Heart flatlined
Here we are, toiling away at our various paid pursuits, and there you all are, wanting more information. Those calloused by their toil at the Chron might well demand another five percent. If we were to get an additional five percent, we'd still be earning zip. So, as Your Mother (whom we haven't seen commenting for a while - are you well, Mother?) would say: Time for some self-reliance.
As we've said before, you're all LawsWatchers, and you're all citizens. Most of you are ratepayers. So you have every right to seek - nay, demand - answers from your elected representatives and public servants, and to share them with your fellow citizens here on this blog. So if you want to know, ask - you can only be told to sod off. And that in itself is information worth sharing.
Meanwhile, we're doing our best. Thanks to the valiant efforts of LawsWatch supporter Matt Dutton we've got our first answer to a request for information under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act. And that answer is: The Vision salute - two fingers raised and shoved right up the nose of any ratepayer rude enough to ask what our betters are up to to.
We asked to see the brief for the Heart of the City project. Nope, we're told, we wouldn't be able to understand it. Excuse us? There are people in Wanganui, and beyond, far better qualified to understand budgets, plans, architectural diagrams (or whatever the information actually is) than most of the people who happened to get themselves elected to Council. All they need is the information on which to base an informed assessment.
So we've responded thusly (or rather, Matt has):Mr. McGowan,
Meanwhile, more LGOIM Act requests were filed today regarding
I asked to see the brief for The Heart of the City project. I find it hard to believe that I would be unable to derive "meaningful" information from it. The brief is a vital part in the development of any design proposal, and I believe "the public" has a right to know how this brief is being developed, especially in light of the fact of the inherent flaws in the design brief that led to the Warren Mahoney proposal.
I do not accept your refusal to provide this information, and I will be requesting an opinion from the auditors as to its legality.
Matt Dutton
- River Queen
- Audit Office Port report
- Any correspondence between Council & Westgate Port of Taranaki
- The Independent OSH report into the Sarjeant
Comments on this post are now closed.
27 comments:
Diddums.
If you're referring to our state of under-paidness, well, fair enough. But you surely can't mean a refusal to release information that everyone in Wanganui is entitled to know?
It is frustrating, yes. But fortunately, Council responded by way of an email with a scan of the letter attached, and didn't fax the letter, so our fax machine is still safely on our desk ;-)
As noted in another post - inventing stories does LW no credit.
LawsWatch is not Wanganui. You're getting ahead of yourself, Carol. Your interest is not the city's :)
We're not inventing - or asserting - anything re fax machines.
A commenter asserted that office equipment had been damaged. Several other commenters (or maybe the same one, several times!) have implied the same thing.
We merely noted that ours remains firmly fixed to the desktop, by way of a humorous aside. Just in case the slow-on-the-uptake were reading, we even put a wink after it. So goodness knows where that leaves people who still think we're serious.
Yes Carol but you're responsible for reporting what's here which makes you responsible. I mean if one was to assert that certain individuals liked their horses TOO much ... get my drift?
"Your interest is not the city's "
It's not about interests it's about information.
Since we run an open comments policy, deleting only material that is defamatory or outright offensive, what commenters post as rumour is entirely their own responsibility. We accept responsibility for the posts and for comments in our own name such as this - no more, no less.
LawsWatch is - if you'll pardon the expression - a tool. It's up to those who come here how they use it.
FLASH. RCP front page this week.
Understand where you're coming from LW but the courts are insistent that "publishing" defamatory comments makes the publisher liable including blogs.
Then there's the recent Auckland High Court decision that says even if the server is outside the country, those responsible for the website/bolg in NZ are still responsible.
You're right anonymous, which answers the question as to the anonymity of the Watchers. Having said that, we delete - as quickly as possible - not only comments that are clearly defamatory but also those which go outside the bounds of this blog, which are to discuss issues and people acting in their capacity as elected officials.
If someone is a little to kind to Mr Ed, we're afraid he'll need to find someone else to talk to.
anyway...back to the heart of the city... i dont suppose the project has gone off the rails due to the mayor being a tosser to the architects..just rumour i suppose..anyway ML would never vomit forth first without thinking would he?
Anonymous said...
FLASH. RCP front page this week.
And...? What? The truth about the fax machine??
Carol is out of the city ....
3leggeddonkeyinaphonebox said...
i dont suppose the project has gone off the rails
That's not my reading of the LGOIA response: I think they just need a little reminder who they work for.
Well it's not for YOU, Matt!
Good story in the Chronicle today - good basic reporting with no hyperbole nor histrionics. Just one flaw - no individual spokespersons for WAG. Are they ghosts?
All the rich folk who've been telling me that any attempted sale of artworks will be tied up in court for years had better start getting ready to put their money where their mouths are. Perhaps Council will realise that if they can afford $200k for the High Court, they can afford to look for other solutions. Reinstate the SGTB, fundraise for the Gallery.
Did Matt Dutton really write the letter published here? is the guy a dimwit? What auditors would you appeal to to test Ian McGowan's alleged illewgality?? Duh.
Strictly speaking I'd be asking the ombudsman to rule on the legality of Council's decision to withhold information.
Matt
Is it true - as I heasd some council wallah tell me last week - that you wrote a letter of apology to the mayor after the code of conduct hearings?
I told him that it would be bollocks, but he kept insisting.
In a manner of speaking - he seemed a little bit upset at the CoC hearings, so I wrote assuring him it was nothing personal.
Go read my CoC submission - I indicated a willingness to apologise for certain remarks there, too.
Tony van Raat wanted the Heart plans made public after Council spent the first $30k. No grounds to refuse release there.
Damaged public equipment, in a public building by public servants? Surely the Chron needs to investigate on behalf of the public? True or not?
The Chron. exists for the purpose of selling newspapers, not to provide info to the public.
I just got off the 'phone with Ian McGowan - the cogs are ticking, decisions are under review, but I believe he has a good understanding of what it is I'm asking to see. Council has spent $30k, they must have something to show for it.
Yes,they should Matt.
There is also $110,000 in the 05/06 Annual Plan for " Heart of Wanganui" but once again no details .
Post a Comment