“Hide’s move to sack Councillors is curious”

Local government watchdog Council Watch is questioning the measures taken by Local Government minister Rodney Hide after he gave Canterbury Regional Councillors their marching orders yesterday.

Rodney Hide’s sacking of elected officials of ECAN is being questioned in the face of accusations that the government is using the Local Government Act to take ownership of valuable water resources on the Canterbury Plains.

Council Watch spokesman Mike MacLeod says he was surprised at how rapidly the Local Government Minister moved in this particular case, when there are far more important and systemic failings within the local government sector. He also heralded a warning to citizens of New Zealand, say this action is “an overreaction, inconsistent and antidemocratic”.

Council Watch’s main concern is that Rodney Hide has thrown the baby out with the bathwater. “He’s sacrificing the people elected to this Council by the citizens of Canterbury. Not only the ‘bad ones’, but also the good ones,” says MacLeod, “His excuse is that there was poor management. So is he also going to sack the CEO and Senior Managers too?”

To date the media have referred only to a report from Wyatt Creech with no reference to the Auditor General’s report which has already taken action (or inaction) in respect these issues. Nothing in the foregoing makes any reference to the so-called “ECAN Four”, those councillors found by the Auditor General as having abused their position to influence water charges levied against Canterbury farmers, a group to which they belong.

“In view of the serious findings of the OAG,” asks MacLeod, “Why did the government not take appropriate action at the time and ask the Auditor General to prosecute or at least seek convincing arguments against prosecution? If such arguments were forthcoming – why take this action now?”

“It seems odd that the Minister would allow something so serious to pass, yet later sack the entire Council.”

By the numbers: water management is but one activity among many that ECAN administers. Is it appropriate that 14 councillors (only four of whom were ostensibly guilty of misconduct) should be banned from administering the business of the Council because of mistakes and concerns in one area? Surely this is an overreaction?

Says MacLeod “Even if we might be persuaded that this is not an overreaction there is a glaring inconsistency insomuch as the government has essentially ignored a damming OAG report which; had it been suitably acted upon, might have resolved all the (water) issues without impacting upon other activities and their legitimate governance.”

“This raises questions about the governments’ true agenda in these issues. What are they and what is the rationale for them? Why is the Minister not allowing the people of Canterbury to go to the polls this year and decide for themselves who should represent them? Who – in the long run – is going to be benefiting from a government-controlled Regional Council?”

“The Minister and the government are acting curiouser and curiouser. No wonder the Prime Minister is distancing himself from this bizarre and totally undemocratic decision.”

ENDS

© Scoop Media