Squawk boxing

An interesting point - though not one made directly in the Radio NZ report on Councils' spending - is that they've published a figure of 4.1%, apparently quoting none other than Mayor Michael Laws as touting this as the lowest in the country, without even questioning the fact that the propaganda meant for Wanganui's citizens has been steadfastly quoting three percent. Is Mr Maslin moonlighting at RNZ, we wonder?

The Diva is also quoted as saying the WDC has "moved to justify every element of its spending". Someone should tell him that squawking "it won the referendum!" doesn't justify anything on any basis other than populism - certainly not an economic basis, or planning or even a social one.

He also boasts of sacking six senior managers but makes no mention of his intention to restock the Council's legal and engineering departments, no doubt with people hand-picked to give him the answers he wants on the afforability and legality of the contents of his pork barrel. Meanwhile the low-level haemmorhage of staff is continuing, with two walkers from the engineering-planning area in recent weeks.

Talking of squawking, Mickey's rant on 13 June has had the chattering classes occupied for most of last week. Apparently, democracy is well and truly dead in Wanganui. According to the Mayor, who was reportedly standing on it's throat while dictating that day's press release, committees exist only to rubber stamp his proposals. If they don't, they'll be ignored. Specially if, like the Heritage Committe, they actually have real people on them, as opposed to tame councillors.

Heritage, as we're sure you're all aware, chucked out his idea for a Wanganui Anniversary Day. That drew an immediate outburst from Mickey (complete with headline exclamation mark!) reminding us that committees can only recommend. And when they recommend something that isn't a pet project of his, that doesn't count - they're just a bunch of incompetents, and anyway not everyone turned up for the meeting. And anything a committee does has to go to full Council (where of course he can tug the strings and set heads a-nodding like those dog toys people used to put in the rear windows of their cars before we had actual suspension).

This fine piece of penmanship appeared on the Council website, but then someone decided it might be wise to balance it with a somewhat more moderate rant in the name of Mickey's boy Marty. Clearly someone in the hierachy has decided it's better to put the bucket beneath the elephant as soon as it starts bellowing rather than follow it round afterwards with a broom. That must be one of those "efficiencies" we keep hearing so much about.

Having gone to so much trouble to educate the burghers of Wanganui that Council committees weren't actually there to be listened to - or accorded any respect by the Mayor - the Diva managed a pirouette of incredible skill the next day.

How anyone who can instantaneously reverse their position 180 degrees with such consummate skill could have failed to make the cut for "Dancing with the Stars" eludes us, truly it does.

The Administration and Finance Committee had, you see, approved his plans for the waterfront, choosing Option One (Mickey's favourite, and the most expensive of course), over the alternative. So not a word in his subsequent release about it having to go to full Council for approval, let alone about how weak and ineffective committees were. No, this decision was praiseworthy because it had come from senior councillors, he managed to tell us whilst keeping a straight face.

Turns out all the moving and seconding on the waterfront was by Vision (Dottie and Muzza) or Vision-in-drag's Rangi Wills. Since when did these fresh-from-the-bottle fizzers become senior councillors?

A few days later, the smoke started pouring from the windows of Guyton Street as the Spin Machine's gears attempted another 180 degree reversal. Seems another one of those pesky committees that isn't stacked with "senior" councillors gave the Diva the single digit salute. This time it's Haker-Bogan's lot telling Wanganui Inc to bugger off:

The Masters Games Organisation yesterday won the battle to have control of the Wanganui District Council's $40,000 two-yearly contribution towards the cost of the 2007 Masters Games. The council's sport and recreation committee voted strongly in favour of the Masters Games taking the money after receiving written and spoken submissions from Masters Games and Wanganui Inc, who were both vying for it...

A Games takes between $800,000 and $900,000 to run, and the District Council’s offering is $40,000. Committee members heard that the Dunedin City Council, in Wanganui’s "off-year", contributes around 90 percent of the cost of its turn at the Masters Games...

The subject of whether indebted sports – in financial trouble in other words – should be a subject of this committee was discussed briefly. It was suggested the sport and rec committee should stay with the positiveness of helping sports develop.

Positiveness?? Why use four syllables when there's the perfect four-letter single-syllable word for this: It's called spin, Phillipa.

The Masters Games folk were recently on the receiving end of a Mayoral spray for taking a "junket" to Australia - we imagine they're sheltering beneath their umbrellas for a deluge worse than the recent weather for snatching money from the hands of Mickey and the New Boys on the Wanganui Inc board.

With wastewater now estimated at $118.5 million, and the referendum pork-barreling needing to be funded, plus these miscellaneous expectations coming home to roost, are they going to be funded by more and more asset sales? At this rate Wanganui Gas will be on the block before we know it.

All these recommendations will hit the next full Council meeting on 3 July. We won't be taking bets on which pass and which are overturned. We're sure that councillors will follow the tradition of robust scrutiny and open debate exemplified by the patsy questioners showcased in the Mayor's Chron columns - this week none other than diVision stalwarts and members of the inner circle Gordon Keelty and Julie Morris (wife of Nigelwho).

Has anyone submitted a question to Mayor Michael Laws and so far not received an answer? Or had it rejected? If so, we'd be interested to hear. And if you're submitting one, c.c. LawsWatch - we'll publish it here so everyone knows whether it gets a reply and, if so, what that reply says.

Then again, we could be misjudging Mickey. Perhaps he needs the patsy questioners because, like his radio show, no one else is listening, or gives a damn.

Comments on this post are now closed.

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.