Wednesday, September 21, 2005

Monster Inc - should we care?

Amid the thunder and hail rocking the council chamber on Monday, Watchers swear they heard the stirring of those vengeful ghosts of the 80s, Ruthanasia and Rogernomics, rattling their favourite toys: electricity market reform, health sector "restructuring" and SOEs.

In the smouldering ruins left by the Diva’s ethnic cleansing of the old boys network there has arisen a new entity. It’s called the new boys’ network and its influence is nowhere more evident than in the murky council decision-outsourcing arena where Wanganui Inc operates.

Back in the days when it first stirred in the Diva’s and Dotty’s primordial soup, this beast was tagged Monster Inc by a quick-thinking Chron sub-editor.

Reading between the lines which pass for open, transparent government, it seems Monster Inc chair Ron Janes, the Diva et al have already picked the (non councillor) person they want to join their gang but ran into resistance at last week’s strategy meeting. Thus, the matter re-appeared on the agenda for the full council meeting.

Some councillors started to hear not only the rattling of ghosts, but the burning torches and rattling pitchforks of an attempted putsch by Janes, fondly remembered for visiting havoc on the Wanganui health sector*. Janes had put his name to a letter asking that, following the departure of Graeme (GK) Taylor, the balance of power on Monster Inc be changed to favour private business representatives. The letter apparently had the backing of Chamber of Comics president Warren Ruscoe.

The Diva declared the letter out of bounds to the public after Cr Bullock waved it in the air and said it degraded councillors. She did, however, win her bid to have discussion about the letter taken out of the secret agenda. Watchers figure the letter, in Janes’ charmingly outspoken manner, slagged off councillors as lacking in skills and business nous, though it’s not clear how he and Ruscoe rate existing board members Rangi Wills and the Diva.

Replacing GK with a non-councillor would change the balance from the 3:3 council:private split proposed by the Diva when Monster Inc was being set up, and give the majority vote to private interests.

Cue the sound of alarm bells among the likes of Barbara Bullock and Sue Westwood. In the same breath as it was being asked to bury its economic development committee - which is required to operate transparently in the interests of ratepayers - the council was being asked to further alienate key economic development functions and spending authority.

The vote went, as so many do, with a whimper. Wanganui Inc can anoint its preferred person but the council gets the final say, and the Diva agreed that nothing prevented a councillor with the right skills getting the nod. To which we can only append that immortal phrase, "Yeah Right!".

As Rob Vinsen has kindly pointed out in a comment to LawsWatch, Monster Inc could find economic development funding from outside the council’s coffers easier to win if it’s seen not to be unduly influenced by the council. And that's certainly been the plan all along, with Janes saying back in June that the $800,000 already set aside for them in this "cash strapped" city won't be nearly enough, and that more like $1.5 million to $2 million a year would be his aim.

LawsWatch wonders, however, whether that’s sufficient reason for our elected representatives to further abrogate their responsibilities to a small cartel of the Diva and his mates, meeting behind closed doors and making public only what they want the public to know.

As a CCO (Council Controlled Organisation) Monster Inc is required by the Local Government Act to report half yearly and yearly to the council, but outside of that, it appears it’s okay for the chairman to just drop the council a line from time to time telling them his version of what the gang’s been up to.

That’s a bit like the new system of press scrutiny where the Chron apologises for not attending meetings but then publishes a summary supplied by the chairman.

Vision Party policy gives no hint of what is effectively an outsourcing of the economic development role but this issue has become something of a canary in the mineshaft that the council is being driven down in the name of the Diva’s vision. LawsWatch wonders what those ratepayers of Castlecliff, Aramoho et al, so beloved of the Diva, would say if all this had been explained in words of one syllable.

Council / business partnerships have achieved some notable successes throughout the world. But they've also descended into squabbling, recriminations, and (as anyone who's watched City Hall or The Sopranos knows) sometimes even widespread corruption. We're not saying that any of these outcomes is our prediction for Monster Inc., but what we are saying is that conducting public business out in the open is the surest way to ensure transparency and accountability are maintained, that people are informed about - and unite behind - a common vision.

Some Monster Inc factoids:

  • $42,000 in directors’ fees has been budgeted by the council for 2005-06
  • It gets to distribute the lion’s share -- $200,000 of the $350,000 community contracts money, with events like the Mayoral Mile having the inside running
  • Its newly-appointed CEO, John Quigley, will start next month
  • The current board comprises Ron Janes (ex CEO of Good Health Wanganui), GK Taylor, the Diva, Cr Rangi Wills (nominally Ratepayers rep, actually a Vision recruit), Nygllhuw Morris (a staunch Vision/Diva supporter) and Bruce Nicholson (business partner of the incoming CEO David Warburton).


