Cats —or, Infrastructure spending, Council debt, and Disenfranchisement of Ratepayers

Council cat squad checking rego fees [supplied]

After the great floods, the common affliction amongst leaders, “water on the brain”.

█ The ‘thinking’ – DCC cat control remit for LGNZ AGM

****

At Twitter:

Warming: The "cat rangers" are coming – if Local Govt NZ President & Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull has his way (Video) https://t.co/VHyv1Ns2sy

— Dave Goosselink (@davedunedin) July 26, 2017

****

“There may be issues with cats but they also serve a useful purpose in controlling pests. The cat population doubled to two at my place last year, and we have more tui and bellbirds around than ever, as well as visits by kereru and eastern rosellas and fantails and waxeyes. The cats occasionally catch a bird but most often it is a sparrow or a thrush. But it looks like the Dunedin council and some others are keen on requiring the herding of cats. They kept as quiet as they could on cats during the local body elections, and now mid term they try to foist it on the public. Devious.” –Pete George at YourNZ

****

Councils will now lobby the government to finish its National Cat Management strategy.

### radionz.co.nz 6:05 pm on 25 July 2017
RNZ News
Councils seek greater powers to control cats
By Michael Cropp – Wellington Local Government Reporter
The country’s councils are calling on the government to give them extra powers to protect wildlife from cats including microchipping, de-sexing and registration. Local bodies have the power to control dogs and their behaviour, but they only have jurisdiction over cats when they become a health risk. While the remit presented by Dunedin City Council at the meeting acknowledged the companion role of animals, it noted cats are a danger to wildlife. […] The controversial remit scraped through with just 51 percent of the vote at the Local Government New Zealand annual general meeting.
….Auckland mayor Phil Goff said his council abstained from the vote because it was not sure what it would mean for the 500,000 cats in the country’s largest city. “We are in favour of practical measures to protect native birdlife …. We’re not in favour of bureaucratic measures that might involve millions of dollars of council time and energy but doesn’t achieve the objectives that we set out to achieve,” Mr Goff said.
Read more

****

More about ‘LGNZ The Blight’:

Local Government New Zealand – Media Release
Local government to debate four remits and elect new President at AGM
News type: National news | Published: 21 July 2017
The local government sector will voted on four issues when it gathers for its annual AGM in Auckland on Tuesday 25 July. There is a focus on litter legislation, local government funding, cat management and health in this year’s remits. The AGM follows this year’s LGNZ Conference, when over 600 delegates from local government and its stakeholders, industry and community will gather in Auckland for the two day event [23-25 July]. The theme of this year’s conference is Creating pathways to 2050: Liveable spaces and loveable places. Remits are voted on in a secret ballot and if passed will become official policy and be actioned by Local Government New Zealand. Local government will also be voting for a new LGNZ President to replace Lawrence Yule, who steps down after nine years in the role.
….National legislation to manage cats
The third remit was proposed by Dunedin City Council and asks that LGNZ lobby the Government to take legislative action as a matter of urgency to develop national legislation includes provision for cost recovery for cat management.
Throughout New Zealand councils are tasked with trying to promote responsible cat ownership and reduce their environmental impact on wildlife, including native birds and geckos.  Yet, territorial authority’s powers for cats are for minimising the impact on people’s health and wellbeing, and regional councils’ powers are restricted to destruction of feral cats as pests.  The remit seeks the protection of our wildlife and native species by seeking regulatory powers for cat control, including cat identification, cat de-sexing and responsible cat ownership.
….The LGNZ AGM is open to members only. Following the meeting, LGNZ will advise of the outcomes of all votes.
Read more

****

Cat rangers and collars with bells on are some of the ideas Dunedin City Council wants to lobby Government for.

### Stuff.co.nz Last updated at 14:28, July 10 2017
Cat control: many Kiwi councils ready to lobby for national rules
By Libby Wilson
Councils around the country are looking to band together to rein in roaming moggies. Dunedin City Council has suggested its colleagues help it push the Government for national rules that could include cat rangers and shutting cats in overnight. Seven other councils around the country have given the idea, and its environmental focus, their backing ahead of a July vote at the Local Government New Zealand annual meeting.
Read more

****

‘Vacuum of cat management policy and services in Dunedin’, local submission says.

