Dotty decisions

Excellent response from anonymous to our last post:

"...that was just Michael Laws pretending to be the mayor. He actually started being the mayor about ten minutes after the interview finished, and remained so for the next three hours. He was then off duty for a while, but slept peacefully through his 4am-6am shift."

That pretty much sums up the view of the majority of Councillors who heard the Code of Conduct complaints. Trouble is, there are times when a mayor isn't a mayor - especially when it's not a full-time job. And if anyone can split these sorts of hairs (when not busy brushing and tweezing his own) it's the Diva.

So, having explained earlier that Dotty and Co couldn't really censor the Diva for the drivel he spouts whilst being paid by the kind of newspaper which makes New Idea look like a serious journal of record, nor by the radio station which peddles various flavours of snake oil one minute and then tries to pretend it has any credibility the next, we'd better turn our attention to the parts of the Code of Conduct Report which let him off the hook entirely.

It's not that complex, really. If he's scribbling in the newspaper and talking about book-burning in general, it's clearly personal opinion. If, however, he talks about popping down to the Wanganui Public Library with an incendiary device strapped to his body, then there's clearly potential for him to be seen as expressing that opinion as Mayor. Then it comes down to hair-splitting: Was he working in the employ of some media outlet at the time? Or was he being interviewed and, if so, was it as Mayor? And so on...

So, let's look a some examples from the Code of Conduct findings where Dotty and the others seem to have taken a rather liberal view:

Example 5
An article in the Sunday Star Times, 12 December 2004, by reporter Helen Bains, quoting from an interview with Mayor Laws. Whilst some Councillors considered a comment by Mayor Laws regarding the Sarjeant Gallery Trust Board reflected badly on them as Councillors and on Wanganui as a whole, by a majority the Committee resolved that the example referred to the Mayor’s personal opinion which he was entitled to express and no response would be required.

So it was an interview, not a paid commentary. It was in his capacity as Mayor. It was a comment on a topic not only relating to Wanganui but on a matter in which he had a well-known involvement in his Mayoral capacity. The remarks "reflected badly" on "Wanganui as a whole". But they're "personal" opinion?

Remember when the Diva's mentor (no, not Winnie, the other one) Rob Muldoon called then-President Jimmy Carter a "peanut farmer". That was something of a personal opinion, too. But since he was being interviewed as NZ's PM at the time, more than a few people cringed. Even those who thought Carter made Gerry Ford look dynamic didn't want our elected leader bringing us into disrepute. Rob must be looking down (alright, we'll concede he might be looking up) in amazement - the Diva can get away with even more than Muldoon could in his heyday.

Example 7
A news article in the Sunday Star Times, 12 December 2004, reporting Mayor Laws comment that he would have the Sarjeant Gallery collection assessed by independent valuers, and that it would make sense to sell some of the Gallery’s 6,500 art works rather than have them “rot away” in storage. It was resolved that the example referred to the Mayor’s personal opinion which he was entitled to express and no response would be required.

Another interview, again clearly in a Mayoral capacity. This one doesn't just express opinion, personal or otherwise, it states intent to take an action (having the Sarjent Gallery collection assessed by an independent valuer) without reference to the Council, the Gallery Board or anyone else.

Perhaps an analogy is in order here. Helen Clark, in an interview with the same rag, blithely announces her intention to have Cash Converters pop round to Te Papa and make her an offer on a few of the works "rotting away" in there. When questioned, she (or rather her spindoctors) say it was "personal opinion". Would she get away with it? Alright, she basically got away with signing a painting she didn't do... but you see our point.

Example 10
An article, “Laws Plans Art Sale”, in the Sunday Star Times, published 19 December 2004. It was resolved this was again a personal comment by the Mayor and no response was necessary.

Ummm, let's deconstruct this for you, Dotty. Laws (the Mayor of Wanganui) plans (not an opinion, an intention) art sale (i.e. flogging off public assets). Let's try another analogy: "McKinnon plans Civc Square strip show". Mere opinion? Or a clear statement of a dubious intention likely to call your official position into disrepute (and cause widespread nausea throughout the lower North Island)?

These, by the way, are examples from just one of the complainants. Unfortunately, almost all the complainants also missed the mark, complaining not only of things said by the Diva in his columnist or talkback host capacities, but even complaining about things said by other people. That certainly made it easier for the Council to dismiss the complaints (and for the Diva to defend himself by alleging irrelevance). But it doesn't excuse the Council from considering those complaints that did have substance - and clearly many did.

More on this later, as it seems the longer blog entries don't get commented nearly as much as the pithier examples, and we do want some interaction here (yes, even with you, John B!).

Meanwhile, fascinating to see Dotty getting so excited about "Wanganui Inc". Almost every time "Inc" has been attached to something by politicians, it's ended in tears (and more than a whiff of corruption). In fact a few states in Australia have some unstuck with their "Incs"... first Queensland, then NSW, and even sleepy Western Australia, where the Labor government of Brian Burke became notorious for "WA Inc" - so much so that the Premier ended up peeling spuds for a stretch. It's even true of student politics.

Comments on this post are now closed.