(hat-tip Kylie)
Questions are being asked as to the legality and appropriateness of Nick Smith's appointment of a Crown Observer to keep a (Big) brotherly eye in the Christchurch City Council. Here, Council Watch does their job - the've watched and now they're asking questions. Good stuff.
Ombudsmen And Crown Law Asked To Investigate Minister’s Decision WELLINGTON, 30 January 2012 Council Watch has formally requested the investigation of Local Government Minister Nick Smith’s appointment of a Crown Observer to Christchurch City Council. The Minister’s office had arranged for Sir Kerry Marshall MBE to take up an observation role in the weeks leading up to a meeting with the Chief Executive and councillors of Christchurch City Council. Council Watch Local Government Engagement Advisor, Jim Candiliotis, has formally asked the Office of the Ombudsmen to investigate the advice provided to the Minister. He says Council Watch has also requested the Solicitor General to review the appointment. “Local government is constituted separate from central government under an Act of Parliament for a reason,” says Mr Candiliotis, “When the Local Government Act was drafted our lawmakers saw fit to give the Minister four options if intervention was necessary in local government affairs. These powers are outlined in the Local Government Act and are accompanied by clear requirements to follow if used. “The appointment of a ‘Crown Observer’ is not derived from the Act and we believe it is unconstitutional, unlawful or at the very least a blatant interference in the governance of a city. “To date the Minister’s office has not provided a satisfactory explanation for taking such a course of action.” The Minister has borrowed from a little-known provision in the Education Act 1989. Under S.195C of that Act the Minister of Education may appoint a Crown Observer to the council of a Tertiary Institution. It does not provide for such an appointment to a local body, nor does it allow any other for any other Minister to appoint a Crown Observer. Mr Candiliotis says the move begs the question why the Minister is involving himself in the Council in the first place. “Anyone who works with Councils understands there are tensions at the Councillor level – that is the nature of democracy. When it comes to misbehaviour, arguments and public spats the people we elect to Parliament provide a much greater spectacle than those we elect to councils. So why has the Minister gone to all this trouble? “How would the taxpayers of New Zealand feel if Barack Obama appointed the American Ambassador to sit in on Cabinet meetings at the Beehive? “The ratepayers of Christchurch no doubt are feeling a bit like that now. Mr Candiliotis does not know when he’ll be getting a ruling from either the Ombudsmen or the Solicitor General, but he says the issue is too important to allow it to rest. “There has been a lot of interference by central government in local authorities in the past three years,” he says, “And the subversion of democracy is a slippery slope. Our hope is the Minister takes a step back and allows the Council to sort its own problems out, or else uses the provisions allowed him under the Act. “Just because you are elected to Parliament, it does not give you the right to bend the law.” ENDS
Monday, January 30, 2012
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Very interesting post Robert ..
BUT at the risk of being accused of being in support of interference. I under stand the problems on council are due to secrecy and decisions been made without consultation with not only the public but also with other council members.
This is one thing that really really bugs me where important decisions of public interest been done behind close doors in local bodies.
I want Govt to regulate NOW to stop this BS, ( I could see an exception allowed for exceptional/privacy to individual reasons)BUT this should not allowed to be abused as it is at present.
Now on the other hand there is NO WAY should we tolerate another ECAN situation. Yeah I guess I could be accused of having a foot in both camps.
Transparency in loacl government, Pauline - it's a rare substance. Perhaps it doesn't really exist at all. Decisions made in cabals that exclude some councillors and out of public view are a disease that infects councils every where, it would seem, judging by what I read and hear. If the Government could clear up that rot, I'd support them. Tricky little devils though, those embedded elite who favour secrecy and subterfuge :-)
Unfortunately, the same outcome can be achieved by Gerry Brownlie under the CERRA legislation, and only NZ First can claim the right to object, because they didnt support the original Bill ('cos they weren't in parliament)
Post a Comment