### nzherald.co.nz 29 Jun, 2017 7:02am
Dunedin council proposes registration of cats in New Zealand
A Dunedin proposal that could result in the registration of cats in New Zealand will be discussed nationally. The proposal from the Dunedin City Council, in consultation with seven other councils, will next month go to a Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) vote. If it is successful, LGNZ would make it a policy, and begin lobbying the Government to have it made law. The proposal could see the Government called upon to develop legislation for cats similar to the Dog Control Act. It already has the support of the Otago Regional Council, one of 78 councils which will vote on the idea.
Read more

****

### ODT Online Wed, 17 May 2017
DCC seeks support for cat control
The Dunedin City Council will seek support from other New Zealand councils to gain greater control of cat management. If additional support from councils was gained, a remit would ask Local Government New Zealand to call upon the Government to give councils statutory power to control cats. The DCC was researching a Wellington City Council bylaw on microchipping cats. However, the current bylaw could not be enforced by non-compliance fees. Cat management would focus on the control of wild cats.
Link

****

S T O P ● P R E S S

At Facebook:

—

Related Posts and Comments:
26.7.17 RNZ Morning Report : Guyon Espiner sticks claws in Cat Cull & Curfews
25.7.17 To borrow from Stevie Smith : ‘the truth is I think he was already stuck’
22.7.17 Regional state of emergency lifted in Otago (incl Dunedin & Waitaki)
21.7.17 Rainy Day reading —The Spinoff : Ministry of Transport fraud case
21.7.17 DCC ORC : Heavy rain warnings preparations #PublicNotice
1.7.17 LGNZ, don’t wish ‘his lordship’ on New Zealand #VoteRachelReese
3.6.17 ODT updates mayoral vehicle serious injury crash information
24.4.17 LGOIMA vehicle (DCC) : Hyundai Santa Fe (2016) written off Jan 2017
10.12.16 Oh christ ! [LGNZ bureaucratic dopefest]
21.7.15 Dunedin to host LGNZ 2016 conference —FFS TIME TO TAKE IT OUT
21.5.15 DCC and LGNZ, total losers
2.2.15 LGNZ run by Mad Rooster Yule, end of story
10.10.14 Cull consorts with losers at LGNZ
26.6.14 LGNZ #blaggardliars

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

This post is offered in the public interest.

‘I Find That Offensive!’ – recommended by Patrik Schumacher · Mar 25

BOOK PROMO [by tweet]

‘I Find That Offensive!’ (Provocations Series)
By Claire Fox

When you hear that now ubiquitous phrase ‘I find that offensive’, you know you’re being told to shut up. While the terrible murder of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists demonstrated that those who offend can face the most brutal form of censorship, it also served only to intensify the pre-existing climate that dictates we all have to walk on eggshells to avoid saying anything offensive – or else.

Indeed, competitive offence-claiming is ratcheting up well beyond religious sensibilities. So, while Islamists and feminists may seem to have little in common, they are both united in demanding retribution in the form of bans, penalties and censorship of those who hurt their feelings.

But how did we become so thin-skinned? In ‘I Find That Offensive!’ Claire Fox addresses the possible causes of what is fast becoming known as ‘Generation Snowflake’ head-on (no ‘safe spaces’ here) in a call to toughen up, become more robust and make a virtue of the right to be offensive.

PROVOCATIONS is a groundbreaking new series of short polemics composed by some of the most intriguing voices in contemporary culture and edited by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. Sharp, intelligent and controversial, Provocations provides insightful contributions to the most vital discussions in society today.

“An ambitious new series that tackles the controversy of the topics explored with a mixture of intelligence and forthright argument from some excellent writers.” — The Observer

Bitebackpublishing.com

—

Related Posts and Comments:
26.3.16 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 —Section 14

█ Enter the terms *post removed*, *removed*, *rephrased* or *video animation removed* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 —Section 14

█ The Act (government legislation): http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM224792.html

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
About the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (Guidelines) Link

The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 [NZBORA] was enacted to affirm, protect and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms in New Zealand. The Act also affirms New Zealand’s commitment to the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on which the rights and freedoms it contains are based.

