Media Statement on the Len Brown Saga

Written by Ben Ross - Talking Auckland

For MSM Consumption

A Further Response from Talking Auckland

 

In light of the Len Brown Saga, EY Report, and my own subsequent reaction (Reaction to the EY Report) there has been interest from the Main Stream Media on my own commentary on the matter. As a result this post is an “official response” from Talking Auckland on the Len Brown Saga – specifically around the call for censuring the Mayor.

Please note that Talking Auckland operates under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License at all times unless otherwise stated. However, this specific post I am waivering  the particular Creative Commons licence and placing it under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence.

If the MSM are seeking any further comment you can contact me at Talking Auckland’s email address (view[dot]of[dot]auckland@gmail[dot]com or via the comment box below.

 

Further Response to the Len Brown Saga and the EY Report

 

My initial reaction to the EY report into the Len Brown Saga remains unchanged when I first published it on Friday 13th December, 2013. I will republish that particular post here down at the bottom.

In recap though I had come to the three conclusions as a consequence of the EY report, they being:

  1. The “rules” set by the Council Code of Conduct,  that by the Remuneration Authority, and the Local Government (Auckland Amendment) Act 2009 are too loose with little measures provided if something does go wrong/breached

  2. Government must tighten up the regulations set about by the Remuneration Authority for issuing rules around use of ratepayers resources – e.g the mayoral car and when it can be used or not. In the same regard the Local Government Act needs tightening up so the Governing Body have available a wide range of measures to deal with errant elected members. This can range from a Censure motion to something more punitive (whatever one decides that might be short of sacking a mayor)

  3. Owing to this error in regards to several matters pointed out in the EY report (cell phone, mayoral car, and not declaring the hotels on the register)(and rather than the actual affair) my confidence in the mayor is shaken with support moving from positive to negative. That said I still have confidence and positive support in the wider main Council (although a particular CCO is an exception at the moment) and the rest of the elected members (regardless of whether I agree with them or not (Dick Quax and Cameron Brewer)). In being honest it has weighed on my mind on what else has the mayor not declared outside of the “affair” and could have this affected any other mayoral decision-making

Source: https://voakl.net/2013/12/13/reaction-to-the-ey-report/

Since the initial response I gave there have been further developments into this sordid saga that will no doubt and hopefully come to ahead by the end of next week.

I have not been in any direct contact with any Councillor nor the Deputy Mayor over EY report when it was released on Friday. This is to provide a clarification and leave no room for doubt on that particular matter. In saying that looking at MSM reports today I had expected Councillors most likely “crunching the numbers” and undertaking a large amount of brainstorming on what to do as a consequence of the EY report.

Again I continue to display full confidence and support towards the Deputy Mayor and the Governing Body since the EY report came out on Friday. That confidence does not extend still towards the mayor where I hold a negative view as a consequence to the EY report.

I still maintain my own call as an Auckland Ratepayer for the Governing Body to move a motion of censure against the Mayor as fast as it can be done. Even if the vote fails the swiftness of moving such a motion for the most part will give the City some stability and security from the Council. This security and stability extends to the Council still being able to deliver on the City Building phase which Auckland has entered. The reason for the Censure in my eyes is to show the Mayor he has stuffed up big time and his actions can not go unpunished by the Governing Body AND the Auckland citizenry. Failure to move such a motion (even if the vote fails) would be telling Auckland that the Governing Body is complicit in what the Mayor has done as highlighted in the EY report. This to me would be extremely unacceptable to the point I would ask the Minister for Local Government to look at Commissioners to replace the Council if the Council became paralysed as a result of the Mayor’s actions.

 

While I do not wish to second guess our Deputy Mayor in this sorry saga with the Mayor in any way I would implore the City, the Governing Body, and Local Boards to put political ideologies and differences aside and in these unprecedented times rally behind Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse. I call on this rally for the sake of stability of Auckland until a final decision and resolution is made against the Mayor. This will ultimately mean in my own opinion elections for a new mayor one way or the other.

