The Walking Dead

Those of you who have followed LawsWatch through 367 posts over two years will know that we Watchers are seldom lost for words. We sometimes think we’ve seen it all, like the world weary forensic pathologists on our favourite television gore-fests. We’ve often felt in danger of becoming inured to the unspeakable horrors revealed by our weekly dissections of the rotting remains of the walking dead around His Worship the Mayor of Wanganui Michael Laws.

We’ve gasped and we’ve raged at the ghastly crimes against truth, justice, democracy (and most recently the sanctity of the Prince Edward Auditorium at Wanganui Collegiate) committed daily by the Beast of Taupo Quay, aka John Philip Maslin! We’ve cracked our cynical medical jokes at the ineptness of the Foolish Felons operating under the Sign of Vision! We’ve even developed a grudging respect for the ability of the Devilish Doctor Warbottom and his Guyton St Gang to evade the Bungling Cops in Wellington!

But we have to confess, Dear Readers, that events of the past three months have left us wondering just what deadly pathogen has infected the Wanganui body politic and its parasitic media. Since this vile disease called Election Fever was unleashed three months ago we’ve seen sights that have turned the stomach of even the most seasoned Watchers.

But nothing to match the appalling sight on page ten of the October 4 issue of the tacky and thoroughly corrupt little rag called River City Press. There, Dear Watchers, you will be shocked to see the grinning skulls of Dr Warburstein and his very own creation Julian Harkless proclaiming they ‘have their fingers on our council’s financial pulse’ and that everything – believe them – is hunky dory!

Debt is good! Debt is great! says Dave. We’re doing a terrific job! says Julian. Watch their lips … VOTE VISION!! Their jobs depend on it, and the financial genii at the River City Press aren’t in the mood to argue. Like the rats down the drainpipe at Wanganui’s decaying morgue, they’re happy to feast on whatever comes their way.

MEANWHILE, BACK IN BLOGSVILLE …

We’ve been amused in the last few weeks by the emergence of a couple of Wanganui wannabe blogs which have fizzled and faded like soggy sparklers on a wet November 5. The first was the curious case of http://wanganuigossip.blogspot.com which set itself up as an alternative to LawsWatch, professed to be seeking the dirt on (night)mayor Mickey and attracted about five desultory comments before disappearing mysteriously into the blog fog with an announcement that:

This blog is open to invited readers only.

AND THEN

… there was the curious case of the newbie blogger at http://whanganui.org who lasted only a couple of posts after erupting with a hiss and a roar on September 17 with these promising gems …

Many feel that Michael has done God’s work but that it’s time for a rest from the politics of aggression and intimidation and for a bit of co-operation.

The Vision team bear an uncanny resemblance to Czarina Helen’s ministers: what the head prefect says goes. There’s one person making the decisions and we all know who it is. Supporters of Rob Muldoon and Maggie Thatcher will be suffering severe déjà vu.

I’m open to persuasion, but my feeling is that Wanganui folk are ready for some decorum and unity.

OF COURSE

The RIGHTeous Blogmeister turned pollster David Farrar boasts nothing if not longevity with his KiwiBlog. Mr Farrar, famous in his own lunchtime for the fact that ‘Michael got me arrested 13 years ago’ very kindly includes a link to LawsWatch on his very well-read site which recently discussed his polling pranks on behalf of the Wanganui Chron(ic).

Take a spoonful of sleaze & call the doctor in the morning

Shocking as they are, the revelations reported in the Chron(ic) and DomPost about the sordid goings-on and contempt for employment law shown by CEO Dr David Warburton following the firing last year of Wanganui District Council’s community development manager, it will have come as no surprise to Watchers who remember LawsWatch’s revelations about the then newly-appointed CEO. (NB:For the benefit of those who foolishly rely on the Chron(ic) for their information, we hear that after pouring good ratepayers’ money after bad at the Wellington lawyers running the case, the good doctor made an acceptable offer at the end of a torrid two-day hearing to settle the case.)

On Friday, September 9, 2005, this blog reported that the good doctor’s Kaitaia timber company Tanner Group had recently lost an Employment Relations Act case in which it was alleged to have "threaten[ed the] applicant with disciplinary action over [a] term of employment that had not been directly and expressly negotiated and [the] contents of which remained uncertain between parties".

