Council Meeting – The Pool Age Decision in Detail

TYPICALLY Council meetings only attract a handful of observers from the public, but at last night’s meeting the chambers were packed with community members concerned about a new pool policy which proposed to restrict the age of children being able to attend the pool without a parent.

The Council voted to increase the age of children to attend the pool without an adult to 13.

The following is a detailed account of the meeting.

Public Participation

Ben Wyndham – spoke as a parent, swimming club parent and sponsor – degree in aviation safety specialising in accident investigation, certified quality and safety management auditor – under ground coal and an airline. Mr Wyndham said he believed the new policy was taking away the freedoms and discretion of parents and eroded the lifestyle of living in a country community. He noted the pool was built by the community and council was simply the caretaker of the community asset. Mr Wyndham said the new policy smelt of Council’s safety concerns, not the safety concerns of children and seemed Council contract with the contractor was more important than Council’s contract with the community. He pointed out that there is far more risk to children if they spend their time in parks, private pools, or worse rivers or dams which are far less safe. He noted the care of SWOOSH ceases at 12 years of age, yet Council’s pool policy states children 14 and under should be under direct adult supervision. He questioned if children at the Youth Centre would now also need adult supervision as they do at the pool. He concluded by listing a range of pools that have not adopted the change.

Brook McInerny – gave the Council a petition with more than 550 signatures. She highlighted the inconsistency in signage and advice from Council in relation to the policy. She described the pool as a safe fenced environment where children should be able to have fun. She said she had investigated pools in Newcastle which did not have the new policy Council was considering introducing. She said there should have been proper consultation with the community.

Helen Coady – Read an email she had sent to Councillors and expressed her disappointment that her children which were 12 and 14 could no longer go to the pool unescorted and described her son as weighing 95 kilograms and being an age swimming champion of the club. She said Council had “clearly lost the plot” if the decision is based on grooming as girls know to go to the toilet in groups and if anyone was suspicious they would have the person plastered all over social media in a matter of minutes. She questioned why children in the city could swim at the beach, which is unfenced and not have the same restrictions. She concluded by listing more pools which had not adopted the policy.

Pat Gleeson – told his story as a grandparent who was turned away from the pool with his granddaughter because he was not a parent. He spoke about how he had worked in local government for 13 years and was confounded by how Council were managing this issue. He pointed out how the signage at the pools also contradicts the information Council are giving and how they are implementing the policy at the pool. He questioned why Council had claimed it was the risk of children being groomed that had led to the change, to then be told it wasn’t the reason.  He said it was great to see the community be so vocal on the issue and so many people, especially the children come to the Council meeting, He asked them to vote to maintain the old policy until issues with the new policy could be ironed out.

Cr Ron Campbell asked Mr Gleeson if he understood “the legal side of things”. After some confusion, which Mr Gleeson tried to clarify by asking Cr Campbell a question, the Mayor called order and told Mr Gleeson while the Councillors could ask him questions he was not allowed to ask them questions. Mr Gleeson then responded that the policy and recommendations were not law, simply recommendations and again implored the Council to keep the old policy until the new policy and the reasons behind it were clearer.

Stan Wall – the CEO of Lifesaving Services Australia, the current pool operator said he had faced exactly the same thing at Forbes (The operator is based in Sydney and runs four pools, three are in the Upper Hunter Shire and one is in Forbes, where the Forbes community opposed his recommendations). He said he has spent 30 years as a lifeguard and said his job was to assess risk. He said that he had personally “had to deal with more than 100 indecent assaults” and 80 abandoned children, however said he did not have such data for the Upper Hunter area. He said he recommended the Keep Watch in Public Pools program. He said there were a lack of laws in the area and safe pool operations was based on guidelines. He also said 40 percent of people pulled out of public swimming pools, were pulled out by their parents or carers. He apologised to Mr Gleeson that he had been turned away from the pool as a grandparent and said he would address the issue with his staff. He said as a parent it can be difficult to say no to children.