When it was enacted, the Bill of Rights Act did not create any new rights but merely confirmed existing common law rights. The Act does not reflect all ICCPR rights; however, section 28 provides that, just because a right or freedom is not expressly provided for in the Act, that does not mean that the right or freedom does not exist or is otherwise restricted. The right or freedom is given effect by other legislation and by common law. For instance, while the ICCPR contains a right to privacy, the Bill of Rights does not. Nonetheless, the Privacy Act 1993, together with the common law tort of privacy, provides for rights of personal privacy.

The rights and freedoms
The Bill of Rights Act affirms the following rights and freedoms:
● the right not to be deprived of life (section 8)
● the right not to be subjected to torture or cruel treatment (section 9)
● the right not to be subjected to medical or scientific experimentation (section 10)
● the right to refuse to undergo medical treatment (section 11)
● electoral rights (section 12)
● the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (section 13)
● the freedom of expression (section 14)
● the right to manifest religion and belief (section 15)
● the freedom of peaceful assembly (section 16)
● the freedom of association (section 17)
● the freedom of movement (section 18)
● the right to freedom from discrimination (section 19)
● rights of minorities (section 20)
● the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure (section 21)
● the right not to be arbitrarily arrested or detained (section 22)
● rights of persons arrested or detained (section 23)
● rights of persons charged with an offence (section 24)
● rights to minimum standards of criminal procedure (section 25)
● the right not to be liable to retroactive penalties or double jeopardy (section 26), and
● the right to natural justice (section 27).

Application
The Bill of Rights Act is designed to protect individuals (natural persons) and legal persons (such as corporations) from the actions of the State (section 29). The Act applies to any acts done by the legislative, executive or judicial branches of the government, or by any person or body performing a public function, power or duty conferred or imposed by or pursuant to law (section 3).

Limitations
The rights and freedoms contained in the Bill of Rights Act are not absolute but may only be subject to reasonable limits that are prescribed by law and can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”. If a limitation does not satisfy this test then the legislative provision, policy or practice is inconsistent with the relevant section of the Bill of Rights Act.

The Bill of Rights Act does not have the status of supreme law. This means that the Courts cannot use the Act to repeal, revoke, or invalidate other legislation. In the event of an inconsistency between the Bill of Rights Act and another enactment, the other enactment must prevail (section 4). The Bill of Rights Act, however, includes two important safeguards to help protect human rights.
Cont/

—

Douglas Field 25.3.16

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
█ The Guidelines on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990: A Guide to the Rights and Freedoms in the Bill of Rights Act for the Public Sector

Introduction to sections 12 – 18: Democratic and Civil Rights Link
Sections 12 – 18 of the Bill of Rights Act concern the fundamental rights and freedoms that are essential to an individual’s effective representation and meaningful participation in the public life of a democratic society.

Section 12 Electoral Rights
Section 13 Freedom of Thought
Section 14 Freedom of expression*
Section 15 Manifestation of religion and belief
Section 16 Freedom of peaceful assembly
Section 17 Freedom of association
Section 18 Freedom of Movement

….

█ Section 14 – Freedom of expression Link
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form.

[excerpt]
What every policy analyst needs to know about section 14:

● There are very few activities that will not be protected by the freedom of expression because most human activity has an expressive element (including political, artistic and commercial expression).
● Speech or an expression that is considered important to the ability of individuals to participate in core democratic processes, for example in elections, and political and social speech, is likely to enjoy a very high degree of protection.
● A fundamental aspect of the right to freedom of expression is that it extends to protecting all information and opinion, however unpopular, offensive or distasteful.
● The right generally protects all expression that conveys or attempts to convey meaning except expressive activity that takes the form of violence.
● Even though the right extends to all types of opinions, certain categories of expression (e.g., advertising, pornography or speech that incites racial violence) are more likely to be subject to reasonable limitations than others (e.g., political and social speech).
● The scope of section 14 means that as all forms of expression except those that take the form of violence are protected by the right, any restriction on expressive activity will be considered in the context of section 5 of the Bill of Rights Act.
● Freedom of expression includes the right to say nothing or the right not to say certain things.
● The opinions or views do not have to be held by that individual – the protection broadens out to include anyone else who subsequently communicates or disseminates those ideas or opinions.
● The right to seek and receive information may involve consideration of other statutory frameworks such as the Official Information Act 1982 or the Privacy Act 1993.

