Wyndham Mayor Preet Singh has again acknowledged that writing a character reference for a convicted child sex offender was an error of judgment, but has pushed back against calls for his resignation, saying one mistake should not erase more than a decade of service to the local community.
The latest exchange, shared on a Wyndham community Facebook page by administrator David Powell on behalf of an anonymous resident, shows the continuing emotional weight of the controversy and the difficult line Singh is trying to walk between apology, accountability and defending his right to continue serving.
The resident, who described themselves as an academic, counsellor, social justice advocate and victim-survivor of child sexual abuse, wrote a detailed letter to Singh arguing that his actions had caused further trauma to victim-survivors and damaged trust in community leadership.
The letter urged Singh to step down, saying the issue was not about race but about accountability, child safety and the impact of supporting a person who had pleaded guilty to grooming and sexually assaulting a 15-year-old girl.
Singh’s response did not dismiss the seriousness of the matter. Instead, he acknowledged the author’s lived and professional experience and accepted that his decision had caused distress and anger.
“I want to state at the outset that I do not dismiss the seriousness of child sexual abuse, nor the lifelong impacts it has on victim-survivors, their families, and the broader community,” Singh wrote.
“I recognise that for many people this issue is deeply personal and retraumatising, and I understand that my actions have caused distress and anger for some members of the community.”
Singh has previously apologised for writing the character reference and again described the decision as an error of judgment.
“I have publicly acknowledged that writing a character reference was an error of judgment,” he said.
“I have apologised for that decision and for the hurt it caused. While I acted without intent to minimise harm or undermine victim-survivors, I accept that intent does not negate impact.”
At the same time, Singh argued that the reference was not criminal or unlawful, and said he had limited information at the time about the seriousness of the offences.
He also rejected the view that the incident should automatically disqualify him from public office.
“This single error does not define my character, nor does it negate more than a decade of service to the Wyndham community,” he wrote.
“I do not agree that one error renders me unworthy of serving.”
Singh’s reply sought to frame the controversy as a painful but complex moment, rather than a simple question of resignation. He pointed to his broader record of community work, including supporting families after tragedy, raising funds for victims, advocating for tougher laws after youth violence and working with residents affected by family and domestic violence.
“Over the years, I have stood with families seeking justice following tragedy, helped raise significant funds for victims, organised advocacy for tougher laws following youth violence, and supported many individuals affected by family and domestic violence,” he said.
“These experiences inform my ongoing commitment to community safety and wellbeing.”
The mayor also addressed claims that his reference contributed to a lighter sentence, saying the court had made clear that factors such as good character references and an early guilty plea were common in such cases and did not make an offender exceptional or deserving of special treatment.
He said the guilty plea was identified by the magistrate as a significant mitigating factor.
Singh also acknowledged there was genuine disagreement in the community about what accountability should look like.
“I do not agree that continuing to serve automatically equates to disregard for victim-survivors, nor that stepping down is the only expression of integrity,” he wrote.
“That said, I acknowledge the pain, anger, and distrust many people continue to feel.”
His response also condemned racism, abuse and threats directed at him, his family and members of the community, while agreeing that racism should not be used to avoid accountability.
“I unequivocally reject racism, abuse, and threats directed toward myself, my family, or any member of the community,” Singh said.
“As you rightly note, racism is never acceptable. At the same time, it is important that conversations about accountability do not become unsafe or harmful to others.”
The exchange highlights the difficult position now facing Wyndham City Council and the broader community.
For many critics, Singh’s apology is not enough. They argue that a mayor’s role carries a higher standard of judgment and that writing a reference for a convicted child sex offender has damaged community confidence.
But Singh’s supporters are likely to see his response as a measured attempt to take responsibility without surrendering to what he views as a disproportionate campaign to remove him.
His central argument is that accountability does not always have to mean resignation and that a person’s entire public record should not be erased by one serious mistake.
The Facebook post sharing the exchange also warned commenters not to turn the issue into a racial attack, stating that racist comments would be removed and users banned.
That distinction is important. Singh’s conduct can be scrutinised, criticised and debated without allowing the controversy to become a vehicle for racial abuse.
The mayor has now signalled that he will continue reflecting on the concerns raised, while maintaining that he remains committed to serving Wyndham.
“I appreciate that your letter is grounded in advocacy and concern for the well-being of others, even where we fundamentally disagree,” he wrote.
“I will continue to reflect on the matters you have raised.”
For Wyndham, the question remains whether Singh’s apology, explanation and record of service will be enough to rebuild trust, or whether the controversy has already created a political and moral divide too deep to repair.
What is clear is that Singh is no longer simply defending one letter. He is defending the proposition that accountability can include apology, reflection and continued service, not only resignation.
Support our Journalism
No-nonsense journalism. No paywalls. Whether you’re in Australia, the UK, Canada, the USA, or India, you can support The Australia Today by taking a paid subscription via Patreon or donating via PayPal — and help keep honest, fearless journalism alive.
