New Zealand packaging advocacy group The Packaging Forum issued a press release yesterday disputing Ms Irvine’s comments.
### ODT Online Wed, 7 Sep 2016 Claim about coffee cup lid incorrect
By Vaughan Elder
A Dunedin City Council staff member has admitted being incorrect when she said coffee cup lids being sold as compostable could not be composted in New Zealand. Council waste manager Catherine Irvine said the polylactide (PLA) disposable coffee cup lids still presented as an issue as there were no facilities in Dunedin and many other parts of New Zealand where they could be composted. However, her claim no facilities in New Zealand could compost them was incorrect and since a report in the Otago Daily Times on Saturday, she had been contacted by Wellington City Council saying it had a contractor which had begun composting the lids using a special additive. Read more
****
Companies selling lids could breach Fair Trading Act if sold as compostable or biodegradable when not compostable in NZ –Commerce Commission
### ODT Online Sun, 4 Sep 2016 Coffee cup lids not compostable in NZ
By Vaughan Elder
Dunedin cafes buying so-called compostable coffee cups are being “misled”, in what could be a breach of the Fair Trading Act. Dunedin City Council waste manager Catherine Irvine said polylactide (PLA) disposable coffee cup lids were being sold as compostable when there were no facilities in New Zealand capable of composting them. As a result, well-meaning cafes in Dunedin and across New Zealand were paying a premium for the lids in an attempt to “do the right thing” when they could not even be recycled, Ms Irvine said. Read more
—
Are they recyclable ? ? ?
### Australian Business Traveller 10 Feb 2016 Air New Zealand’s coffee app hits one million cups, and counting
By David Flynn
We’re probably not alone in putting ‘good coffee’ rather high on the list of what makes a great airport lounge, and we love that Air New Zealand’s clever coffee app makes it easier to enjoy your chosen brew. Plenty of NZ passengers do, too – the app has logged over one million orders since it went live in August 2014. And using an app to streamline the process of ordering a cuppa in the lounge is a typically Air New Zealand thing.
Travellers in Air New Zealand lounges can order a coffee straight from their smartphone or even Apple Watch using the airline’s app, with an iPad located near the barista station offering the same functionality.
Here’s a walkthrough of how it works. Sidle up to the barista bar and tap to get started: note that the app also advises how long the current wait is…. Read more
—
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
Election Year. This post is offered in the public interest.
Received from Gurglars
23/05/2016 4:13 am (GMT+12:00)
Subject: Banks Theft
I have sent this letter to my bank.
This type of arrogant theft by banks must be exposed and stopped! The stock exchange has recently shortened settlement days from 3 to 2 for this very reason! In some cases over the weekend banks can make 50% on overnight money markets, so they use YOUR and MY money to make huge profits whilst charging us interest on outstanding debts that could be amortised.
A sum of $***** was deposited to my account Saturday. At the latest it should be in my account Monday morning! Given the nature of internet transactions, the keeping of MY money for two days is in fact an act of theft. The monies have left the sender’s account and not been lodged in my account and therefore the bank has claimed some ownership of the money for two days when the bank is trading. This “theft” which could be presumed legal when banks had to have time to clear funds is no longer a “legal” action!
[ends]
—
My quick reply:
Excellent point. Yes they reap at our cost, bare-faced. Some banks over others have difficulty moving to processing 24/7…. more ‘instantaneously’. From discussion with colleagues, it appears ANZ has recently moved to “next morning” (including paying in on Saturdays) for deposits made after 10pm on Friday nights —which previously had a dogged (clip-ticket) wait until “after 10pm Monday” for transaction. Some shift has occurred(?).
Consumers need to stack on the pressure.
The Banking Ombudsman needs to investigate – the public should send letters their way.
New Zealand’s Banking Ombudsman Scheme
The Banking Ombudsman Scheme investigates and resolves disputes between customers and their banks. We are independent of scheme participants, customers, and government. Our service is free of charge and easy to use. https://bankomb.org.nz/
—
### radionz.co.nz Tue 24 May 2016 7:00 am today
Morning Report with Guyon Espiner & Susie Ferguson Reserve Bank keeping an eye on digital disruption on banking
The Reserve Bank is monitoring the impact of digital disruption on the banking sector, as a rapidly increasing number of unregulated players have the potential to undermine the existing financial system. Audio | Download: OggMP3 (2′07″)
Batch #2 being 11 of 21 emails
Received from Cr Lee Vandervis on Sun, 24 Apr 2016 from 08:45 AM
See Batch #1 here.
A small number of emails considered objectionable have been withheld.
Where appropriate, all contact information has been removed.
The original emails have been archived by What if? Dunedin.
Election Year : This post is offered in the public interest. -Eds
_____________________________________
EMAIL 6
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:25:01 +1200 To: David Loughrey [ODT] Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
—— Forwarded Message From: Lee Vandervis Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 08:40:32 +1200 To: Sandy Graham, Sue Bidrose [DCC] Cc: Tony Avery, Doug Hall [DCC] Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” Subject: Re: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
Hi Sue and Sandy,
Further to my previous email please note that, contrary to the response below, several suburbs of Dunedin have again become mini-lakes districts as a result of the 5pm rain we have had yesterday.
In one drive to Calvin’s place, many blocked mudtanks creating mini-lakes were evident in Hilary st, Orbell st, Fea st and Ramsey st with rivers running from these mini-lakes all over the roads, proving widespread failure of our mudtank structures.
The claims below that 95% of mudtanks have been properly cleaned or that this might have been due to a particularly severe rain event, high tide, or a lack of capacity down-stream are obviously not the case.
Unpleasant options beckon.
Regards,
Lee
On 15/01/14 3:52 PM, “Sandy Graham” [DCC] wrote:
Dear Lee
Please find below information from staff about the operation of the mudtank structures with specific reference to the rain event on 16 December 2013 as per your enquiry to Sue and Tony of 17 December 2013. Sue has asked that I respond on her behalf noting that Tony is still on leave. In summary, the note explains that there was not a widespread failure of the mudtank system on 16 December 2013. It also details how the system is inspected and maintained. The issue you raise about debris on the roads is also addressed.
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:31:57 +1200 To: David Loughrey [ODT] Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” Subject: FW: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
—— Forwarded Message From: Lee Vandervis Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2014 12:31:01 +1200 To: Sandy Graham [DCC] Cc: Sue Bidrose, Tony Avery, Doug Hall [DCC] Conversation: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested” Subject: Re: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
Dear Sandy,
A DCC department is not a ‘who’.
Can I please have the names of those people who supplied you with the ‘information’ in the response to my mudtanks questions, from both Transportation Operations and Water and Waste.
It is important for me to know who produces such information.
Can you please also advise who is the person in Transportation operations who is ultimately responsible for the audit of contractor performance?
The difficulties I regularly experience in discovering who authors or produces information to Councillors is becoming a serious issue.
Cheers,
Lee
On 17/01/14 12:03 PM, “Sandy Graham” [DCC] wrote:
Dear Lee
In answer to your questions:
1. The response of 15 Jan 2014 was the result of information supplied by staff from both Transportation Operations and Water and Waste. The response is on behalf of the CEO under my signature – I wrote the final response.
2. Staff in Transportation Operations are responsible for the audit of the contractor performance.
Cheers
Sandy
From: Lee Vandervis Sent: Friday, 17 January 2014 10:21 a.m. To: Sandy Graham [DCC] Cc: Sue Bidrose; Tony Avery; Doug Hall [DCC] Subject: Re: Mudtanks FYI – ” there has been insufficient effort put in to maintain the level of service requested”
Dear Sandy,
I think that you are missing the point that there are blocked mudtanks everywhere in Dunedin.
Again,
Can you please let me know;
1 – who wrote the mudtanks/flooding response below?
2 – who is responsible for the accuracy of the monthly mudtank audits?
Cheers,
Lee
On 17/01/14 9:15 AM, “Sandy Graham” [DCC] wrote:
Dear Lee
Staff will check the Pine Hill areas that you list below today. If following inspection, there is a blocked mudtank it will be remedied. FYI, this is the standard process we follow when we receive advice from a member of the public that there may be an issue with mudtank(s) in a particular area.
Regards
Sandy
EMAIL 8
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 18:32:22 +1200 To: David Loughrey [ODT] Conversation: More mudtank misery. Subject: FW: More mudtank misery.
—— Forwarded Message
From: Lee Vandervis
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2014 08:40:58 +1200
To: Tony Avery [ODT]
Cc: Sandy Graham [ODT]
Conversation: More mudtank misery.
Subject: More mudtank misery.
Hi Tony,
I have had a verbal and written complaint from the owners of Davies Heat ‘n’ Cool over the flooding of their 1 Donald st premises, and the DCC failure to address the issue of future flooding.
In the past flooding has been so severe that a complete evacuation and insurance claim cleaning of all carpets was necessary.
This because the camber Kaikorai Valley on the intersection with Donald st is so flat that water streaming down the road from the east side of Kaikorai Valley road during extreme rain events crosses the road at the intersection and it all ends up in the two mudtanks on Donald st, which routinely do not cope.
These Kaikorai Valley mudtanks would appear to be have the same problem as those I have previously identified in Roslyn, Pine Hill, central city, and anywhere else I have been in a heavy rain event – namely that they have not been cleaned to the 150mm below outlet pipe as required under the DCC contract.
