Hasting Mayor was no exception!
Mayor Schollum is no stranger to finding herself at the centre of public and political criticism. Recently being the recipient of community and political backlash regarding her leadership centred around two major controversies.
A recent Herald report detailed the growing fallout within the council. An independent assessment found Councillor Steve Gibson guilty of low-level bullying against a staff member, but the friction didn’t stop there. Gibson has publicly slammed Mayor Schollum’s governance, calling it a “my way or the highway” approach.
Gibson widened the rift when he refused to attend strategic planning sessions at a marae.
Mayor Schollum’s handling of these internal disputes and the glaring communication gaps surrounding them has drawn heavy criticism from both the community and political peers.
Surely ratepayers deserve a transparent, cohesive leadership, not escalating council dysfunction.
But Mayor Schollum, this week, put herself right back in the firing line over Local Government minister Simon Watts proposed legislation!
Mayor Schollum claimed “The new law will see councils lose expert advice on big financial decisions”
Schollum further claimed “It made “very little sense” to strip the independent experts of their voting rights, because councillors needed to see their stance.” “It’s actually a really important weighting that we give experts in their field on committees like risk and assurance,” she said.
I suggest Mayor Schollum is being disingenuous at the least and devious at worst.
I think she is using “expert financial advice” as a smokescreen for her real agenda to further increase Maori influence into council decision making.
She is totally incorrect by claiming The new law will see councils lose expert advice on big financial decisions.
Expert advisors, whatever the subject, do not need to be able to cast a vote. Like anyone else they attend committee meetings and give advice, they can then be questioned extensively by councillors and from there the council officers make a recommendation which the committee can choose to agree with or not.
By all means bring in anyone to make a submission on any topic; public submissions have always been the hallmark of the council process and of democracy.
The reason why all councils have a plethora of highly paid financial and engineering staff is to provide recommendations for councillors to vote on.
Mayor Schollums inference or conviction that having, accountants, engineers etc on any committee with voting rights is actually an insult to the ratepayers!
As I said; it is a smokescreen!
Law change will see councils lose expert advice, Hastings Mayor Wendy Schollum says – NZ Herald
Hastings Mayor Wendy Schollum says a new law will see councils lose expert advice on big financial decisions.
The Government is changing the law to ensure that only elected councillors can vote on council committees – meaning other appointed members such as iwi representatives would lose their voting rights.
Local Government Minister Simon Watts said councillors were directly accountable to voters for their decisions and having unelected people on committees undermined decision-making and diluted elected members’ influence.
He referenced examples in the Far North, Tauranga and Hastings, where iwi representatives and people under-18 had been appointed to council committees and given voting rights without being elected.
Schollum said there were 16 elected members on their standing committees, as well as a Māori representative and a rural community representative, who were both unelected but could vote.
A recent Herald report detailed the growing fallout within the council. An independent assessment found Councillor Steve Gibson guilty of low-level bullying against a staff member, but the friction didn’t stop there. Gibson has publicly slammed Mayor Schollum’s governance, calling it a “my way or the highway” approach.
Gibson widened the rift when he refused to attend strategic planning sessions at a marae.
Mayor Schollum’s handling of these internal disputes and the glaring communication gaps surrounding them has drawn heavy criticism from both the community and political peers.
Surely ratepayers deserve a transparent, cohesive leadership, not escalating council dysfunction.
But Mayor Schollum, this week, put herself right back in the firing line over Local Government minister Simon Watts proposed legislation!
Mayor Schollum claimed “The new law will see councils lose expert advice on big financial decisions”
Schollum further claimed “It made “very little sense” to strip the independent experts of their voting rights, because councillors needed to see their stance.” “It’s actually a really important weighting that we give experts in their field on committees like risk and assurance,” she said.
I suggest Mayor Schollum is being disingenuous at the least and devious at worst.
I think she is using “expert financial advice” as a smokescreen for her real agenda to further increase Maori influence into council decision making.
She is totally incorrect by claiming The new law will see councils lose expert advice on big financial decisions.
