Run that by us again?
On the one hand:
I stood for change. I also stood for accountability of ratepayers' money. And, more importantly, to share decision-making with the wider community. Apparently, in some quarters of this district, that is not 'the Wanganui way'.
Tough. That is the mandate I was given and I have no intention of breaching my word or the faith shown by electors. And if the old boys' and old girls' network have a problem with accountability and democracy, well there's always Zimbabwe. Or the Ukraine.- Michael Laws, 22 November 2004
On the other hand:
Exemption of Council Controlled Organisations from Local Government Act ProvisionsEconomic Committee, 29 March 2005
- Cooks Gardens Trust
- Whanganui River Enhancement Trust
- Royal Wanganui Opera House Trust
- Sarjeant Gallery Trust
Dave Foster, Finance Manager, reported as follows:
"Section 64 of the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA) requires a Council Controlled Organisation (CCO) to submit a draft Statement of Intent to the Council by 1 March. Section 7 of the LGA allows the Council to exempt a small organisation from being included within the definition of a CCO, provided the organisation is not a Council Controlled Trading Organisation. If an organisation is exempt from being a CCO it does not have to comply with any of the requirements for a CCO under the LGA. Requirements for a CCO include:...
- Submission of a Statement of Intent.
- Preparation of a Half-yearly Report.
- Procedures for appointing directors.
- An audited Annual Report.
Committee’s Recommendation
Proposed by Mayor Laws, seconded by Cr McKinnon:
THAT the Cooks Gardens Trust, Whanganui River Enhancement Trust, Royal Wanganui Opera House Trust and the Sarjeant Gallery Trust be exempt as a Council Controlled Organisation under Section 7 of the Local Government Act 2002.
CARRIED- Council Minutes, April 2005
So... by exempting organisations from reporting, and procedures for appointing directors, we're somehow attaining improved "accountability and democracy". Here's an idea, then. Let's have meetings in secret where we actually make all the decisions, and then Council meetings themselves will become mere window dressing. Oh wait...
Comments on this post are now closed.
18 comments:
You missed WINC and its takeover of some community contracts too. Rumour on the inside has Rosemary and Keith up in arms.
LawsWatch - you're a twit. If Carol had been properly recording the committee & council (& I blame her because your left handshould know what your right hand is doing, dearie) then you'd know it was an ACCOUNTING issue to exempt voluntary groups from expensive financial audits and nothing to do with accpuntability. Standard practise in local govt. & practised by all city & district councils.
WINC have taken over modst of the community contracts & the word is that Keith & Rosemary may be hopping but they were powerless to resist the move. Rosemary H is on the endangered list I'm told.
Our report comes not from a recording, dearie, but the (presumably faithfully recorded) Minutes of Council itself.
Oh, so it's an accounting issue. Like when Antoinette signed off on that poll, you mean?
Michael Laws said: "... and nothing to do with accpuntability"
Phew, that's a relief, Michael. If there's one thing we don't need it's more accpuntability.
"accpuntability"?
Is that where you breach the LGA at every opportunity and take a punt at being able to get away with it?
I know nothing about past transgressions real or imagined, Carol. But as a council employee (of another council) kept appraised by my mates at WDC I do know the LG Act and thats a bit more than you. Cherie dearie.
Here's a Q for you tho' Carol (LawsWatch).
Michael Laws has always been upfront about the events that led to his resignation, accepted all responsibility & was not found to have committed any criminal wrong.
Why do you still find it relevant 10 years later when it was extensively ventilated by his opponents during the campaign (I saw fliers,leaflets, Chronicle articles even a mag article on it)
and yet Wangas voted for him & his team?
Why are you so pathological about it?? If he'd stolen, been convicyed (say like John Tamihere/DoverSamuels) of some evewnt, it would be over. So why isn't it over for you?? It's over for the rest of us!
Exempting Nciki's "friends" from the LGA "Procedures for appointing directors" must be a good thing. Word is that one of her new friends is Richard Moore..
I get all council minutes & papers and I see anon [6.04pm] was right if you read all the background papers.