“Hopefully”, we told Watchers with amazing percipacity at the time, “Council staff have dotted the i's and crossed the t's in their employment contracts”.

We also noted that Dr Warburton’s list of achievements included the fact he was also a director of Fibrecraft Industries, placed in liquidation in Wanganui High Court on 2 June 2004 on petition of Nuplex Industries. Interestingly, Warburton’s fellow director in the failed fibreglass venture, Bruce Nicholson, was installed as a director of Wanganui Inc, about the same time as Mayor Michael Laws, deputy Dot McKinnon and the rest of the capitalist raiders were finding their new CEO (and we all know what happened with WINC, don’t we).

Meanwhile, back in Kaitaia in 2005, according to MP Sue Bradford, “in (Warburton’s timber company) TGL ... we have a company that has obviously kept its workers in the dark for some time and has then attempted to make itself look good by offering a fig leaf of consultation."

Welcome to the world of Dr David Warburton, whose contempt for employment law obviously was not left at the door to 101 Guyton St. As for his pretence of recognising the fundamental provisions of the Local Government Act 2002 -- “I will need to learn to work within the constraints of the Local Government Act,” he said at the time of his appointment – the DomPost coverage of last week's Employment Relations Authority hearing revealed he may have missed the bit about the CEO – not the mayor – being responsible for hiring and firing staff.

As commenters have pointed out, Sally Patrick hasn’t exactly covered herself in glory since taking her seat at the right-hand of Warburton and Laws, and it was no surprise to experienced Watchers to see her name on the roll of shame of the “anonymous” Greek chorus of letter writers eventually outed by Warburton and listed on the Chron(ic)'s front page. There she is, with the Spin Fairy's former squeeze Julian Rewiti, the impeccably pedigreed Stephanie Rose and non-entity Jill Jones.

Another area of CEO responsibility for political neutrality that seems to have escaped Dr Warburton’s notice has become glaringly apparent in the first week of what the Office of the Auditor General (OAG) calls “the pre-election period”, ie the three months leading up to the October 13th election. According to the LawsWatch calendar, that started July 13th -- but you wouldn’t know it from the likes of Philippa Baker-Hogan who commandeered the ratepayer-funded Councillor Comment advert in the July 18th MidWeek, and on the WDC website, for a fevered bout of electioneering.

Like many “watchdog” provisions, the OAG’s Communications Guidelines are the sort of toothless tigers that Mayor Mickey, his Visionaries and their pet CEO routinely treat with utter contempt. But it’s safe to assume the OAG is keen to hear about blatant flouting like we’re already seeing, and no doubt will be seeing much more of ,in the next 12 weeks. You can read the full Guidelines here

You can find contact details for the OAG here if, like us, you find it hard to see why Warburton thinks he can continue to turn a blind eye to Vision’s contempt for clauses like these in the OAG’s guidelines:

Principle 12: Communication of a Member’s personal views or opinions using Council resources is unacceptable during a pre-election period.

Principle 13: A Council’s policy should also recognise the risk that communications by or about Members, whether in their capacities as spokespersons for Council or otherwise, during a pre-election period could result in the Member achieving electoral advantage at ratepayers’ expense. The Chief Executive Officer (or his delegate) should actively manage the risk in accordance with the relevant electoral law.

Principle 14: The use of Council resources (including stationery and internet, e-mail and telephone Communication facilities) for re-election purposes is unacceptable.

Dr WTF

Time and again we find ourselves penning a "Civics 101" lecture in order to counter the misleading spin put out by Michael Laws, and this post is no exception. So apologies in advance to those readers who have already cottoned on to the basic precepts of democracy. We're obliged to do this occasionally to help out those who have not (Mickey, Dotty and the dwarves, the entire editorial staff of the Chron and a smattering of LW commenters).

What's sparked this latest lecture is Mickey's tired drum-banging about the previous Council's supposed "financial slackness", as Dave Laurence termed it in a Chron story recently.

Leaving aside for the moment that Mickey has quite a few "control weaknesses" of his own, the Mayoral hyperbole that the report was "one of the worst he had seen in his 20 years in the public sector" was allowed through without so much as a question.