The ongoing failure of contractors to do the mudtank cleaning for over a year now has escalated to utter abysmal farce.
Both Donald st mudtanks need to be properly cleaned, and a raised subtle berm of asphalt needs to be added to the middle of the Donald st intersection to prevent storm-water from east Kaikorai Valley crossing the intersection at this point and flooding west Kaikorai Valley road/Donald st.
Please let me know how soon both of these issues will take to be addressed.
Batch #1 being 5 of 21 emails
Received from Cr Lee Vandervis on Sun, 24 Apr 2016 from 08:45 AM
A second batch will be posted shortly; a small number of emails considered objectionable have been withheld.
Where appropriate, all contact information has been removed.
The original emails have been archived by What if? Dunedin.
Election Year : This post is offered in the public interest. -Eds
_____________________________________
EMAIL 1
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2016 08:45:35 +1200 To: EditorODT, Vaughan Elder, Tim Brown, Nicholas GS Smith [ODT] Conversation: Flooding Mud-bath Subject: Flooding Mud-bath
Letter to the Editor
Dear Editor,
Perhaps Mayor Cull only takes showers and does not realise that a bath won’t empty when the plug hole is blocked.
As the Councillor who was filling hundreds of sandbags into the early hours of June 4th in the tremendous community effort to fight back the floodwaters, I had first hand experience of the high water remaining long after the rain had stopped, and well into the next day. Hundreds of South Dunedin and other Dunedin residents took an appalling bath, followed by further property value damage from Mayor Cull ludicrously suggesting sea-level-rise greenwash as requiring a ‘managed retreat’ from South Dunedin. South Dunedin has great investment potential which should be realised, beginning with a big pump that works.
Cr. Lee Vandervis
EMAIL 2
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2016 10:03:40 +1200 To: Ruth Stokes, Sue Bidrose, Sandy Graham, Laura McElhone, Andrew Noone, Andrew Whiley, Chris Staynes, Doug Hall, Hilary Calvert, John Bezett, Jinty MacTavish, Kate Wilson, Lee Vandervis, Mayor Cull, Mike Lord, Neville Peat, Richard Thomson, David Benson-Pope, Aaron Hawkins Conversation: Questions re June 3rd 2015 floods. Subject: Questions re June 3rd 2015 floods.
Dear All,
In the interest of Tenders transparency, last month I enquired of staff whether FH had bought City Care, as City Care’s new ownership remained a closely kept secret and rumours circulated.
Given the City Care appraisal of mudtank maintenance in our Infrastructure Services Committee Agenda, knowing the new ownership of City Care now takes on increased importance.
Who are City Care’s new owners, and do Fulton Hogan have any financial or other interest in or influence over City Care?
In Item 5 a number of other questions arise:
1 – why is there no mention of Mayor Cull’s claimed contribution to flooding from sea-level-rise? Has this been contribution been assessed as nil? If not, why not?
2 – Is it true that City Care applied to do screen clearing prior to the June 3rd flood event, but were not authorised by DCC staff to do so in time for the flood? [28]
3 – Does the statement “a proactive maintenance regime is important to manage and maintain overland flows into the storm water system” mean that without this proactive maintenance, flooding effects will be more damaging due to the restricted ability to drain? [38]
4 – What is the contract specification for cleaning of the mudtank outlet lateral pipes which are compromised when mudtank debris has not been kept “at least 150mm below outlet”? [39]
5 – where/when is the FH ‘30% full proxy’ first recorded in DCC files? [41]
6 – If 26% of draining mudtanks were totally blocked, and a further 36% partially blocked, would this drainage blockage not mean that flooding effects would be made worse as a result? [52]
7 – Does 230T [52] mean 230 tonnes of debris was removed from mudtanks? When was this removed, and by whom, and at what cost to whom? [52]
8 – which ‘water’ “would have been unable to enter the network even if all mudtanks were clear”. Why would this ‘water’ not be able to enter the network? Is this because network screens were blocked or pumps not working adequately? [55]
9 – Was water below road level [57] a major contributor to flooding and damage of houses? Viz, how many houses’ floor levels are below road level in South Dunedin?
10 – What alternative internal management regime is being considered? [61] is an updated resident cellphone-photo-text-alert monitoring system being considered to replace our old fixagram system?
11 – Who have been the successful tenderers for the new separable portion of the Mudtank maintenance contract? And who were the businesses that tendered for this separable portion?
Looking forward to answers that will further inform debate on item 5.
From: Lee Vandervis Sent: Friday, 24 April 2015 9:02 p.m. To: Chris Morris [ODT], Nicholas George S Smith [ODT] Cc: Elizabeth Kerr Subject: Follow-up questions
Dear Mr Morris,
There are serious DCC issues underpinning the Code of Conduct process.
DCC Bureaucracy has run many months of self-investigations costing quarter of a million dollars, which this Councillor has not been allowed to see the results of.
Unbelievable claims that the acknowledged $1.6++ million worth of fraud was all perpetrated by one man only, now dead.
Months of Police investigation leading nowhere, with no prosecutions because they only looked at missing vehicles and anticipated that all receivers had to say was they thought the dead man had authority to sell in the way he did. And they all did. This despite many assurances from CEO Bidrose to me from the beginning that there would be a full and wide investigation.
My requests to the Serious Fraud Office [including discussion of 3 year plus investigation of Landfill frauds by local Police] to do the job local Police are seem not to be up to. CEO Bidrose claims SFO had been asked to investigate but SFO have no knowledge of this when I ask them to investigate.
Police investigation only claimed to be widened by Police management after my exposing of their very narrow investigation. Still no prosecutions, or Police interest to date in my offered evidence of Citifleet maintenance contract fraud, credit card fraud etc.
Mayor Cull and CEO Bidrose saying that no public comment allowed while investigations ongoing, but commenting themselves that it was all down to just one man and that the public can have confidence in the living remainder of the DCC organisation.
Mayor Cull accepting non-confirming [devoid of any evidence] Conduct complaints against me.
Crs. Thomson and Staynes add tampered evidence to one of their complaints but not the other – both immediately accepted again by Mayor Cull.
Mayor Cull falsely claims it is within his authority to choose the membership of the Code of Conduct committee against me. Is defeated.
Mayor Cull chooses again, this time with majority Councillor rubber stamp.
CEO Bidrose fails to ensure proper meeting and Code of Conduct processes over many weeks, fails to read my related email, finally culminating in hallway loudness. My full apology should have been printed and still should.
Audit and Risk committee fails to address major DCC problem of contract fraud, identifying 17 types of fraud but not including contract or tender fraud which I have been complaining of repeatedly.
Audit and Risk chair refuses ultra vires to allow any discussion or debate on 40 page pivotal financial report confirmed agenda item which I had previously indicated in the meeting I wanted to speak to.
Cr. Calvert also wished to speak to it but the Chair abused her authority and shut it down. This along with a history of other A&R suppression was the cause of this loudness and my final exit from this committee.
These are all real issues with stories you should be interested in Mr Morris, but instead you bypass the reasons “Whatever the reasons for your frustration…” miss the important issues and ask 5 inane questions about my behaviour.
These are the actions of a gossip columnist, not a reporter.
Cr. Vandervis
{Draft text deleted at Cr Vandervis’s request. -Eds}
On 24/04/15 4:11 PM, “Chris Morris” wrote:
Lee,
I’m following up on this morning’s story. I tried to include as much as I could of your comments, where they addressed the issues being raised in the conduct committee’s report, but I’d still far rather talk through it all point by point, in detail.
Failing that, can you respond to these specific questions about where to from here:
1. Whatever the reasons for your frustration, do you now accept that your behaviour (as reported by witnesses in the report) was bullying, aggressive and intimidating and included swearing (which you initially denied)?
2. If you do, what changes (if any) will you make to modify your behaviour, other than the previously mentioned plan to raise concerns with council staff only by email?
3. What is your reaction to the comments by Richard Thomson, who said your approach was counter-productive and your talents wasted?
4. What is your reaction to the comments by Cr Thomson and others suggesting a genuine apology might be the best way forward? Will you consider this, or do you plan to offer one at Tuesday’s meeting or at any other time, or do you maintain that you have already offered one?
5. Do you think your behaviour (as described in 1) is in any way appropriate for an elected public representative? If not, and given the limited sanctions available to the council, will you be considering your position, including whether or not you should resign?
From: Sandy Graham Sent: Friday, 24 April 2015 4:16 p.m. To: Lee Vandervis Cc: Sue Bidrose, Elizabeth Kerr Subject: RE: Overestimation of Dr. Bidrose’s time as most senior Citifleet Manager
Dear Lee
Please find attached the information you have requested about the responsibilities of Dr Bidrose.
It took a few days to collate as I wanted to ensure accuracy.
The information will also be forwarded to all Councillors for their information.
From: Sandy Graham Sent: Friday, 17 April 2015 8:45 p.m. To: Lee Vandervis Cc: Sandy Graham; Sue Bidrose; Elizabeth Kerr Subject: Re: Overestimation of Dr. Bidrose’s time as most senior Citifleet Manager
Dear Lee
I will get this information on my return to work on Monday.
