Councillor Paul Truscott speaks out. The system must be fixed.

AFTER nearly a year and a half of legal meetings, correspondence, conciliation sessions and mounting public expense, Fraser Coast Councillor Paul Truscott says he is relieved a Human Rights Commission complaint made against him has finally been closed, but he is deeply concerned about what the experience reveals about the state’s complaints system.

In an interview with the Hervey Bay Advertiser, Cr Truscott described the process as “frustrating, unnecessarily stressful, and incredibly costly for the community” and said the system is in urgent need of reform.

Cr Truscott said he has always accepted that complaints come with the territory of public life, but the notice he received in mid-2024 from the Queensland Human Rights Commission (QHRC) caught him completely off-guard.

“In my early days as a Councillor, someone told me that if you don’t get complaints, you are probably not doing your job,” he said.

“Over the years I have had a few, but none have ever been upheld. When this one arrived, I honestly stopped and thought “What on earth have I done?”

According to Cr Truscott, the complaint arose from a public participation session at a Council ordinary meeting in 2024, during which a resident was invited to speak. Community presenters are normally allocated three minutes, with the Chair empowered to extend this to five. In this case, he says, the resident was permitted six minutes, but spoke for nearly ten.

“They were reminded several times that they needed to bring their presentation to a close,” he recalled. “They became rude and hostile, but ultimately wrapped up at about the ten-minute mark. I personally only spoke once, suggesting we may need security if the situation escalated. Thankfully, we didn’t.”

The subsequent complaint alleged that Cr Truscott repeatedly interrupted the speaker, denied them their allocated time, and even physically dragged them from the room.

“It was completely false,” he said.

“There was a recording of the meeting that clearly showed none of it happened. The evidence proved the allegations wrong, and still, the process dragged on.”

Cr Truscott said he expected the recording to end the matter early.

“You would think that when the Commission has actual evidence showing the complaint couldn’t have happened, the matter would be dismissed,” he said. “But that’s not how the system works.”

He said the Commission acknowledged the recording contradicted the complainant’s narrative, but that this did not meaningfully influence how the process unfolded.

“Their focus wasn’t on what happened,” he said.

“It was on how the complainant felt about what happened. Their feelings were prioritised above the facts.”

When he asked the Commission how Councillors were meant to handle a difficult speaker in future, he says he was told to advise the timeframe, offer extensions where appropriate, remind the speaker of limits and bring the session to a close if needed.

“That’s exactly what we did, and it’s all on the evidence, yet somehow I still ended up before the Human Rights Commission.”

“In other words, I handled it correctly, but the process continued anyway.”

From mid-2024 to mid-November 2025, the complaint required Council to engage external solicitors, allocate staff time, prepare submissions and attend conciliation meetings.

“This has cost the community tens of thousands of dollars.”

“Taxpayers fund the Human Rights Commission and representation for the complainant. Ratepayers fund Council’s legal work and the time involved. All for a complaint about allegations that never happened.”

The matter has now concluded with no admission of liability by any party. As part of the reconciliation, Council must now review its Community Presentations Policy, with the Commission suggesting more scope be given for individuals who “feel they need additional time.”

Cr Truscott believes the requirement may have unintended consequences.

“If Councillors become restricted in asking speakers to stay within their allocated time, we risk fewer opportunities for others to speak,” he said. “Ironically, enforcing fairness could now expose us to further complaints.”

“The system needs fixing.”

While he supports people’s right to lodge legitimate complaints, Cr Truscott says the current process leaves public officials vulnerable to claims that are untrue, untested and resource-intensive.

“This isn’t about the individual who made the complaint, but there has to be a better balance. The system needs fixing.”