Those readers who were waiting for the Chron to ask the obvious, like "how does that tally with the horrific scare stories you keep telling us about Auckland's pending 200 percent rates rise, then?" were sorely disappointed.

But more importantly, the fearless guardian of Wanganui's fourth estate allowed the Mayor to get away with saying he considered that "the audit was saying to elected representatives that they were responsible for the council's financial management".

Errr, no. Not unless the Audit Office has lost all touch with reality. Because as just about any Year 9 student who's been paying attention in social studies can tell you, the elected representatives on any body set policy and employ a chief executive who carries the can for financial management.

Now then Watchers. Sit up straight, pay attention, and open no less an authority than the Local Government Association's useful handbook for those who weren't paying attention at school:

Generally the council:

• sets major policy (including strategic, annual and district plans, long-term financial strategies and funding policies)
• appoints and monitors the performance of the chief executive
• approves major contracts
• determines the council’s committee structure, membership and delegations
• builds iwi relationships
• makes decisions on matters that aren’t delegated to committees or council staff.

Still not convinced? Then let's see what we can ascertain from the Council's own Governance Policy:

The Chief Executive is appointed by the Council in accordance with section 42 and clauses 33 and 34 of Schedule 7 of the Local Government Act 2002. The Chief Executive implements and manages the Council’s policies and objectives within the budgetary constraints established by the Council. Under section 42 of the Local Government Act 2002, the responsibilities of the Chief Executive are:

• implementing the decisions of the Council
• providing advice to members of the Council and Community Boards
• ensuring that all responsibilities, duties and powers delegated to the Chief Executive or to any person employed by the Wanganui District Council, or imposed or conferred by any Act, regulation or bylaw are properly performed or exercised
• ensuring the effective and efficient management of the activities of Wanganui District Council
• maintaining systems to enable effective planning and accurate reporting of the financial and service performance of the Council
• providing leadership for the staff of the Council
• employing staff, including negotiation of the terms of employment for the staff, of the Wanganui District Council

Mr Whitlock, of course, got out while the going was good so is unlikely to be called to account for any perceived failing to perform any of those functions. And pillorying him wouldn't score Mickey any cheap political points anyway.

But let us return to the Chron's unasked questions. Right after they'd let Mickey bang on for column centimetre afer column centimetre lamenting "the system which the incoming council inherited" which was "manifestly inadequate and grossly deficient, exposing the organisation to risk", we get given a few examples, one of which is:

There was a hand slap for the district library’s "unders and overs" account, which arose from discrepancies between cash banked and cash sales entered into the accounting system.

Hold on... a financial stuff up at the library? On such a basic level as accurately recording cash receipts? (Note: the Audit Office said there was no indication of fraud. Which just leaves incompetence). But hasn't the person responsible for the library at the time, on whose desk the buck stopped (or, it seems, in this case didn't stop) just been... promoted by Mickey?

Was the Chron not aware of this? Was Mr Laurence asleep, leaving his tape recorder to faithfully record the Mayoral rant? Or did he just rehash a Guyton Street press release and allow Mr Maslin to run it under his byline? We'd concude by asking, rhetorically, "have they no shame?". But we suspect we know the answer to that, as do most of you.

Off topic admin note: Thanks to those Watchers who raised the issue of the difficulty they had locating LawsWatch in the ever-growing world wide web. We can be found by typing "Laws Watch" into most search engines, but otherwise it has been difficult. We've taken some technical steps to remedy this in the past few weeks, and the results should slowly become evident in search engines etc. We'd also encourage supporters to add the blog's address to their email-signatures, to tell their friends about it (just tell them to Google "Laws Watch") and - if you're really that keen - to take up the suggestion of posting flyers etc. But please - remain with the law and use common sense.

Comments on this post are now closed.

Porkies on pork

As at least one commenter has already noted under the previous post, the story in today's Chron about the departure of Rosemary Hovey from Council after 21 years of loyal service highlights the fact that promises were made - including by Nicki "I don't read unsigned emails" Higgie in the Chron as recently as May 30 - regarding a community development position being established in the Luftwaffe sorry, the Sally Patrick wing of the Council.