Regards
Sandy
Group Manager Corporate Services
Dunedin City Council
————
On 17/04/2015, at 4:12 pm, Lee Vandervis wrote:
Dear Sandy and Sue,
Thank you for correcting my overestimation of the time Sue was senior manager of Citifleet prior to becoming DCC CEO.
I sincerely apologise for my inaccuracy.
To avoid future inaccuracy on my part, can you please clarify which departments Sue was in a managerial position over and for what periods in the years Sue was at the DCC prior to be coming our CEO.
Kind regards,
Lee
The overestimation was made in Cr Vandervis’s open letter found at the highlighted link below (15.4.15). -Eds
█ For more, enter the terms *vandervis*, *cull*, *bidrose*, *citifleet* or *deloitte* in the search box at right.
Received from Lee Vandervis
Thu, 23 Apr 2015 at 6:22 p.m.
█ Message: Your readers may be interested in this email exchange below.
—— Forwarded Message From: Lee Vandervis Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 15:58:40 +1300 To: Sandy Graham Cc: Stuart Anderson [University of Otago], Andrew Noone, Andrew Whiley, Chris Staynes, Doug Hall, Hilary Calvert, John Bezett, Jinty MacTavish, Kate Wilson, Mayor Cull, Mike Lord, Neville Peat, Richard Thomson, David Benson-Pope, Aaron Hawkins, Sue Bidrose Conversation: Code of Conduct public announcement Subject: Re: Code of Conduct public announcement
This does not answer my governance question Ms Graham, as to why I was not advised that this was coming out.
There has been nothing standard about any of this Code of Conduct process.
Cr. Lee Vandervis
————
On 23/04/15 11:48 AM, “Sandy Graham” wrote:
Dear Councillor
The report formed part of the public agenda that was delivered to all Councillors last night in advance of Tuesday’s meeting.
The media receive a copy of the agenda at the same time as per our standard process.
Regards
Sandy
————
On 23/04/2015, at 10:34 am, Lee Vandervis wrote:
Code of Conduct public announcement
Dear [as in expensive] all,
I have been rung by media this morning wanting my comment on the outcome of the Code of Conduct claims against me.
Nobody has had the decency to inform me of what these outcomes might have been, despite the exceptionally long time the production of these outcomes has taken.
Can anyone advise me why the media seem to have this information well in advance of me, or is it just standard process for a show ‘trial’, in which I have not even been allowed to see 2/3 of the ‘evidence’.
Cr. Lee Vandervis
—— End of Forwarded Message
Received from Lee Vandervis
Thu, 23 Apr 2015 at 7:12 p.m.
Re: Code of Conduct decision
I have sent my response to today’s Code of Conduct decision just sprung on me to you since I can not rely on ODT reporter Chris Morris to accurately present it.
Fortunately most interested parties read your blog anyway.
I am innocent of the Code of Conduct claim that I have misled the non-pubic Audit and Risk committee regarding the Citifleet fraud investigations.
The guilt lies with those DCC staff and some elected representatives who for years failed to act on my Citifleet fraud and other whistle-blowing allegations despite the DCC records evidence available to them. Some of this evidence has recently emerged in the Deloitte reports which I continue to seek.
If my allegations and evidence had been appropriately acted on, many matters of grave concern would have been dealt with when the record shows I raised them as early as 2011.
DCC staff refusal even now to let me see the full main unredacted Deloitte Citifleet Fraud report, or the Deloitte staff report, or the digitised relevant DCC records evidence, further increases my suspicion of a cover-up.
Questions regarding the role of new DCC CEO Bidrose as senior manager of Citifleet prior to becoming CEO, and of what she knew of my allegations in the years prior are some of the many questions yet to be answered.
What has been shown is that the Police investigation was certainly very narrowed up until my complaint of this narrowing to CEO Bidrose and the Police investigating officer, some six months after the Citifleet manager’s sudden death. Subsequent claims by Area Commander Jason Guthrie that the investigation has been widened have not been supported by Police following up on the evidence I tried to interest them in: the Citifleet maintenance contract fraud, DCC credit card use fraud, etc. or by any convictions, or other widened investigation action that has been visible to me.
The two loudness claims, evidence of which I have not been allowed to see and therefore defend, both come back to the shutting down of the wider DCC contract fraud debate, and the resulting multiple abuses of Code of Conduct process to try and shut me down.
The four prescribed penalties suggested in the Code of Conduct report are:
1 -Censure
– the Mayor has already done this on pubic and non-public occasions.
2 -Request Apology
– I already apologised for loudness at the time
3 -Suspension of voting right only in Committees, not Council
– abuse of my representative function, but a wet bus ticket given my continuing right to debate
4 -Dismissal from positions of Deputy Mayor, Chairperson or deputy chairperson of a committee
– Mayor Cull already did this at the beginning of the triennium.
The Mayor’s recommended members of the Code of Conduct Committee have run an expensive Kangaroo Court with only my loss of two months committee voting rights to be recommended. It will be interesting to see if enough Councillors will vote for that.
It will also be interesting to see what the voting public think – do they want wide investigation and full disclosure or do they just prefer good news stories from the DCC.
Kind regards,
Cr. Vandervis
Received from Lee Vandervis
Thu, 23 Apr 2015 at 7:17 p.m.
—— Forwarded Message From: Lee Vandervis Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 19:15:55 +1300 To: Chris Morris [ODT], Nicholas George S Smith [ODT] Conversation: Code of conduct report Subject: Re: Code of conduct report
Chris,
I have sent my response to the What If site, as I can not rely on you to accurately present it.
I was out last night, and the first I heard of the Code of Conduct decision today was radio media wanting comment.
Cheers,
Lee
————
On 23/04/15 3:34 PM, “Chris Morris” [ODT] wrote:
Lee,
I’ve sent you a text with a very basic outline of the key findings. Happy to hear from you at any time today or tonight for a detailed response once you’ve read the report in full. I understand it was hand-delivered to your house last night.
Updated post Fri, 17 Apr 2015 at 6:45 p.m.
Correspondence from Lee Vandervis in reply to Sandy Graham and Sue Bidrose; and forwarded note to Code of Conduct Committee – entered below last update to post.
Updated post Fri, 17 Apr 2015 at 1:46 p.m.
Correction received by email from Sandy Graham, DCC General Manager Corporate Services entered below Open Letter.
—
Received Wed, 15 Apr 2015 at 11:24 a.m.
█ Message: I have forwarded this Open Letter to the DCC Code of Conduct Committee in an attempt to debunk the many misleading claims around the DCC Citifleet fraud investigations.
I am happy to provide supporting email evidence for anything stated below that your readers may find questionable.
Cr. Vandervis
—— Forwarded Message From: Lee Vandervis Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 22:48:00 +1300 To: John Bezett, David Benson-Pope, Stuart Anderson Conversation: OPEN LETTER TO THE DCC CODE OF CONDUCT COMMITTEE Subject: OPEN LETTER TO THE DCC CODE OF CONDUCT COMMITTEE
OPEN LETTER TO THE DCC CODE OF CONDUCT COMMITTEE
Dear Sirs,
Three separate Code of Conduct issues have been raised against me this year following my Code of Conduct complaint against Mayor Cull which Deputy Mayor Staynes decided, without giving his reasons to me, not to refer to you.
There has been an uncomfortable mix of assertions and facts in the limited evidence that has been presented regarding the claim that I misled over Citifleet investigations, which I would like you to consider.
Provable facts include my long mostly non-public attempts to clean out dysfunctional management at the DCC since I was first elected in 2004. Partial success keeps me going.
I never expected whistle blowing to be popular, but neither did I expect such personal attacks for my trouble on behalf of our ratepayers.
Regarding the Citifleet frauds, my records show my many 2011 complaints to senior DCC management of: inappropriate DCC vehicle disposal, Citifleet manager selling vehicles to himself, credit card fraud, vehicle maintenance tender fraud, and tyre fraud are all well documented.
What is equally clear is that nothing was done to seriously investigate these complaints which all turned out to have substance until almost 3 years later when the Citifleet manager’s ‘sudden death’ resulted in new CEO Sue Bidrose ordering the DCC accountants Deloittes to investigate.
Dr. Sue Bidrose had been the most senior manager in charge of Citifleet and many other DCC departments prior to becoming CEO. It is my view that whatever evidence she might have given is not only inadmissible in terms of process because I had not been advised in advance of her evidence or her intention to give evidence, but that Dr. Bidrose is compromised because of her years as the senior manager of Citifleet prior to the Citifleet manager’s sudden death.
In the month following the Citifleet manager’s sudden death I repeatedly urged CEO Bidrose and head of Governance Sandy Graham to resist the temptation to minimize the frauds’ fallout by narrowing the investigation or by blaming it all on the dead manager. Although later admitting that the initial request for investigation related mainly to missing vehicles, CEO Bidrose gave me assurances from the beginning that Deloittes and then later Police would conduct a wide investigation. This provably did not happen with the Police, and I have no evidence other than yet another management assurance that it has or will really happen.
CEO Bidrose also gave me assurances from the beginning of the investigations that if I could provide hard evidence of DCC staff stealing even one dollar she would ensure prosecutions followed. Unfortunately the DCC records evidence which I have sought to complete hard evidence cases against both DCC staff and those involved outside the DCC has been denied me by CEO Bidrose, despite my making LGOIMA requests for it last year, namely: both the full unredacted Deloittes report, the Deloittes staff report, and the digitised evidential files which Deloittes collated for their investigation.