Cr Sue Abbott asked Mr Wall if it was the case that the recommendations he has made are not mandatory and are not law? She further asked why they have stipulated a parent must accompany the child and not a person 16 years or over as the Royal Lifesaving Australia recommends? Mr Wall said they were not mandatory changes, but said there were changes in legislation based on risk that needed to be addressed and that is why they stipulated parent. Cr Abbott said Royal Lifesaving Australia did not stipulate parent, rather an adult and also defined adult as a person 16 years or older. In terms of Mr Wall’s reference to law, Cr Abbott asked if he was referring to section 43b of the crimes act and said his recommendations far exceeded the act and went beyond risk management. Mr Wall said there was an incident at another pool, where a pool staff member had not passed his working with children check and that was the reason behind many of these changes. Cr Abbott pointed out section 43 of the crimes act was not being breached by the old policy and said Mr Wall’s recommendations were not consistent with the act.

Cr Joshua Brown also sought clarification if a responsible adult is termed someone 16 years and over. Mr Wall said that was correct.

Cr Maurice Collison asked pending the decision of the meeting how long it would take to implement the new policy and signs. Mr Wall said could implement it tomorrow and order new signs.

Cr Kiwa Fisher said he had heard about Forbes changing their policy following community concerns and had moved it back to 12 year olds and older no longer needing a parent. He asked Mr Wall what implications that had to him as a contractor. Mr Wall recounted an incident on the weekend where lifeguards were dealing with some 13 year olds, when a four year old boy broke away from his father and ran into the pool. The father rescued him. Mr Walls said it showed from an operational perspective there is risk and the new policy would protect them as an operator, the users of the pool and Council. He also said because Forbes did not take his recommendation Forbes pool would not be accredited with child safety certification.

Cr Ron Campbell questioned, if we don’t implement your recommendations we won’t get certification? Mr Walls said that was correct.

The Mayor then proposed to bring forward the matter of the pool policy for voting, which the other Councillors passed.

Cr Lee Watts began to speak to put forward a motion, however Cr Maurice Collison spoke over the top of her to put forward his motion, which the Mayor allowed.

Cr Collison said they would trial a recommendation for the 2018-2019 season where they would allow teenagers to go to the pool without parents, being 13 year olds and up. The motion also included free entry for the adult supervisor.

Councillor Fisher seconded the motion.

Cr Lee Watts stood and said she had spoken to make an amended, but had not been heard. She said she was disappointed that the community had raised the issue of the change, as the change should have gone to Council for approval in the first instance.

Cr Watts put forward a motion to leave the previous policy the pool had operated under, including armbands for children under 5 and children 10 and younger to be accompanied by and adult, defined as 16 years and older and had to be actively supervised.

Cr Abbott seconded her motion.

Cr Brown suggested that whatever motion is successful both motions should able to be amended if “something changed”.

Cr Abbott seconded the motion.

Cr Watts said she was disappointed the policy did not come before Council, before it was changed at the pool and said the policy could not feasibly insist on a parent being present and should be an adult. Cr Watts recounted how her father and mother ran the pool for 17 years and she was raised at the pool and worked there. She said she understood the world was changing but questioned how far the policy should go. She said it is parents who need to be responsible for their children and they should be allowed to make the decision as to if their child is allowed to go at an age (over 10) that they see fit and Council should support that. She said that kids walk home from school every afternoon and often go to swimming training. She questioned under the new policy how that would occur. She said most families now have two parents who work and it was unrealistic to expect a parent to be available every afternoon after school. Cr Watts said there was too much confusion with the new policy and there was lots of inconsistency. She also questioned why the conditions of the seasons tickets had changed after sale. The new policy is not consistent with managing risk and no where did the attorney generals department (which oversaw the Royal Commission into Child Sexual Assault) stipulate age for entering a pool without an adult. Cr Watts said Council’s role was not as a parent and parents should be respected. She also pointed out 6.5 of the Royal Commissions recommendations which stipulated that children on the community should be consulted and said there had been no consultation take place. In terms of claims there is a 2 year gaol sentence if there was an incident at the pool (referenced by Cr Abbott as section 43 of the crimes act), she said she had sought legal advice and for a gaol sentence there would have to be criminal negligence of the pool operator, such as a situation where there was a person the operator knew to be a pedophile who was in the girls change rooms unattended and they did nothing about it, to reach the point of such negligence. She said of course Council would take all reasonable steps to prevent child harm, but not allowing the children to go to the pool was unreasonable. She also noted the Sydney Olympic Park Aquatic Centre did not have a new policy and was still 10 and under. She concluded by saying what Mr Wall was putting forward were merely recommendations and that Council could make the right choice for the community. She pointed out that Forbes Council did not take Mr Wall’s recommendations.