I will be rallying behind our Deputy Mayor not only as I have faith that Penny Hulse will do what is right for the City but also the fact this situation has not occurred before and this will not be an easy time for the Deputy Mayor. Auckland has every right to demand the leadership with integrity at all times. With the integrity of the Mayor literally shot to pieces and the City rather not amused the ball has landed in the Deputy Mayor’s court as the City looks for a leader to take it through this mess. I could not fathom what Penny is going through right now as the saga continues to play out and it is pointless in idle speculating as well. It is time to rally and get ready to close a sorry chapter and move forward once for all.

 

While this is going to be hard, patience is needed as if a decision is made rashly by the Council it will hurt the City more than Censure motion failing in the Governing Body.

 

We will know what the Governing Body will commit to soon and best wait for it.

 

Of course Talking Auckland will be keeping an eye on the saga until its natural conclusion is reached.

—-Ends—-

 

Normal Talking Auckland commentary will also be continuing with more on the Housing Accord tomorrow after a briefing on the Accord.

 

Reaction to the EY Report

Government needs to tighten up the “rules”

 

This is a rare piece of commentary from me personally into the entire “Len Brown affair.” Since the story broke I have been more or less silent on the “affair” aspect while constantly keeping an eye on the “conduct” side of the matter. From Day One when the story broke (while returning from a Council briefing on I believe it was on the Unitary Plan heading for notification) I have always said for me to no longer give “support” to the Mayor, he would have to conduct a criminal act (and be convicted) or conduct serious misconduct (an affair is not misconduct) through misuse of resources or power, and/or other serious nature.

I have the EY report that was commissioned by Council CEO Doug McKay after it landed (with an accompanying release) in my email box this afternoon. You can read the report over at this post here: The EY Report Commissioned by Auckland Council CEO. That said I was NOT at the Press Conference in Town Hall this afternoon over the release of the report.

 

After receiving and reading the report I have come to three conclusions:

  1. The “rules” set by the Council Code of Conduct,  that by the Remuneration Authority, and the Local Government (Auckland Amendment) Act 2009 are too loose with little measures provided if something does go wrong/breached
  2. Government must tighten up the regulations set about by the Remuneration Authority for issuing rules around use of ratepayers resources – e.g the mayoral car and when it can be used or not. In the same regard the Local Government Act needs tightening up so the Governing Body have available a wide range of measures to deal with errant elected members. This can range from a Censure motion to something more punitive (whatever one decides that might be short of sacking a mayor)
  3. Owing to this error in regards to several matters pointed out in the EY report (cell phone, mayoral car, and not declaring the hotels on the register)(and rather than the actual affair) my confidence in the mayor is shaken with support moving from positive to negative. That said I still have confidence and positive support in the wider main Council (although a particular CCO is an exception at the moment) and the rest of the elected members (regardless of whether I agree with them or not (Dick Quax and Cameron Brewer)). In being honest it has weighed on my mind on what else has the mayor not declared outside of the “affair” and could have this affected any other mayoral decision-making

 

I stress again to make it crystal clear that yes confidence in the mayor is shaken with support switching from positive to negative. HOWEVER, confidence and support remains with the Deputy Mayor and the rest of the Councillors despite disagreements from time to time. 

 

One thing I do ask of the Governing Body after the elected members have had time to review the EY report is that an extraordinary meeting be called of the GB ASAP! In that extraordinary meeting a motion of censure is called and voted for against the mayor immediately. Whether the vote passes or fails is beside the point in my opinion. The point being is that the Governing Body has now been damaged and in the eyes of the City the censure motion needs to occur to help restore confidence towards the Council. Failure to move the censure motion quickly could paralyse worthwhile projects before the Council – and that would be a true detriment to Auckland. It is risky

 

For the rest of it Parliament is going to need to haul backside and tighten up rules around Local Government to prevent this kind of mess from happening again. And to me that is going to be the main point coming out of this entire mess! 

 

The EY report