In that month following the Citifleet manager’s death I became very concerned when CEO Bidrose did not achieve a proper Police investigation apparently ‘because Police lacked the resources’, and that only the accounting investigation by Deloittes was to take place. I was relieved that Deloittes’ investigator Kyle Cameron seemed to have a good grasp of the many Citifleet complaints that had been made to me during his detailed interview of me, and that subsequent to the Deloitte reports Police were to investigate fully after all.
My concerns about Police having a belated investigation three months later are recorded, as are my concerns that Police requested that no public statements be made about Citifleet while their belated investigation was in progress. This despite Mayoral and CEO public statements that the Citifleet frauds were all the work of one now dead man.
I have highlighted with evidence to the SFO and CEO Bidrose the extreme slowness of a previous Dunedin Police investigation into DCC Landfill frauds that took more than three years before one individual was finally prosecuted, and I have written to the Serious Fraud Office unsuccessfully urging them to have an outsider’s independent investigation into the Citifleet frauds because local Police seem unable to do the job. CEO Bidrose claimed that the SFO had been contacted re the Citifleet frauds, but curiously the SFO’s Sara Morris said to me that no request from the DCC to investigate had been received by the SFO prior to my request for them to investigate.
My worst fears for the hoped for DCC investigation were realised when the Police investigating officer Detective Mathew Preece interviewed me at my home six months after the Citifleet manager’s tragic death, in what he described as the last week of his investigation. Detective Preece said that the scope of his investigation was only the missing vehicles and that he had already interviewed all other people he intended to interview. He said that all those he interviewed regarding missing vehicles offered the defence that they thought the deceased Citifleet manager was authorised to dispose of the vehicles in the way that he did, and that subsequently there would be no prosecutions of anybody.
I told Detective Preece that I had received many Citifleet complaints for years regarding not only vehicle disposal but fraudulent Citifleet credit card use, tyre supply, fuel supply, and fraudulent Citifleet maintenance contracts and that I had a motor trade business owner and others prepared to give evidence on these issues.
That night I wrote the following email to CEO Bidrose, Head of Governance Sandy Graham and to Detective Preece voicing my concern at the very limited scope of the investigation, and the investigating officer’s understanding that he could not investigate anything else because he did not have any wider complaint from the DCC to act on.
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2014 22:57:31 +1300 To: Sue Bidrose, Sandy Graham, “PREECE, Matthew” Conversation: Police Citifleet Investigation Subject: Police Citifleet Investigation
Dear Sue,
An hour and a half spent with Detective Matthew Preece and another Policeman called Regan has left me with deep concerns regarding the Police Citifleet investigation.
Mr Preece has informed me that the scope of his investigation has been limited by the complaint the DCC has made to the Police, and that this complaint only concerns missing or inappropriately sold DCC vehicles.
Mr Preece says that because Police have not had a complaint from you or the DCC regarding;
– fraudulent Citifleet tender processes,
– fraudulent Citifleet tyre supply contracts,
– fraudulent Citifleet maintenance contracts
– fraudulent use of DCC Citifleet vehicle fuel
– fraudulent DCC accounting of Citifleet credit cards and other payment methods used and Citifleet managerial oversight
– and fraudulent use and conversion of DCC Citifleet vehicles [eg the conversion of a DCC-owned vehicle by Mrs Bachop]
and that consequently none of these fraud areas is being investigated!
Mr Preece did say that if you as CEO were to request that he broaden his investigation to include these other areas and not just the missing cars, that he would broaden his enquiry to include them. He insisted that he would have to have a broadened complaint from you as CEO for this to happen, and implied that a complaint from me as a City Councillor would not be enough to act on.
I have highlighted to Preece and Regan the urgent need to use the Citifleet manager’s tragic death to investigate and prosecute all Citifleet fraud areas, as a failure to do so will result in the loss of an unprecedented opportunity to clean out the culture of entitlement at Citifleet and in other DCC departments.
Can you please with urgency broaden the DCC complaint to include the 6 areas of potential Citifleet fraud listed above, so that Mr Reece can broaden his enquiry to include them.
Can you please also now with urgency, forward to me all instructions to Deloitte regarding the Citifleet investigation as previously requested in my email of 26/10/14 as below.
Is it possible to meet with you at any time tomorrow at your convenience to learn whether you have broadened the DCC Police complaint or not?
Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2014 18:23:41 +1300 To: Sue Bidrose, Sandy Graham Conversation: LGOIMA requests Subject: LGOIMA requests
Hi Sue,
Further to my verbal requests of a week or two ago please forward copies of all original correspondence and or other direction given to Deloittes in regard to their investigation of Citifleet.
I wish to have the original brief stating the terms of reference, the subsequent brief where the investigation needed to be extended, and any other direction written or otherwise given to Deloittes regarding the Citifleet investigation.
I am deeply disturbed by what I have seen in parts of the investigation conclusions appearing without covering page or any details identifying them as parts of the Deloitte findings in non-public parts of the Audit and Risk subcommittee meetings.
I note a severe slowing on responses to my recent LGOIMA requests, and hope this has been a temporary frustration.
Kind regards,
Cr. Lee Vandervis
Subsequent email from Police Area Commander Guthrie claimed as follows:
From: GUTHRIE, Jason [mailto:Jason.Guthrie@police.govt.nz] Sent: Saturday, 15 November 2014 10:48 a.m. To: Sue Bidrose Cc: COSTER, Andrew; INGLIS, Malcolm Subject: RE: Investigation Update
Hi Sue.
I can confirm that DCC staff did not (and have not) in any way attempted to restrict, curtail, or limit the scope of the Police investigation stemming from the Deloitte report either at the 1 September meeting or at any other time.
At no stage has any undue influence been exerted by DCC staff on Police as to what should be investigated and what should not be investigated.
At the 1 September meeting it was agreed that the focus of the enquiry would be limited to activity around the 152 vehicles as this was considered to be the most likely aspect to potentially lead to a criminal prosecution.
To avoid any confusion, from the outset the Dunedin City Council has been clear in it’s desire that Police investigate matters arising from the Deloitte report independently, fully, and thoroughly as Police sees fit. The DCC has also been very clear in it’s desire that if any individual(s) are identified as being involved in criminal activity linked to the matters within the Deloitte report that those people be held accountable for that criminal activity.
I hope this clarifies the situation.
If you have any further questions please do not hesitate to contact me directly.
regards Jason.
Inspector Jason Guthrie
Area Commander | Dunedin Clutha Waitaki | New Zealand Police
Dunedin Central Police Station, 25 Great King St, Private Bag 1924, Dunedin, www. police.govt.nz
Safer Communities Together
Area Commander Guthrie’s response above says that “DCC staff did not (and have not) in any way attempted to restrict…the Police investigation”, but then goes on to say that …”it was agreed that the focus of the enquiry would be limited to activity around the 152 vehicles…”!
Commander Guthrie’s subsequent claim that the Police investigation would be widened has thus far failed to result in my being contacted to provide the further evidence I have already tried to give Detective Preece regarding credit card fraud, vehicle maintenance contract fraud etc. The lack of any prosecutions after so much time adds to my concern.
This seems to me to be another example of management claiming one thing but investigating officers doing another.
I am yet to be convinced either by Police taking an interest in my offered evidence or by any Citifleet related Police prosecutions that a serious Police investigation has really been effectively widened despite stated intention to widen, even at this now very late stage. I do not dispute Police management intentions, but see them as quite different to actual Police investigating actions, which seem to me to be more interested in sidelining me as a critic of their investigation than getting to the bottom of Citifleet fraud.
Regarding the two other loudness Code of Conduct claimed complaints, I do not recognise them and I remain far from content that CEO Bidrose and Cr McTavish at least have made ‘loudness’ statements to your Code of Conduct Committee [Cr. McTavish read hers] but not provided these statements to me in advance so that I could defend them. I see these loudness complaints as politically motivated attempts to ambush me outside of proper Code of Conduct process, and I do not accept that they can have any force.
The two staff that might have had reason to complain of my loudness, namely CEO Bidrose and Sandy Graham, have made no complaint and both have independently assured me that they did not make any complaint, CEO Bidrose with a hug, and Sandy Graham with an eye-roll.
I particularly resent the swearing allegation that no Councillor has admitted to claiming, despite Mayor Cull’s publicly repeatedly saying in the ODT that my swearing had been claimed by a Councillor. I note the irony that when Code of Conduct complaining Cr. Thomson left an earlier Audit and Risk meeting in a huff using the ‘F word’, that no complaint was forthcoming from anybody.
I take this opportunity to register my complaints regarding the running of this Conduct hearing.
1 – That the loudness complaints should never have been recognised as complying by the Committee for want of evidence.
2 – That I was not permitted to record the public part of the hearing in which I spoke, but that Media were allowed to take short-hand and thus given the opportunity to misquote me with impunity.
3 – That no reason was given when asked for, for not being able to record the pubic hearing.
4 – That parts of the hearing evidence were in public, but that apparently some evidence parts were non-public.
