This newspaper said in March, when we saw screen shots sent by Cr Chapman of graphic tweets of infants with mutilated genitals to a woman who voiced her support via Twitter for a new Bendigo mosque, that the matter should immediately be referred to the council code of conduct panel under the Local Government Act.

In the days that followed, mayor Peter Cox said that while Cr Chapman had breached the City of Greater Bendigo code of conduct and it could not be argued she was acting as an individual sending the tweet, he did not want the matter referred to a conduct panel.

The mayor noted Cr Chapman believed she was acting personally and not as a councillor, but the 'council did not agree it was possible for elected representatives to separate the two roles, particularly when commenting on council issues'.

But within a week, seven of nine councillors voted for the matter to be taken further.

They issued a statement following more than two hours of discussions that Cr Chapman’s actions required more than an inappropriate apology. All except two councillors moved to refer the issue to a panel, saying the tweet was 'abhorrent and inexcusable'. They saw the issue for what it was – behaviour ‘not fitting of someone who has the privilege of representing the people of Greater Bendigo’. The councillors quoted a line from the code of conduct, which read: ‘councillors will treat all people with courtesy and respect; recognising that there are legitimate opinions, race, culture, language, gender and abilities’. This was never a complex matter. This issue has always been about the behaviour of sending such an inappropriate tweet and the failure to accept blame for doing so. In referring the matter, the councillors gave credibility to the Code of Conduct signed by those elected to represent the people of our city, and to the process available should they breach that.

Tonight, we will learn if an independent Code of Conduct panel believes Cr Chapman breached her responsibility as a councillor and to what extent. If it is found she did, the consequences must be fitting of such an abhorrent act.

Nicole Ferrie, editor