A promise that was subsequently broken. "I did not expect to be restructured out completely," Mrs Hovey is quoted as saying. Nor, we suspect, did she expect over two decades of loyalty to be rewarded with a "don't come Monday" notice on the first day of her holidays. But that's the way it is around Council nowadays. Any number of things - including people - are being sacrificed to find the money, not to reduce debt, but to pay for diVision's pork barrelling of projects such as the Splash Centre.

Commenters have been quick to blame Mayor Michael Laws for the way in which the layoffs were handled, especially since Mrs Hovey reveals that after she wrote to CEO David Warburton asking for written answers about her future, his response "necessitated a letter from her own lawyer". Mickey's record on industrial relations is, after all, less than perfect, having - as we've pointed out in the past - already cost the taxpayer a wallop at least once in the past. And it certainly seems like his modus operandi.

"All further correspondence was then between my lawyer and the council’s lawyers. I did not find any pleasure in this way of resolving matters," she understatedly tells the Chron. "I am disappointed with the tone of the letters I received throughout this process, especially as I felt threatened by them", ominously adding that "It would be fair to say this caused me much angst and may require some follow-up in the future".

Not so fast though, Watchers. LawsWatch has already revealed that Dr Warburton also has an equally appalling record on human resources management, especially when it comes to getting rid of people.

It was Warburton's company, Tanner Group Ltd, which announced it was closing its three paper mills at Kaitaia, Kerepehi and Tairua because it couldn't make a profit. TGL told workers on a Friday that they had until Monday to come up with a way to keep their plant open. Local MP Sue Bradford said at the time that local people were "bitter" towards the company because it had "kept its workers in the dark for some time".

That whole "four days to save your own backside" line sound familiar, Watchers? It ought to. Back in May, that's precisely what was told to Irene Pearson, who was called into Warburton’s office on a Monday and told the council was restructuring and her job was gone. As the Chron reported at the time "Dr Warburton gave her four days to suggest somewhere else in council where she might fit in. She asked what the master plan was, and was told he could not discuss it. That left her at a loss to know where she could fit in."

And then, when the workers get bolshy, the threats begin. For it was Tanner Group which, just a month before decimating the three timber towns, lost an Employment Relations Act case in which it was alleged to have "threaten[ed the] applicant with disciplinary action over [a] term of employment that had not been directly and expressly negotiated and [the] contents of which remained uncertain between parties".

Now the treatment of Mrs Hovey et al may well have Mayoral fingerprints all over it. But in this case it's just as likely to have been Dr Warburton who trained the big lawyerly guns on the first person to peek over the parapet, and blew their head off.

Mickey, Nicki, Dotty et al knew all about his record before he was hired. They knew he had no local government experience, yet according to both Dotty and the Diva, "over fifty people applied for the top job including CEOs of three other councils and the heads of two government agencies". So he was picked for a reason. Now we know what it was. He's a codependent:

Codependent personalities evolve from attempts to keep some type of order in a hurtful relationship. The term codependency refers to a relationship where one or both parties enable the other to act in certain maladaptive ways. Many times, the act of enabling satisfies a need for the codependent person because his or her actions foster a dependency from the other person or persons in the relationship.

Codependency is reinforced by a person's need to be needed. The enabler thinks irrationally by believing he can maintain healthy relationships through manipulation and control. He believes he can do this by avoiding conflict and fostering dependency. Is it rational for someone to think that he can maintain a healthy relationship when he does not address problems and he lies to protect others from their responsibilities?

Still, we're sure Dr Warbond (© Bearhunter, 2006) has "shared with the full council" the latest decision to not have a community development staffer after all, as promised in the e-coli of 15 May:

Unsurprisingly, Dr Warburton is restructuring the current council to make it more efficient and effective. He has shared his restructuring plan with the full council, and those plans have been formally approved.

Perhaps he'll also "share with the full council" (in open meeting, of course - it's our money he's spending, after all) just how much that highly paid Wellington employment lawyer is hoovering up to deal with all this.

So... Nicki? Dotty? Anyone? Prepared to step up and take responsibility for this? Or content to let the not-so-good doctor continue to "not address problems and protect others from their responsibilities?"

Comments on this post are now closed.