5 – that I have been given an extract only from your draft report, on grey paper marked confidential, ensuring that I can not as a result comment on it. The claim that “This is to ensure that the principles of natural justice and due process are observed.” is absurd, given that natural justice and due process have been absent throughout.
Looking forward to having this wasteful exercise in enmity drawn to a conclusion.
Cr. Lee Vandervis
—— End of Forwarded Message
[ends]
*Email addresses, phone numbers and web links removed. The company referred to above is “Deloitte”. The councillor surname is “MacTavish”. -Eds
—
CORRECTION
From: Sandy Graham [DCC] Sent: Friday, 17 April 2015 1:31 p.m. To: Elizabeth Kerr [What if? Dunedin] Subject: Correction
Dear Elizabeth
As discussed, I wish to correct a statement made by Cr Vandervis in his “Open letter to the Conduct Committee” which is published on your website.
The statement that the CEO Sue Bidrose had “years as the senior manager of Citifleet prior to the Citifleet manager’s sudden death” is incorrect. Sue had Regulatory Services (which included Citifleet, Building Control, Environmental Health, Parking Services) added to her General Manager portfolio for less than five months in 2013, immediately prior to being appointed CEO. This is clearly not “years” and needs correcting. Cr Vandervis’ assertions that Sue’s evidence to the Conduct Committee was therefore compromised is not supported by the facts.
Regards
Sandy
Sandy Graham
Group Manager Corporate Services
Dunedin City Council
—
—— Forwarded Message From: Lee Vandervis Sent: Friday, 17 April 2015 5:01 p.m. To: John Bezett, David Benson-Pope, Stuart Anderson Subject: FW: Overestimation of Dr. Bidrose’s time as most senior Citifleet
Dear Code of Conduct Committee,
Please accept my apology for ignorantly overstating the length of time Dr Bidrose was most senior manager of Citifleet prior to becoming our CEO.
‘Years’ should read ‘5 months as the senior manager of Citifleet and then 6 months as CEO’ prior to the Citifleet manager’s sudden death.
Kind regards,
Cr Lee Vandervis
—— Forwarded Message From: Lee Vandervis Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2015 16:12:33 +1300 To: Sandy Graham, Sue Bidrose Cc: Elizabeth Kerr [What if? Dunedin]
Conversation: Overestimation of Dr. Bidrose’s time as most senior Citifleet Manager Subject: Overestimation of Dr. Bidrose’s time as most senior Citifleet Manager
Dear Sandy and Sue,
Thank you for correcting my overestimation of the time Sue was senior manager of Citifleet prior to becoming DCC CEO.
I sincerely apologise for my inaccuracy.
To avoid future inaccuracy on my part, can you please clarify which departments Sue was in a managerial position over and for what periods in the years Sue was at the DCC prior to be coming our CEO.
Kind regards,
Lee
—— End of Forwarded Message
—— End of Forwarded Message
█ For more, enter the terms *vandervis*, *cull*, *bidrose*, *citifleet* or *deloitte* in the search box at right.
Of course —with Professional Rugby the sense of entitlement goes a terrible long way. The Dunedin City Council, cracked and broken, has been unfairly or dishonestly “short-changed” by Otago Rugby and big brother NZRU. So too is the community of South Auckland (history: Jokers Bars, Gambling money spent out of area on Otago Rugby and Racing). What a delightful experiential and lucrative background exists to the Otago Union.
Straight up and rational, in the course of a chairman’s work, it’s simply the case that there’s been no mandate to name the rugby sponges who misused millions of dollars of public funds; although Jeremy Curragh, former ORFU change manager, suffered a moment when he was forced to blurt that a lesser amount of charitable funds had been misused by the union in yet another of its darkest hours. [enter *curragh* in the search box at right]
Nor has prosecution of ‘the deserving’ been progressed (fact), but then NZRU and DIA are fully committed to ‘looking forward’ rather than back at their contentious and damning files that might be, suddenly(!), lost or misplaced, or smoothly sealed and suppressed. That’s the political climate, nefariously yet continuously supported by a line-up of senior government ministers along with NZ Police, IPCA, SFO, the Auditor-general, and yes, the Ombudsmen.
Doug Harvie will be glad he is now (personally) out of the spotlight.
Like it never happened. Not on his watch. Like it would not in future.
A clipped accounting English.
—
### ODT Online Wed, 21 Jan 2015 Rugby: Harvie stepping down after getting tough job done
By Steve Hepburn
Doug Harvie will step down from the Otago Rugby Football Union’s board with the sport in a much better position than when he arrived. Harvie, a Dunedin chartered accountant, became chairman of the newly structured board in May, 2012. He was shoulder-tapped to stand and felt he could not say no.
Harvie (57), a former loose forward for the University and Dunedin clubs, said the new board did not want to look back on why it found itself in such a tough position. It was focused on getting the business of rugby back into a good shape in Otago. Read more
The Police have joined both the Charities Commission and the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) in picking off low hanging fruit to justify their existence. There’s no mongrel in the public service any more and all they want is the easy life. It’s why the Police love traffic enforcement, particularly speed and drink driving – so instant, so easy and oh so profitable. –Anonymous
—
Southern police officers were investigated for a range of complaints, including failure to investigate, attitude/language, and inadequate service.
### ODT Online 9:20 AM Sunday Jan 11, 2015 Dozens of police faced disciplinary procedures
By Hamish McNeilly
Complaints about bad language and bullying are just some of the reasons for disciplinary actions against some Southern district police officers. Figures released to the Otago Daily Times show dozens of southern officers have been involved in disciplinary action over the past five years, with 12 officers resigning. Read more
—
IPCA: “It’s our job to keep watch over Police” !!!!
Independent Police Conduct Authority of New Zealand Sometimes incorrectly referred to as the Independent Police Complaints Authority. The Independent Police Conduct Authority is an independent body that considers complaints against New Zealand Police and oversees their conduct. http://ipca.govt.nz/
IPCA Role and powers
The Authority has the following functions and powers under the Independent Police Conduct Authority Act 1988.
Functions: Under section 12 of the Independent Police Conduct Authority Act 1988, the Authority’s functions are to:
● receive complaints (i) alleging misconduct or neglect of duty by any member of Police or (ii) concerning any Police practice, policy or procedure affecting a complainant; or
● investigate incidents in which a member of Police (acting in the execution of his or her duty) causes or appears to have caused death or serious bodily harm.
Action on complaints: Under the Act, when the Authority receives a complaint, it may carry out its own investigation, or refer the matter to the Police for investigation under the Authority’s oversight. If a complaint is referred to the Police for investigation, the Authority will take steps to ensure that it is properly resolved. This may include directing or actively overseeing the Police investigation, or reviewing or auditing the Police investigation once it is completed. The Authority may also decline to take action on a complaint – for example, if the complaint is very minor or outside the Authority’s jurisdiction. The Authority’s powers in relation to complaints are set out in section 17 and section 19 of the Act. Read more
IPCA Vision and values
The Authority’s mission is to promote public trust and confidence in New Zealand Police. […] The Authority’s values include independence, trustworthiness, accountability, vigilance, and integrity. The Authority exists to support public expectations – as expressed by Parliament – for the justice system to be trusted and effective.
Outcomes: The Authority is funded through Vote: Justice and contributes to the overall justice sector outcome ‘A safe and just society’ and to the following three justice sector goals: accessible justice services, effective constitutional arrangements, and trusted justice system. The work done by the Authority also contributes to Police outcomes of ‘Confident, safe and secure communities’ and ‘Organisational development’, and Police values of integrity and professionalism as outlined in the Police Statement of Intent 2008/09. Read more
IPCA Accountability
The Authority is an independent Crown entity, which means it is accountable to Parliament for its use of taxpayer funding. The Authority is independent in its day-to-day operations. It cannot be told how to handle an investigation, or what the outcome of any investigation should be. However, the Authority is taxpayer-funded and it must account to the responsible Minister and to Parliament for its use of those funds. Read more
IPCA Independence
The Independent Police Conduct Authority is fully independent – it is not part of the Police. ‘Independence’ means that the Authority makes its findings based on the facts and the law. It does not answer to the Police or anyone else over those findings. In this way, its independence is similar to that of a Court. There are three aspects to the Authority’s independence: Legislative independence, Operational independence, and The perception of independence. Read more
The Independent Police Conduct Authority (IPCA) was established in November 2007, replacing the Police Complaints Authority.
The Police Complaints Authority had been established in 1989, following several years of debate about Police accountability, sparked in part by the role of Police during the 1981 Springbok Tour. Prior to 1989, complaints against the Police were investigated internally. Through most of its life, the Police Complaints Authority comprised a single person with a small number of support staff conducting reviews of Police investigations. Because of its reliance on Police investigations, the Authority was perceived as lacking independence. Recent changes, including the appointment of independent investigators, are addressing that perception.
Key milestones in the history of the Police Complaints Authority include:
● the October 2000 Review of the Police Complaints Authority by Sir Rodney Gallen, who recommended the appointment of independent investigators;
● the appointment in late 2003 of the first independent investigators;
● the March 2007 report of the Commission of Inquiry into Police Conduct, which recommended a number of changes to the Authority, including enhanced powers and improved communication with complainants;
● the Independent Police Conduct Authority Amendment Act 2007, which changed the Authority’s name and made changes to the Authority’s powers.
