Broyd paints black picture of council
FORMER Tweed Shire Council development director David Broyd was an obstacle for prodevelopment councillors to get over, even if it meant breaking the law.
Giving evidence on the third week of the inquiry into the council yesterday, Mr Broyd made some damning revelations about councillors during his term in the organisation from 1991 to 2003.
"Clearly to me there were preconceived cases of certain developers that were asserted strongly at council meetings and meetings with council staff," Mr Broyd said.
"There were a range of examples that showed a predisposition and premeditated approach to advocate the developers' cause and interests."
Mr Broyd said he saw collusion between developers and some councillors during meetings when they would talk together, and inside chambers when councillors would approach the developers and their consultants in the gallery.
"Clearly there were other consultations during breaks where they were meeting to talk about how a matter be progressed," he said.
Mr Broyd named Bob Brinsmead and Lynne Beck as prime culprits, but said relations got better under Warren Polglase and George Davidson.
He warned there was a potential conflict of interest in regards to 1999 election funding, but could find no evidence.
"I did not see anything that would overtly run to a conflict of interest," he said.
Despite internationally-recognised credentials, Mr Broyd's career and decisions came under immense fire from councillors during his term.
Outside the inquiry he said this was a reason why he left.
"I think it would be beneficial for the organisation to have a new start in the way of electoral representatives," he said.
"Some councillors saw me as an obstacle to what they politically (hoped) to achieve for development outcomes in the shire."
Inside the inquiry he said some councillors had showed a lack of regard for planning policy and legalities, public interest, open space and more.
He suggested councillors who voted against staff's professional recommendations provide a report as to why, to reduce perceived corruption.
"The community has the right to know why variations were made to make a decision," he said.