A WAR of words has erupted over Michael Neoh collecting his mayoral allowance while on a leave of absence.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Councillor Peter Hulin is questioning why Cr Neoh received almost $6000 – remuneration he was entitled to – while campaigning for a seat in state parliament.
Cr Hulin was acting mayor for 26 days during October and collected his regular allowance, around $2000 a month. He said it wasn’t about the money, but the principle of the issue.
“I put my hand up for the role and I knew it would come at a cost,” he said.
“Cr Neoh was not acting in the mayoral role or working for the best interests of the city.
“He was campaigning for a spot in parliament, but he still collected the full mayoral allowance.”
Cr Neoh hit back: “People in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones.”
He pointed to a 2012 article where Cr Hulin was quoted as saying he didn’t think councillors should be paid at all.
“It’s in the legislation, a mayor can take 55 days leave before there has to be an adjustment to allowances,” he said.
“I haven’t taken any leave while I’ve been the mayor. When you take a leave of absence, you are not supposed to act as a councillor, but other councillors collect their allowance when they take personal holidays.”
The comments come days before councillors select the mayor for the next year.
Cr Hulin will nominate for the post on Monday night while Cr Neoh is yet to declare his intention.