The period since the establishment of the Independent Police Conduct Authority in November 2007 has been one of transformation, as the Authority shifts its focus towards independent and transparent investigation of the most serious incidents and complaints. This period of change has included the appointment of additional investigators, and changes to the Authority’s legislation, structure and operations.
[IPCA History] Read more
—
### stuff.co.nz Last updated 10:00 10/01/2015 ‘Zero tolerance’ policy should be scrapped
By Duncan Garner
OPINION Police like to roll out statistics when it suits them so here’s one that hurts – 17 people killed on the roads during the holiday period. That’s more than double the death toll compared with last year. And it’s despite the police’s misguided efforts to target speeding drivers with the hopelessly designed zero tolerance for speeding campaign. It’s a campaign that has utterly failed. It’s a stupid policy that needs to be scrapped. Hundreds of thousands of us will have broken the zero tolerance policy over the holidays. Good on you. I did. It was safer to do so. Read more
****
### stuff.co.nz Last updated 05:00, January 11 2015 Uber taxi battle sees police vs cabbies
By Shabnam Dastgheib and Marika Hill
Police are cracking down on Uber, the cheap and trendy new-kid-on-the-taxi rank, leaving paying customers on the pavement. After complaints from the old-school taxi firms, police have begun fining the Uber drivers whose lower fares have been hurting the big cab companies. The private car hire service has hit back, lodging a complaint of police harassment with the Independent Police Complaints (sic) Authority. Uber operates as a private hire service which means the fare has to be set at the time of booking, rather than using a meter. This means Uber does not have to abide by taxi regulations, thus saving on operating costs. Read more
Otago Rugby —For more information, enter the terms *orfu*, *rugby*, *racing*, *pokies*, *auditor-general*, *audit nz*, *dia*, *oag*, *sfo*, *operation chestnut* and *whistleblower* in the search box at right.
### ODT Online Mon, 19 May 2014 Councillor urges better standard of work
By Debbie Porteous
Parts of Dunedin are lacking basic maintenance and city council staff need to put pressure on contractors to improve their performance, a Dunedin city councillor says. Cr Andrew Noone, from the Waikouaiti-Chalmers ward, said the untidy state of roadside berms, gutters, ditches and creeks and an apparent slip in service levels were the main issues he heard about from constituents. Read more
—– Original Message —– From: Jeff Dickie To: Elizabeth Kerr Sent: Friday, March 21, 2014 5:45 PM Subject: Sunday in the slums of North Dunedin
Hi Elizabeth, your comments re the new hotel [“Cull’s Cockup”, the new “Farry’s Folly”] are very good and congratulations on the National Radio coverage.
In the next day or so I’d like to post something on your Whatif site regarding the implications of the DCC neglecting core business and services. We’ve watched as the North End has transformed from an integrated community combining residents and students to an intensely populated and filthy slum. Largely as a result of poor planning by the DCC and University. I took these photos on Sunday, 16 March.
While Dave preens himself in front of the mirror and is distracted by the latest snake oil salesmen, there are some very serious social issues developing.
Mr Gable stressed not all the partygoers exhibited bad behaviour, with others trying to calm the more aggressive young men.
### ODT Online Wed, 19 Mar 2014 Man attacked by St Patrick’s revellers
By Hamish McNeilly
A Dunedin man says he had his shirt ripped, glasses pulled off his face and his car’s wing mirror yanked off after he confronted drunken St Patrick’s Day revellers who were urinating on his property. Walking from work to his Malvern St home, Chris Gable encountered a large crowd of green-clad revellers in the area of the former Woodhaugh Hotel, about 5pm on Monday. […] He later had to leave the property, and while he was away, his neighbour, Jeff Dickie found an estimated 40 people on Mr Gable’s section, including some bouncing on his trampoline and others urinating on his property. Read more
****
Figures released under the Official Information Act show the Fire Service recorded 586 nuisance fires in the North Dunedin student area between February 20, 2009, and February 20, 2014. Of those, 179 were recorded last year – compared with 77 in 2009.
### ODT Online Wed, 19 Mar 2014 Student fires dampened
By Hamish McNeilly
Nuisance fires in the student quarter hit a five-year high last year, with Castle St the area’s top hot spot. To dampen fire threats, the Fire Service, police, University of Otago and Dunedin City Council have taken a zero tolerance approach to such fires in the city. Fire Service East Otago area manager Laurence Voight said that approach, coupled with fire prevention activities during Orientation Week appeared to have ”reduced the unwanted behaviour”. Read more
—
Meanwhile Vice-chancellor Harlene Hayne, on advice received from the likes of Stuart McLauchlan and John Ward (did we mention Mayor Cull?), ‘decides’ the University of Otago should sponsor, yes, the ‘drinking culture’ that attends a professional but barely coherent and losing rugby team, The Highlanders. Some things are cumulative by fragile branding connection… a marketing marriage borne in heaven: A GREAT EXAMPLE TO ALL. This, a ‘subtle’ buttering device, before the DCC’s Stadium gets offloaded to the University for nothing, and Hail Mary/Harlene! the University doesn’t have to pay rates.
From ODT Archives (via Lee Vandervis): Chris Morris. Local Body Elections 2013: How they rated [councillors]Link 1Link 2 [mayor]Link 1Link 2
The article appeared in print and digital editions on Saturday 19 Sept 2013, and at ODT Online the next day. The full article is no longer available at ODT Online or Google cache.
—
Received from Lee Vandervis.
Monday, 23 December 2013 4:11 p.m.
{Personal contact details and email addresses have been removed. Owing to limitations of the WordPress template minor changes have been made to the layout of the email for legibility. The italics are ours. Read the 2001 Local Electoral Act here. -Eds}
—
—— Forwarded Message
On 23/12/13 1:53 PM, “Debbie Porteous” [ODT] wrote:
Hi Lee, just arrived in for the day…have you had a chance to lay your complaint yet?
regards
Debbie.
.
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 16:03:20 +1300 To: Debbie Porteous [ODT] Conversation: Morning Report Subject: Re: Morning Report
Hi Debbie,
After 3 days of attempts to lodge a complaint with the Police I was finally able to lodge my complaint under the Electoral Act 2001 today against the ODT for their Councillors Ratings publication on the day that most voters received their voting papers.
In addition to the complaint which I have already forwarded, I today added the following Appendix detailing several of the alleged cases to answer.
CIB Detective Brett {Roberts} took detailed notes as well as my prepared material and copies of evidence and said he would write the case up for me to confirm in the next few days. From then it would be up to Police lawyers in Wellington to decide whether or not to proceed with a prosecution.
Let me know if further detail would be helpful.
Kind regards,
Lee
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:18:37 +1300 To: “ROBERTS, Alan (Brett)” [NZ Police] Conversation: APPENDIX – Local Electoral Act 2001 breaches – Section 122 Case to Answer Subject: APPENDIX – Local Electoral Act 2001 breaches – Section 122 Case to Answer
Dear Police.
There is a case to answer for the ODT because of the Councillor Ratings publication breach of several different provisions of section 122:
122 Interfering with or influencing voters
● (1) Every person commits an offence, and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000, who—
(a) interferes in any way with any person who is about to vote with the intention of influencing or advising that person as to how he or she should vote:
(b) prints, publishes, distributes, or delivers to any person (using any medium or means of communication) a document, paper, notice, or message, being or purporting to be in imitation of any voting document to be used at the election or poll that,—
—(i) in the case of an election, includes the name of a candidate or candidates, together with any direction or indication as to the candidate or candidates for whom any person should vote:
—(iii) in any way contains or suggests any such direction or indication or other matter likely to influence how any person votes:
.
█ (a) Was the timing of the ODT Councillor rating publication perfectly timed to influence voters?
YES it arrived in the mail on the Saturday 21st September when most voters would have just received their voting papers in the mail, either Thursday 19th or Friday 20th. It was delivered as near as could be timed to influence voting.
[18 Council candidates featured in ads and articles in this prime election newspaper (apart from the offending Councillor Rating pages) with the Mayor in 3 ads and Cr Wilson in 2.] The timing precluded any Councillor opportunity to effectively rebut what was claimed in the Councillor Ratings.
[see Cr Stevenson email 8/12/13 below…’to allow those reported on and members of the public some time to respond publically {sic}.’]
Was the publication intending to influence or advise voters?
YES it was advertised on the ODT’s biggest circulation day of the week along the top of the front page as ‘CHRIS MORRIS RATES DUNEDIN COUNCILLORS The best and the worst performers. p30-31’.
The two page spread also claimed authority, with the introduction lauding ‘reporter Chris Morris [who] has occupied a unique vantage point on the press bench, watching more of the debate unfold than any other member of the public’. [It fails to note that most Councillor work is in non-public meetings and in individual contacts for which an ODT reporter has no vantage point. This issues {sic} was highlighted verbally to me by Cr Hudson.]
The claimed authority in this context IS intention to influence. Add biased text and you have perverting influence.
The addition of a rating/10 IS intention to advise.
The ODT spread gave a white-washed glowing account of Mayor Cull over six columns [whose previous election campaign was partly financed by ODT owner Julian Smith and campaign managed by Julian Smith’s regular advertising consultant Tony Crick, who has continued to design and manage Mayor Cull’s subsequent GREATER DUNEDIN electoral campaigns], and gave me one column of
the most slanderous print I have ever read of any Councillor anywhere. All GREATER DUNEDIN candidates got scores of 6/10 or better. No Councillor with a score of less than 6/10 was re-elected.