* Ron Janes's time as CEO of Good Health Wanganui was given this epitaph by none other than Jill Pettis, speaking in Parliament on Wednesday, June 14, 1995:
...246 staff will be losing their jobs at Good Health Wanganui. Health is being reduced to the lowest common denominator. It is absolutely disgraceful ...The absolutely disgraceful thing that is hanging over the staff at Jubilee Hospital - who are employed by Good Health Wanganui - is that they were told to take pay cuts or the hospital would close. What an absolutely disgraceful thing to say to staff - take a pay cut or the hospital will close! ...I do not know whether we will see Mr Ron Janes turn up on the board of a State-owned enterprise in the near future - I think we might. Good luck to him. Since he has been at Good Health Wanganui he has actually served the Government very well. I am not so sure that he has served the people of Wanganui so well, but he has been a loyal servant to this Government.

And that, we guess, is the question hanging over Monster Inc - will it serve the people of Wanganui well, or will it be a loyal servant of Council? And are the appointees capable of differentiating between the two when necessary?

Comments on this post are now closed.

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

This is good background, thanks LawsWatch. It was pretty confusing to read the Chronicle this morning and they don't seem to be interesting in providing any context for these issues.

I for one am uneasy about giving this group too much power and too much money without them having to open up their meetings to the public.

Surely now the economic committee has been given the chop, the council could insist that Wanganui Inc be a bit more transparent?

Anonymous said...

So LawsWatch(Carol Webb) not content with slagging the mayor & his council, and new CEO David Warburton has added Ron Janes and Warren Ruscoe to the list. Which displays an incredible ignorance of Wanganui because Ron & Warren would be described by anybody as part of the "old boys network". If only you had lived longer than a few months in Wangavegas Carol you'd understand how off beam you really are.

Anonymous said...

http://www.wanganui.govt.nz/forms/HaveSay/

I see the council is calling for submissions on the whole community contracts funding arrangement .. but will they take any notice of anyone who doesn't want $200K being decided by this group?

Anonymous said...

Looks like Michael's back and once again avoiding the issues in favour of personal attack and spin. That's a pity.

Anonymous said...

Don't you read Joan?
Wanganui Inc was established months ago and if Warren Ruscoe is supporting Ron Janes, it's not about personality, it's about the concept. It should be pointed out that according to the council minutes the chance of Ron Janes as chairman was unanimous.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous wrote ...

It's nice to see the Chron has reinstated the "What would you change about Wanganui" in that page two First Person feature. And guess what, there's another citizen saying she'd change (cue drumroll) ....

the mayor

1:35 PM, September 21, 2005

Keely Smith is the person in question. She stood in the council elections with John Milne as a greenie-sympathiser and polled near last. The other person upset was Chas Poynter's campaign manager Mike Gladwell so they're hardly a representative bunch.
Keely would have another reason to be upset - she is a close friend of Tuffy Churton's.

Anonymous said...

BY-ELECTION CANDIDATE POLL RESULTS???
Given that we are such a left-leaning lot then is the poll an accurate indicator of community sentiment?

Anonymous said...

"BY-ELECTION CANDIDATE POLL RESULTS???
Given that we are such a left-leaning lot then is the poll an accurate indicator of community sentiment?"

Yes; little Bobbie Walker gets 12 votes. All twelve of his supporters read Lawswatch.

But seriously, it indicates that if either Jodie or JM can get support from the national party voters they'll be a tough candidate to beat.

Anonymous said...

It's not the mayor - it's the ultra-obsessed Carol Webb (LawsWatch).

But wait a second, anonymous Bob, I thought you said Lawswatch was carolmattdelphineemma. What gives?

Anonymous said...

Watchers, I believe I have you for spin


"The Diva declared the letter out of bounds to the public after Cr Bullock waved it in the air and said it degraded councillors. She did, however, win her bid to have discussion about the letter taken out of the secret agenda. Watchers figure the letter, in Janes’ charmingly outspoken manner, slagged off councillors as lacking in skills and business nous, though it’s not clear how he and Ruscoe rate existing board members Rangi Wills and the Diva."

Mickey hadn't read the letter before the meeting. Cr. Sue Westwood drew his attention to it. When Council agreed to hear the matter in the open, SW piped up and told Laws he'd better check the letter. He read it while she asked a supplementary q. of Colin Whitlock. Then Michael noted that the x-rated content was degrading to councillors, or something.

