A Council “Strategic Relations” Job, and a Political Name in the Rumour Mill

A Council “Strategic Relations” Job, and a Political Name in the Rumour Mill

Shoalhaven City Council is advertising a new senior role inside the Chief Executive Office: Strategic Relations Advisor.

On paper, it’s a serious job with real influence. The role is described as providing high-level advisory and relationship management support to both the Mayor and the CEO, including drafting correspondence, speeches and talking points; providing advice on stakeholder engagement and political dynamics; and monitoring political and social trends that could impact council operations.

It’s also a permanent, full-time role based at Nowra, with applications closing 19 February 2026.

In simple terms this is a “spin doctor” job - as if Trish and Andrew need more spin.

So why is it suddenly politically sensitive?

Because there is circulating information locally that a Liberal person well known in South Coast politics—may have applied (or intends to apply).

I want to be careful here. At the time of writing, I have not seen any official applicant list, and Council has not publicly confirmed who has applied.

So this piece does not assert he is an applicant as a fact. It deals with the governance question that arises if the rumour is true: what does it mean for a council already under scrutiny about recruitment integrity and senior appointments?

Why this role matters more than most

This is not a generic communications position buried in a directorate. The advertisement makes it explicit that the job sits within the Chief Executive Office and supports both the Mayor and the CEO, including speech writing, talking points and advice about “political dynamics” and “internal cultural considerations.”

How is this justified, the Mayor and the CEO are not meant to be a team, the Mayor has a representation role and chair of the Executive, the CEO is responsible for operations - this is the way it is, but when you get political behavior running overt the proper role this is what you get - spin city.

In a council environment, that combination—Mayor + CEO + political engagement + messaging—means power.

Not legal power, but soft power: what gets framed as a success, what becomes a problem, what gets downplayed, and how.

In ordinary times, councils can and do employ people with strong political nous. In abnormal times—when recruitment practices are being actively questioned by State oversight bodies—every senior or sensitive hire becomes a credibility test.

The Mayor is not a parking spot for a State Seat, the CEO role is not a parking spot for a Federal or State Seat, and the strategic advisor is not a parking spot for a wannabe member for the South Coast or other role.

Where a council is already facing questions about recruitmen the public will reasonably ask:

1. Was the role genuinely needed, with a clear business case?

2. Was it advertised and assessed on merit, with a defensible selection process?

3. Were panel arrangements independent and properly documented?

4. Were conflicts of interest declared and managed—especially given the role’s proximity to the Mayor and CEO?

5. Was any applicant given inside-running, ivileged access to decision makers?

Notice what’s missing: I am not saying any of these things occurred. I am saying these are the questions that arise when

1. the position is political and

2. the council is under a cloud over recruitment governance.

In that environment, perception becomes part of the risk.

Why “merit” isn’t enough if the process isn’t visibly independent

Councils often defend contentious appointments with a simple line: “The best person got the job.”

That’s necessary, but it’s not sufficient.

In public administration, legitimacy comes from process: transparent criteria, documented assessments, independent panel membership, consistent treatment of candidates, and clean conflict management.

That’s especially true for a role that will shape the Mayor/CEO’s messaging and manage relationships with government and stakeholders. The job isn’t just doing comms—it’s influencing the political interface of the organisation.

So what should councillors and the CEO do “to be safe” (and look safe)?

This is not hard:

1. First, Council should publicly confirm the governance settings for t applicants. That means: panel composition, use (or not) of an independent member, probity support (if any), and how conflicts are declared and managed.

2. Second, if the role is filled, Council should publish a plain-language statement of why the position is needed, what the successful applicant was selected on (skills and experience), and what safeguards exist to prevent the role becoming a political “spin unit.”

3. Third, councillors should not let this become factional sport. The question is not “do you like Mr X?” The question is “does this council have recruitment systems robust enough to survive scrutiny?”

Finally: if the rumour is wrong, Council can extinguish it quickly by clarifying the facts. If it’s right, Council can protect the organisation by showing its work.

Because the real problem for Shoalhaven isn’t that political people exist.

It’s that when trust is low, secrecy looks like favouritism—even when it isn’t.

---

Please share this with 2 friends who care about Shoalhaven.

Donations to help keep the show afloat and pay for GIPA and legal costs
If you get value from this post and you want to help me with information applications to get to the bottom of issues, you can donate here.
Thank you for considering this, the posts will always be free - but I could do with some help :)

GIPA - information you have paid for or you are supporting me with
Here are the current applications to council, seeking documents. At the moment I have one matter before NCAT. I will fight for transparency.

Defamation
Disclaimer: This article provides analysis and commentary based on publicly available information and council transcripts. It does not make allegations of misconduct by any individual. Readers should verify details independently before drawing conclusions.

Use of AI
Here is a quick disclaimer, or explainer on the use of AI in the Eye.

Contact links for the Council
I encourage you to take up your democratic right and engage with councillors, here are the contact details - send them questions or comments, text is best as they tend to ignore emails.

Questions you can ask the Mayor at meetings or if you see her!
Here are some questions community members have submitted that you can use if you’re at a public meeting with the Mayor. Please keep your question polite and to the point, and if you get an answer, follow up afterwards in writing to confirm what you heard and reduce any “misunderstanding” later. Then let the Eye community know what she said so we can keep a shared record. Here’s the link to the questions