█ (b) Did the ODT print, publish, distribute, or deliver to any person…a paper being or purporting to be in imitation of any voting document to be used at the election or poll that,
—(i) in the case of an election, includes the name of a candidate or candidates, together with any direction or indication as to the candidate or candidates for whom any person should vote?
YES The format of the ODT Rating publication closely followed the format of the official INSTRUCTIONS & CANDIDATE INFORMATION booklet that accompanied all voting papers. Like the booklet, each Councillor’s column led with the Councillor’s name, followed with a passport-sized photograph, and then followed with about 150 words of text [except for the Mayor’s extensive praise].
In the booklet however, the Candidate Information Handbook specifies that 150 word candidate profiles ‘must be true and accurate’. The ODT ratings were anything but true and accurate. They not only rated, but white-washed GREATER DUNEDIN candidates and pilloried others.
—(iii) in any way contains or suggests any such direction or indication or other matter likely to influence how any person votes?
YES. The rating/10 strongly suggested that those above 5/10 should be voted with a high STV ranking and those below 5/10 should not.
The dumping of two longstanding Councillors given 4/10 and 3/10 respectively proved the effectiveness of this influence, not just in the ratings but in the accompanying damning text. The ODT Ratings publication was intended to be an influencing version modelled on the official voter INSTRUCTIONS & CANDIDATE INFORMATION booklet, and one which gave voters a quick easy way of ‘knowing how to vote’. [eg see ODT letter to the Editor 7/9/13 ex Ann Coup – attached]
Dumped long-standing ex-Cr Hudson has been supportive of my making a criminal complaint under the Local Electoral Act. He has told me that the reason he could not effectively make a complaint himself was because it would be perceived and presented as ‘sour grapes’. He added that he wished that he too had cancelled his ODT advertising after the Chris Morris Councillor Ratings was published. There was no alternative print or TV media in Dunedin for either of us to advertise in as they are all owned by Allied Press Ltd.
Dumped long-standing Cr Stevenson was devastated by the Councillor Ratings publication. She initially verbally supported my draft complaint to the Electoral Commission:
From: Lee Vandervis Sent: Tuesday, 22 October 2013 1:01 p.m. To: Teresa Stevenson Subject: Re: Positions of responsibility
Hi Teresa,
I found the whole skateboards debate to be a red herring and did not pay much attention to who said what.
Maybe if you check the videos on the DCC website you can get exact quotes.
Would you be interested in lending your name to my proposed Electoral Act complaint?
Cheers,
Lee
From: Teresa Stevenson Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 15:12:19 +1300 To: Lee Vandervis Subject: RE: Positions of responsibility
yep
…but has subsequently expressed the personal ‘wish to move on’.
From: Lee Vandervis Sent: Friday, December 06, 2013 9:11 PM To: Teresa Stevenson Subject: Re: Draft Formal Complaint to the Electoral Commission – your suggestions would be much appreciated.
Hi Teresa,
The draft below is intended to go to the Electoral Commission and the Minister for Local Government, with other versions going to the Press Council and to nationwide media.
Paul Hudson has verbally confirmed his interest in adding his approval to this formal complaint.
I would be interested to know if you have any suggestions for improving this draft, and if you have any interest in adding your approval to it, as an obviously effected {sic} candidate.
My primary reason for making the complaint is to prevent the recurrence of what I believe to be a gross manipulation of our electoral process by our monopoly media.
Looking forward to any comment you may have.
Kind regards,
Lee
From: Teresa Stevenson Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 10:48:23 +1300 To: Lee Vandervis, Teresa Stevenson Subject: Re: Draft Formal Complaint to the Electoral Commission – your suggestions would be much appreciated.
I now wish to move on in my life, and do not want to re-raise this reporting which I personally felt was unbalanced, however I do not want the whole thing to be publically {sic} raised again.
I sincerely hope the Press Council and the NZ newspaper editors give some guidelines to how report card style reporting can be done better in the future, with any positive or negative grading being scored evenly on set factors, with more than one person doing the grading to avoid perceptions of bias, this should be easily achieved with the video recording of council meetings; report cards should also be published prior to the sending out of voting papers to allow those reported on and members of the public some time to respond publically {sic}. I have expressed my views with our ODT editor whom may consider these matters in future reporting.
I have experienced some positive press coverage from the ODT in the past, for example when I was first elected in 2004. So much so that there were private Councillor jokes about me sleeping with the ODT reporter.
However, after loudly voicing opposition to the unaffordable public funding of the proposed Stadium [ODT manager/owner was a founding member of ‘Our Stadium’ stadium promotion group] my ODT coverage became very negative in 2007 with a new DCC reporter, and I subsequently lost the 2007 election.
Subsequent ODT coverage since 2007 has been variable.
Mark Twain made a telling point when he said ‘Never pick a fight with a man who buys ink by the barrel.’
This complaint is not intended to pick a fight, but is a necessary attempt to delineate how far our monopoly media may go in influencing voters under the provisions of the Local Electoral Act 2001.
In publishing the Councillor Ratings on the day most voters received their papers, I submit that the ODT has [breached] the Act repeatedly and in many parts.
The Police prosecution that I am seeking is necessary to prevent a recurrence and foreshadowed extension of the Councillor Ratings to future Local Body Elections.
The pillars of Democracy on which our society stands have been eroded by the ODT Councillor Ratings publication, the 2013 Dunedin election has been skewed, and the make-up of the elected Councillors significantly and surprisingly changed.
I look forward to the Police acting appropriately with a decision to prosecute.
Cr Lee Vandervis
Received from Lee Vandervis.
Thursday, 19 December 2013 11:56 a.m.
{Copy of this complaint has been forwarded to Wilma McCorkindale (Fairfax News) and Debbie Porteous (ODT) who met Lee Vandervis this morning. The layout of the forwarded email has been slightly modified due to limitations of the WordPress template. Some personal contact details and email addresses have been removed or deactivated. -Eds}
—
—— Forwarded Message
——– Original Message ——– Subject: Formal Complaint to the Electoral Commission, and Hon Chris Tremain – Minister for Local Government Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 08:32:24 +1300 From: Lee Vandervis To: feedback @ elections.org.nz, c.tremain @ ministers.govt.nz
Formal Complaint to the Electoral Commission 10/12/2013
Dear Electoral Commission and Hon Chris Tremain – Minister for Local Government.
I wish to make a formal complaint regarding a breach of section 197 of the NZ Electoral Act 1993 [Reprint as at 5 August 2013];
197 Interfering with or influencing voters
● (1) Every person commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $20,000 who at an election—
g) at any time on polling day before the close of the poll exhibits in or in view of any public place, or publishes, or distributes, or broadcasts,—
● (i) any statement advising or intended or likely to influence any elector as to the candidate or party for whom the elector should or should not vote;
● (1) Every person commits an offence, and is liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000, who—
(a) interferes in any way with any person who is about to vote with the intention of influencing or advising that person as to how he or she should vote:
(b) prints, publishes, distributes, or delivers to any person (using any medium or means of communication) a document, paper, notice, or message, being or purporting to be in imitation of any voting document to be used at the election or poll that,—
—(i) in the case of an election, includes the name of a candidate or candidates, together with any direction or indication as to the candidate or candidates for whom any person should vote:
—(ii) in the case of a poll, includes a statement or indication as to how any person should vote:
—(iii) in any way contains or suggests any such direction or indication or other matter likely to influence how any person votes:
(c) prints, publishes, or distributes any instruction on the method of marking the voting document that differs in any material way from the instructions required by this Act or any regulations made under this Act to accompany the voting document.
.
On the Saturday 21st of September 2013, the day on which the majority of Dunedin voters would have received their voting papers in the mail, the weekend edition of the Otago Daily Times printed an unprecedented 2 page “LOCAL BODY ELECTIONS HOW THEY RATED Opinion: Council reporter Chris Morris’ ratings of the council’s best and worst performers” which I allege was clearly designed to influence or advise voters as to how they should vote.
This ODT ratings of Councillors was authoritatively described in the introduction as being from “reporter Chris Morris [who] has occupied a unique vantage point on the press bench, watching more of the debate unfold than any other member of the public”. [It fails to note that much Councillor work is in non-public meetings and in individual contacts which an ODT reporter has no knowledge of.]
In this 2 page publication, the Mayor and each Councillor was named and photo shown followed by a column of text, in a format similar to the electoral information booklet accompanying voting papers, – additionally scored/10, and ‘Standing again’ noted. The text ‘opinion’ that accompanied each Councillor’s numerical/10 rating was heavily emotive, biased, and largely devoid of fact in many instances.
Further, I believe that the effect of this publication had a significant effect on voting to the extent that no Councillor that received a Chris Morris rating of less than 6/10 was re-elected. This despite two sitting Councillors of long experience, Cr Paul Hudson and Cr. Teresa Stevenson, looking likely to be re-elected but severely disadvantaged in this publication with damning comment and scores of 4/10 and 3/10 respectively. Cr. Hudson’s lost seat in particular was a surprise as he had a strong advertising campaign as well as a long uninterrupted Councillor history. Cr. Stevenson’s campaign was minimal, but always had been in the past and had still been enough to ensure uninterrupted re-election for many prior terms.