So Laws, chairing the meeting, was ambushed by B.B's bid for open government, which would have brought Janes' letter into the public arena had it not been for SW's interjection.

Hardly an indication of strategy. More an indication of incompetence from the chair. Or perhaps it was the 'flu.

Anonymous said...

"If an election were held today, would you vote for the Diva?"

No, did before but never again. 40% 69 votes

Anonymous said...

It's no surprise that Michael picks out two of the Chron's First People who want a change of mayor and ascribes political motives to them. He doesn't mention the others, including a Chron reporter no less.

Ah, if only Mas would stick to "safe" choices, eh Mickey. Like the Spin Fairy (who I seem to recall wanted to change the wine on offer at winter balls) or Mas's very own wife.

Time for a call to Mas with a list of names approved by Mickey HQ, eh?

Perhaps we can help here as I'm sure there's at last five safe choices left, before they actually have to resort to Michael Brian Laws. ie, have they done the Fairy Godmother yet? Bog Walker? the Mayoress? Nygllh**** Morris? Little Lucy. That's about it, I'm afraid.

Anonymous said...

It's good to see the Chron giving Sue P some space on the H issue, after she was sidelined in the earlier strategy "coverage".

It's a pity Higgie didn't feel able to vote against the Diva on an issue that seems to be important to her, or the Rangi Wills seems to have put his Vision hat on top of his Maori representation hat.

Anonymous said...

Isn't this interesting?

Pathological Liars

Durban-based psychologist Nareena Singh lists the following characteristics of pathological liars:

•They're usually very charming, charismatic and persuasive, making them highly attractive and winsome. They can enchant others with their magnetic personalities and appear to have abundant self-confidence. They respond badly to criticism, and usually attack their detractors verbally and emotionally.
•They have an over-inflated sense of self, crave attention and praise and feel a compulsive need to be respected.
•They feel no guilt or remorse about hurting or deceiving people: pathological liars are basically very angry individuals and are unable to recognise the rights or dignity of others. Instead, they see everyone as targets or opportunities.
•They're fundamentally incapable of giving or receiving love, since they're unable to understand real compassion or trust.
•They're often authoritarians, or exhibit secretive or paranoid behaviour.

Anonymous said...

Incompetent?

Sick of people saying what a shit mayor you are?

Try new! improved!!

Personal attack.

Shoot the messenger, there'll be another one along presently.

Anonymous said...

I can't imagine that Michael Laws would slum it in here but in case he visits occasionally - like the rich used to visit Bedlam - rest assured, sir, that this pond scum represents Wanganui like Gerry Brownlee represents Maoridom.
PS Whoever said Carol Webb was obsessive is SO right. Anybody who turns up to all council 7 committee meetings with a taperecorder in hand is not playing with a full deck.

Anonymous said...

Mayor's Column this week -
www.mayormichael.co.nz

Anonymous said...

I read the mayors column. It's really good to hear Helen Clark trying to do right by Wanganui even as Laws does his best to ruin the place.

The only other thing to note is that Mickey seems to be on one of his periodic charm offensives. It won't last.

Laws Watch said...

...B.B's bid for open government... would have brought Janes' letter into the public arena had it not been for SW's interjection. Hardly an indication of strategy. More an indication of incompetence from the chair.

And a very clear indication, it would seem, of why the non-Visionites are left doing goldfish impersonations whilst the Mayor whisks through the agenda, conducting his choir of Visionaries who've rehearsed their lines word-perfect at the last secret caucus meeting.

Have our "independent" representatives never heard of strategising?

One one thing, it seems, LawsWatch and the LawsMob agree - the Mayor can run rings round the "opposition". Not a good thing in a democracy.

Anonymous said...

Laws Watch said ...

Have our "independent" representatives never heard of strategising?

I'd like to ask the Watchers a question if I may - do they ever vote or organise as a block? I heard yesterday that Ray Stevens (non-Vision) challenged Dot McKinnon (Vision) for the strategy chairman's job but he only received 1 or 2 votes. Does that mean that non-Vision councillors voted for a Vision chairman - can someone who was there tell me?

Anonymous said...

Having read this entry, I am even more concerned that the by-election will not alter one iota the balance of power around the council table. As LawsWatch notes, Rangi Wills is a Ratepayers/Vision man and all that would happen is that the current 8-5 majority becomes 7-6; but even then with non-vison councillors not being united then who knows?
Some good advice Jodie and Carla would be to sit this by-election out and wait until 2007.