Mr Ajaka’s continued testimony on Day 8 delved into the tense period before the termination of his employment, focusing on interactions and communications within the council around April 2024. Here are the main points forratepayers.
Rising Tensions and Circulating Rumours
Mr Ajaka recounted the fallout after a meeting on 16 April 2024, where staff, councillors, and even a United Services Union (USU) delegate contacted him about what transpired, particularly regarding comments he made to the Mayor. The USU delegate, Sandie Morthen, forwarded him an email dated 22 April titled “Distress At Liverpool Council,” sent by a USU advocate to press, ICAC, and a politician. This email alleged that the Mayor was “a law unto himself” and planning to dismiss Ajaka at the upcoming 24 April council meeting for refusing to terminate certain directors as directed. Further emals on 24 and 25 April, circulated among councillors and others, reinforced this claim of an impending move to end his employment
For us in Liverpool, this internal drama is a real worry. The spread of such serious allegations via email, involving unions and external bodies like ICAC, points to deep divisions and mistrust within the council. Instead of focusing on our needs—be it fixing roads or maintaining parks —time and energy seem consumed by personal clashes and power struggles. This kind of distraction could delay or derail projects that benefit us, while the public airing of disputes risks damaging the council’s reputation and our trust in its leadership.
Despite learning of a potential dismissal motion through these emails, Mr Ajaka did not directly approach Mayor Mannoun to address the issue. He admitted feeling uncomfortable knocking on the Mayor’s door, preferring to work through Councillor Mel Goodman to arrange a formal meeting with the Mayor and other councillors for an apology over the 16 April incident. He also mentioned a request for a written apology, which he agreed to but never prepared, intending to bring it to a meeting that never happened. He acknowledged in hindsight that delivering a simple apology letter sooner could have stopped the situation from escalating.
As ratepayers, this lack of direct communication is frustrating. Unresolved conflicts at the top level, especially when simple steps like a quick chat or note could have de-escalated tensions, waste time and certainly resources. If disputes between the CEO and Mayor spiral into formal actions like termination—often costing significant payouts from our rates, as hinted in prior days—it’s our money that’s on the line. This inefficiency could mean less funding for community services we rely on.
At the council meeting on 24 April 2024, Mr Ajaka described sitting in his usual spot next to the Mayor as the session began with standard formalities. A surprising Motion of Urgency, moved by Councillor Rhodes and seconded by Councillor Goodman, praised Ajaka, his team, and the council for achieving “collaboration and positivity” and a path of improvement, referencing positive media and USU comments. The motion passed with most councillors, including the Mayor, voting in favour, though Councillors Hadid and Harle opposed it. Ajaka initially thought this signalled an end to tensions, believing the positive resolution meant no termination move would follow, especially as he’d received no prior notice of such an action.
For us residents, this sends mixed messages. A public vote of confidence in the CEO, supported by the Mayor, seems at odds with circulating rumours of dismissal. It raises questions about whether there were hidden agendas or behind-the-scenes dealings not visible to the public. If the council’s actions don’t match the whispers and emails, it erodes trust in their transparency. As ratepayers, we need clarity on whether decisions—especially costly ones like terminating a CEO—are made openly and for the right reasons, not based on personal grudges or undisclosed motives that could drain our funds.
For those of us paying rates in Liverpool, the revelations from Day 8 of the inquiry paint a troubling picture of council dynamics. The internal bickering and rumour mill, evidenced by inflammatory emails reaching external parties, suggest a workplace more focused on infighting than on serving our community. This could stall progress on local issues, from bin collections to park upkeep, affecting every corner of our area.
What’s more concerning is the apparent breakdown in communication at the highest level. The failure to resolve disputes quickly between the CEO and Mayor risks escalating into expensive outcomes like termination payouts, which come straight out of our pockets. With a budget over $530 million, every dollar wasted on avoidable conflict is a dollar not spent on our needs. And the contradictory signals at the 24 April meeting—praise followed by whispers of dismissal—leave us wondering if we’re getting the full story, undermining confidence in how our council is governed.
What’s Next for the Inquiry?
The inquiry will push forward with additional witnesses, Mr Ajaka has been instrcuted to reappear this Wednesday the 30th of July at which time he could face cross examination of his testimony as the inquiry into Liverpool City Council continues.
We urge everyone in Liverpool to keep up with this inquiry through the live stream or online transcripts. It’s crucial we hold our council accountable to prioritise our interests over internal dramas or costly missteps. I’ll continue delivering updates on each day’s happenings, and I’m keen to hear your views or personal experiences with council services—your stories help shape this coverage. Remember to tune into 89.3 every Thursday at 9am with Michael and BJ on The Pulse for the latest local news and updates on these hearings. www893fm.com.au