Expert advisors, whatever the subject, do not need to be able to cast a vote. Like anyone else they attend committee meetings and give advice, they can then be questioned extensively by councillors and from there the council officers make a recommendation which the committee can choose to agree with or not.
By all means bring in anyone to make a submission on any topic; public submissions have always been the hallmark of the council process and of democracy.
The reason why all councils have a plethora of highly paid financial and engineering staff is to provide recommendations for councillors to vote on.
Mayor Schollums inference or conviction that having, accountants, engineers etc on any committee with voting rights is actually an insult to the ratepayers!
As I said; it is a smokescreen!
Law change will see councils lose expert advice, Hastings Mayor Wendy Schollum says – NZ Herald
Hastings Mayor Wendy Schollum says a new law will see councils lose expert advice on big financial decisions.
The Government is changing the law to ensure that only elected councillors can vote on council committees – meaning other appointed members such as iwi representatives would lose their voting rights.
Local Government Minister Simon Watts said councillors were directly accountable to voters for their decisions and having unelected people on committees undermined decision-making and diluted elected members’ influence.
He referenced examples in the Far North, Tauranga and Hastings, where iwi representatives and people under-18 had been appointed to council committees and given voting rights without being elected.
Schollum said there were 16 elected members on their standing committees, as well as a Māori representative and a rural community representative, who were both unelected but could vote.
“That is hardly a massive dilution of democracy, those two extra voices, and they bring a very important perspective, each of them, from different parts of our community to our decision-making,” she said.
“Successive governments and parliaments have chosen to keep that provision in place, recognising that it allows local government to strengthen and bolster our decision making, where we may be lacking specific skills around the table.”
Schollum said final accountability and decision-making already rested with elected members.
“Unelected members cannot sit on full council meetings, which is where all those major decisions around rates, annual plans, long-term plans, et cetera, are made,” she said.
The non-elected representatives sat on committees that usually gave recommendations to the council, leaving final decisions up to elected members, she said.
Independent audit and risk experts to lose voting rights
Many councils appointed independent chairs to their audit and risk committees.
The Audit Office website encouraged councils to do that to promote free and frank debate and ensure that councillors received objective advice and assurance.
The minister’s office confirmed independent members of such committees were included in the changes – so they would lose their voting rights.
Schollum said that was concerning, given it was “ultimately the watchdog committee”.
“No governance table can be expected to hold every skill and expertise in house, especially when they’re an elected member pool,” she said.
“When you’re overseeing around $3.6 billion worth of community assets, as we are in Hastings, it’s a really sensible thing to have independent financial, legal, and risk expertise in the room helping make decisions, because it protects scrutiny and it really helps protect ratepayers.”
Schollum said it made “very little sense” to strip the independent expert of their voting rights, because councillors needed to see their stance.
“It’s actually a really important weighting that we give experts in their field on committees like risk and assurance,” she said.
Schollum intended to write to the minister expressing her concern.
“At a time when councils are working through affordability pressures, infrastructure challenges, and major reform, I really want to understand whether this is really the issue that is most urgent and needs nationwide legislative response,” she said.
“Councils have some really big problems to solve right now, and I’m not convinced this is one of them, and I want to make sure that there’s not unintentional negative impacts in systems that are currently working well and protecting ratepayers.”
Opposition weighs in
Labour’s local government spokesperson Tangi Utikere said councils could make poorer decisions if they were not allowed to fill gaps in representation and expertise.
“If people sitting around the council table see a particular gap or an opportunity that they wish to fill, that’s a matter for them. That’s democracy in action.”
Utikere said he was “deeply disappointed” the Government was amending the proposed law after the select committee process, avoiding public consultation.
Te Pāti Māori co-leader Rawiri Waititi said that was a “gut punch”, and the Government was removing Māori rights to have a say on decisions about their whenua.
“They have the cheek to call iwi representation ‘undemocratic’ while they are pushing through these changes without a select committee process.”
Pee Kay writes he is from a generation where common sense, standards, integrity and honesty are fundamental attributes. This article was first published HERE
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.