I also see council voted unanimously for the motion including all the returned councillors like McGregor, Westwood, Bullock etc.
The entire rationale can be read by clicking the link and reading the Minutes, which says, inter alia, "The advantages of exemption is the saving on the cost of compliance with the provisions of the LGA that relate to CCO’s. The disadvantage is that the reporting and monitoring regime that is inherent in the procedures is not in place".
So the benefit is a saving in cost to the organisations concerned, at a cost of accountability.
It's entirely valid to argue the benefits outweigh the disadvantages (though the organisations presumably managed under this regime prior to April 2005) but under this Council, any dimunition in the accountability of satellite organisations - particularly in the appointment of directors, moreso than the financial requirements - is worth questioning, we feel.
I'm more interested in your response to the anon commentary at 8.13pm, Laws Watch.
The guy (I'm assuming it's a male so apols if not) has a point.
This blog hates too much and Laws' past is irrelevant - he's moved on, Wanganuis moved on, the worlds moved on.
The past is relevant when it is worth referencing as a predictor of present and future behaviour (in this instance, planned deception of a representative body and the public he was elected to serve). Just ask any profiler.
In any case, we're not referencing back to 1996 in this post (and a quick search suggests the last time we did so was on 4 August). The quote we've used is less than a year old and was made as Mayor.
We did make an offhand humourous reference to Antoinette Beck in a previous comment, much as one might say, seeing Dover Samuels heading someplace in a hurry, "off to find a pot plant?"
Something that happened ten years "predicts" how someone will act now? Yeah right. In a decade the whole world has changed and so do people. Knowing people from HB of 10 years ago Laws was a very popular MP with a very strong constituency focus - more pastoral than politician.
This guy now is quite direct to the point of being ruthless and my major problem is that he's too direct and too honest. The jury is out on whether that what Wangas needs but this a blog dedicated to character assassination either way.
I agree that Michael Laws cannot and should not be judged on his actions a decade ago. He must be judged on his performance now.
On the Local Govt Act exemption, I'm reliably informed that this is standard practise in local bodies to exempt organisations with a voluntary component. They do report during the Annual Plan and Annual Report process.
On the CEO's salary - why doesn't someone just ask? It's no skin off Laws' nose or council's as to what that salary would be. If its less than Whitlock's $210K then they could even get kudos. Whitlock's salary wasn't performance-based according to the WDC annual report so is Warburton's? Just get the Chron/RCP/Dm-Post to ask!!
Something that happened ten years "predicts" how someone will act now? Yeah right.
You're a trusting sort, anon. It's widely acknowledged that psychopathology, once set, doesn't really change.
But we're sure you'd stop and give a lift to any of these fine fellows then:
Gary C Evans (13 years).
Guy Georges (6 years).
Randy Kraft (12 years).
Kenneth McDuff (24 years).
Ivan Milat (3 years).
Robert Picton (19 years).
Dennis Rader (16 years).
Michael Swango (10 years).
(The number of years, by the way, relate to the time between the first murder attributed to them and the time they were caught).
Not that we're suggesting the Diva eats his victims. The greatest danger is probanly getting too close during a rant and being hit by a bit of spittle ;-D
Anon protestations at Michael's rehabilitation fall on deaf ears. Why? Have you read his book? Not long after learning his lesson (he says) what do we find him doing? Throwing votes away.
Then there's the constant use of spin. Decrease in annual plan submissions means everyone's happy with ML. Increase in annual plan submissions means ditto. Cutting the number of Councillors will save us money. The "promoters" have exaggerated the operation costs of the extended Splash Centre.
Michael says he took his lumps. He says he resigned of his own accord. Winston Peters demanded his resignation, and only then did he give it. According to parliamentary record he also attempted to duck out of resigning his local body seat.
He writes "satirically", that lying is acceptable, and it's only bad if you get caught. Maybe that's true for him. If so, I'd say he's missing a gene or two.
So sorry, anon, your case for Michael's "change" is unconvincing,
Post a Comment