Although re-elected myself with a comfortable first interation selection, I believe that the ODT ratings publication severely impacted both my Mayoral and my Councillor vote, as a result of a slew of slanderous personal attacks in my single ratings column, contrasting strongly with Mayor Cull’s six columns of mostly misleading praise.
Mayor Cull’s praise included claiming he had delivered on promises of spending cuts, efficiencies, and greater transparency, when Mayor Cull’s Council had in fact increased debt by a record $176 million, failed to reduce bloated staff costs, and organised a secret caucus Liaison Committee which illegally prevented Councillors outside the Committee from attending. Mayor Cull also falsely claimed in his electoral pamphlet that his Council had saved ratepayers $100 million in interest costs by reducing the Stadium debt term from 40 years, when in fact it was Mayor Cull’s Council that had increased the term to 40 years in the first place.
The slanderous adjectives used by Chris Morris in my column included; “hogging…headlines [ironically this same reporter was responsible for most headlines], accused of getting facts wrong, grandstanding or a bullying tone, irate outburst, when angry as he often appears, his boiling shade of red is a sight to behold. Can sit like a storm cloud in council meetings, seemingly ready to erupt, walk out, or both.”…
The clear intention to influence and advise voters in this unprecedented 2 page slander of some candidates, and whitewash of others, could not be more plain.
The devastating result on the election outcome was also marked, as the ODT is the only local Dunedin daily newspaper, and the other local weekly and local TV channel are all owned by the same Allied Press Ltd.
With this ‘Council reporter ratings publication’, the ODT did not just ‘interfere in any way with any person who is about to vote’, the publication interfered in many ways with thousands of people who were about to vote, significantly altering the voting outcomes of the election. This on top of more subtle ODT bias in headlines, omissions, and comment regarding Council issues in the year leading up to the election.
I highlighted two such recent examples in my letter to the Editor of 22nd/9/2013 as follows;
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Sun, 22 Sep 2013 12:01:03 +1200 To: EditorODT, Nicholas George S Smith [Allied Press], Julian Smith [Allied Press] Cc: Chris Morris [ODT] Conversation: A reporter’s ranting ratings! – Letter to the Editor Subject: A reporter’s ranting ratings! – Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor.
A reporter’s ranting ratings! – on voting-papers-weekend!
Dear Editor,
With two pages of a reporter’s ranting ratings! on Councillors, the ODT has emotively screwed with voter preferences just as their voting papers arrive.
For the Mayoralty the ODT has again backed a TV-show-pony instead of a work-horse.
Where was Saturday’s headline ‘Cull falsely claims saving ratepayers $100+ million’ when the ODT knows he tried costing us that $100+ million in 2012 to disguise a double digit rates-rise?*
Where is the headline ‘Imaginative and informative election posters from Vandervis’? [photo here – see attached].
You have helped buy a Stadium that we can not pay for, neither capital nor operational, and failed the only candidate that told you so and still might have been able to pay for both.
You are sending our new CEO saviour in search of a saner situation.
You have, in this most important ODT issue of the triennium, taken the Dunedin disease of savaging style over substance to new debilitating depths.
You have permanently compromised any perceived impartiality of your primary DCC reporter, and warned off any decent future DCC candidates.
Winchell’s fate awaits you.
Cr. Clydesdale Vandervis
[“Walter Winchell – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Winchell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Winchell
You know what Winchell was doing at the end? Typing out mimeographed sheets with his column, handing them out on the corner. That’s how sad he got.”]
● “Mayor Dave Cull said he was “vehemently opposed” to repaying the debt over 40 years, because of the interest it would add to the bill, but would support it in the meantime to keep rates down.” [ODT 26 Jan 2012]
image.jpg
Feedback following the Councillor ratings publication was so severe from many different people that I decided to cancel all further advertising with the ODT on 29th Sept., 10 days before the close of voting as below.
From: Lee Vandervis Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 23:07:22 +1300 To: Esther Lamb [Allied Press] Cc: Nicholas George S Smith [Allied Press], Julian Smith [Allied Press] Conversation: Lee Vandervis Subject: Re: Lee Vandervis
Hi Esther,
Thank you for looking after me personally, but your Editors and Morris have undone any good there might have been in our ODT advertising by the obscene Sept 21st 2 pages of ‘Councillor ratings’ in which I have been slandered and Mayor Cull has been rolled in glitter.
Please cancel any further ads and send me a final account.
I ask that you investigate this complaint, and if you discover that section 122 of the Local Electoral Act or other section has in fact been breached, that you move to appropriately censure the ODT in such a way as to publicly highlight the breach, and especially to prevent this or any other newspaper doing this to Candidates in future elections. The ODT has responded to comment on its Ratings of Candidates publication by saying that it will consider including Regional Council and Hospital Board Candidates in a similar Ratings publication for future elections.
The already too powerful influence of Allied Press’ monopoly print and TV media in Dunedin has become so extreme with this ODT Councillor Ratings paper coinciding with delivery of voting papers, that the outcome of the electoral process effectively rides on the shirt-tails of ODT published opinion.
### stuff.co.nz Last updated 16:49 17/06/2013 SFO investigates Taupo District Council
By Mike Watson – Waikato Times
The Serious Fraud Office has launched an investigation into alleged fraud at the Taupo District Council but would not reveal the reason for the inquiry. SFO acting chief executive Simon McArley today confirmed the agency was investigating the council after a complaint had been lodged.
“We have received complaints in matters relating to Taupo District Council,” Mr McArley said. “The SFO is continuing its investigation of those matters but is unable to provide any further detail in relation to them at this time.” Stuff Link
****
### rotoruadailypost.co.nz 18 Jun 2013 11:45 AM Updated: 1:25 PM Update: SFO investigating Taupo District Council
By Laurilee McMichael
Taupo Mayor Rick Cooper says he’s aghast, shattered and stunned at news the Taupo District Council is being investigated by the Serious Fraud Office. Mr Cooper said he doesn’t know what the alleged fraud is in relation to or who it involves but said it’s definitely not him. However he’s challenging whoever made the complaint or complaints to “put up or shut up” and notes that there is a local government election in October. He believes there’s a vendetta against the council and that people are trying to manipulate public opinion.
Mr Cooper and the Taupo district councillors were informed last week the SFO had launched an investigation but were given no more detail.
The SFO focuses on serious or complex fraud in which there are multiple victims, the sum of money lost exceeds $2 million, or has significant legal or financial complexity beyond the resources of most other law enforcement agencies. Its brief includes bribery and corruption crimes involving public officials. Read more
“Justice delayed is justice denied and people are already distressed when they approach the office.” -Beverley Wakem
### ODT Online Thu, 16 Feb 2012 Ombudsman snowed under
The Office of the Ombudsmen is in “crisis”, with a bulging backlog of cases due to lack of investigators and existing staff underpaid and in some cases being worked to death, Ombudsman Beverley Wakem says. Appearing before Parliament’s government administration committee yesterday, Ms Wakem said the office was under “considerable pressure” in terms of staffing and funding and had been for the past three years. Ms Wakem said the office’s baseline funding had been established on the basis it would be actively working on 800 to 1000 cases at any one time. However, actual case numbers had been far higher than that for some time and been close to 2000 at one point last year. It was currently handling about 1854. Read more
****
### ODT Online Tue, 21 Feb 2012 Editorial: Watching the watchdog
A disconcerting report on the Ombudsman’s office emerged quietly last week. For those unfamiliar with its tasks and responsibilities, this is the office to which people can turn when they feel they have been wronged or disadvantaged by a government department or any other office or organisation of state. Read more
The question would be whether a business case could be made for the “five figure” – less than $100,000 – investment by DVML, rather than expecting the council to contribute more funding.
### ODT Online Sat, 3 Dec 2011 Stadium sound and wind fixes likely
By Chris Morris
Steps to improve sound quality, block wind and speed up service at Dunedin’s Forsyth Barr Stadium could be in place within months, stadium boss David Davies says. He acknowledged complaints from some fans about long queues for food and drinks in the North Stand, criticism of the sound quality in some areas, and problems caused by gale-force winds on the night. Because of that, consideration would be given to purchasing sound drapes to improve the way sound bounced off some of the venue’s concrete and steel surfaces, as well as drapes or shutters to block wind. Read more
[thelittleblackcoffeecup.com USA]
![Bank toon-3228 [glasbergen.com] 1](https://dunedinstadium.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/bank-toon-3228-glasbergen-com-1.gif)
![android__email_by_bharathp666 [bharathp666.deviantart.com]](https://dunedinstadium.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/android__email_by_bharathp666-bharathp666-deviantart-com.jpg)
![android-email-app [carleton.ca]](https://dunedinstadium.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/android-email-app-carleton-ca.png)
![Sue Bidrose - timeline of managerial responsibilities 2010 - 2013 [screenshot]](https://dunedinstadium.files.wordpress.com/2015/04/sue-bidrose-timeline-of-managerial-responsibilities-2010-2013-screenshot.jpg)
![police-generic-1200-A [3news.co.nz]](https://dunedinstadium.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/police-generic-1200-a-3news-co-nz.jpg)
What if? Dunedin... 