Cr Abbott said Council had not consulted with the community or children and therefore contravened a recommendation from the royal commission. “There is not a pedophile behind every towel, we don’t need to panic by implementing such stringent rules and regulations.” Cr Abbott said she had raised four children of her own in Scone, who all used the pool, all unaccompanied when they were 11 and said she couldn’t imagine is she would have had to keep visual contact on them at all times. She said Council’s new policy was going beyond Council’s remit of being reasonable. Cr Abbott said the pool was a safe place, she agreed with the community members who spoke during the public participation in the meeting and used all Councillors to support the community. She said she didn’t feel child safety was the motivating factor behind the change. She also listed many councils which have not adopted the new recommendations.

Cr Lee Watts and Cr Sue Abbott voted to maintain the exiting policy of the pool, however all other Councillors voted against it including, Cr Burns, Cr Fisher, Cr Driscoll, Cr Collison, Cr Campbell, Cr Brown and Cr Bedggood.

Cr Collison’s motion as then put forward to be voted on which was only children 13 years and older can be unaccompanied by an adult. Cr Collison proposed the motion be passed, but said “try the motion for this year and then sit down and come up with something that is more suitable”.

Cr Abbott said she agreed strongly with Mr Wyndham’s comments that Council seemed to be more interested in their contract with their contractor, rather than their contract with the community. That Council were going beyond their remit and that the move was “nonsense”. She said the town was becoming more and more like a Nanny state and that wasn’t what they were elected to do. She described the motion as one of the most disappointing motions she had seen and said “I will not rest on this I can assure you.”

Cr Kiwa Fisher then said it was one of the trickiest motions to pass across his desk and said he was not comfortable with the result. He then said “I have only two words: xxxx xxxxx”. Cr Fisher named a known pedophile who had been a swimming coach at the Scone pool during the 80’s. The response from the gallery was audible in their disapproval. The Mayor said Cr Fisher was out of order and told him to cease. Cr Fisher said he could say it, but the Mayor told him to cease again. See related story: Editorial: Two Words – The Public Had Many.

Cr Watts said it was parents who needed to be accountable for their children and “if they are happy then we should be.”

Cr Campbell said the world was changing and felt if we kept the existing policy it would present risks.

Cr Abbott said if the insurance provider had no issue, why were Council panicking to make a change.

Cr Watts and Cr Abbott voted against the motion, all other Councillors voted for the change in age for entry.

Related stories:

• Editorial: Two Words – The Public Had Many – October 30, 2018.
• Calling All Kids – Protest Tomorrow – October 29, 2018.
• Pool Policy Restricting Age Passed – October 29, 2018.
• Children Protest Council’s Pool Policy – October 29, 2018.
• Make Your Voice Count with the Pool – October 24, 2018.
• Pool Rules Changed – Kicked Out – October 22, 2018.
• Editorial: Parents Know Best Not Council – October 22, 2018.
• Water Getting Deeper for Council – October 23, 2018.