—

█ In Brief: Your rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (PDF)
[click to enlarge]

█ Enter the terms *removed*, *post removed* or *video animation removed* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Auditor-general Lyn Provost #Resign

Link + message received from Anonymous
Wed, 26 Nov 2014 at 11:53 p.m.

Message: What unbelievable crap from Lyn Provost, given her office (OAG) has brushed aside so many public complaints and concerns about Council expenditure that may have prevented the situation she now chooses to alert us all to !!!!

________________________________

### stuff.co.nz Last updated 12:39 26/11/2014
Lax councils $7 billion behind in infrastructure
–Dominion Post
Ratepayers are facing a $7 billion bill to replace crumbling roads and water pipes caused, in part, by the “worry about it later” attitude of councils. A report released yesterday by Auditor-General Lyn Provost found councils nationwide have been failing to put enough money aside to maintain their collective $100b of infrastructure assets. The gap between funds needed and reality is tipped to reach $6b to $7b by 2020. Much of the country’s infrastructure was built in two waves, from 1910-30 and 1950-86, and many assets would reach the end of their lives at the same time, the report warned.

“They are storing up a problem for future generations, ” said Bruce Robertson, assistant auditor-general in charge of local government. Will councils step up and deal transparently and effectively with these issues?”

Keeping rates bills down to maintain political popularity was one reason assets were underfunded, and a “worry about it later” mentality also existed, the report stated.[…] Local Government NZ president Lawrence Yule said a $7b shortfall was significant, but it was too early for ratepayers to be pressing the panic button. It was not yet clear how accurate the auditor-general’s findings were, he said.
Read more

Note: These last years Lawrence Yule has been publicising how bloody good debt-funding council activities is. WTF

—

████ Report 7 Nov 2014:
Auditor-General’s overview and conclusions
Water and roads: Funding and management challenges
New Zealand has a good reputation internationally for managing assets because of the work of groups such as New Zealand Asset Management Support (NAMS). However, many local authorities’ asset management practices fall short of asset management guidance, such as that developed by NAMS. This report suggests that local authorities need to better understand the local economy to plan for the longer term and that their management of infrastructure and capital needs to improve to meet the challenges ahead. Full Report

—

Related Posts and Comments:
21.11.14 Stadium Review: Mayor Cull exposed
31.10.14 Whaleoil on “dodgy ratbag local body politicians” —just like ours at DCC
10.10.14 Cull consorts with losers at LGNZ
9.9.14 Mangawhai, Kaipara: Latest news + Winston Peter’s speech
26.8.14 DCC: Forensics for kids
6.8.14 DCC tightens policy + Auditor-General’s facetious comments
15.7.14 Stadium: Who is being protected?
26.6.14 LGNZ #blaggardliars
31.3.14 Audit services to … local bodies #FAIL ● AuditNZ ● OAG ● LynProvost
20.3.14 Delta: Report from Office of the Auditor-General
7.3.14 Jeff Dickie: Letter to the Auditor-General Lyn Provost
2.2.14 Stadium: ODT editorial (1.2.14) —Garbutt debunks myths
3.12.13 LGNZ: OAG report on Kaipara
28.5.13 Carisbrook: Auditor-General #fails Dunedin residents and ratepayers
21.4.13 Councils “in schtook” —finance & policy analyst Larry.N.Mitchell
31.3.13 DIA and Office of the Auditor General stuff up bigtime #pokierorts
6.3.13 Carisbrook: Cr Vandervis elaborates
15.2.13 Carisbrook: Call for OAG investigation into DCC / ORFU deals
22.11.12 Cull COVERS UP COUNCIL #massage

For more, enter the terms *dcc*, *dchl*, *dvml*, *citifleet*, *stadium*, *carisbrook*, *delta* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

Audit services to (paying) local bodies #FAIL ● AuditNZ ● OAG ● LynProvost

Typically, local government pays Audit New Zealand to audit and review annual financial statements. It’s a tame, tick-box sort of exercise. Audit NZ does a remarkably poor job and is certainly not in it to protect the Community from institutional or corporate misuse of public funds, or indeed from what amounts to perversion or defeat of the course of justice.

Audit NZ is paid handsomely to not see failures of tansparency and non-accountability — such that the enlightened Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Association (MRRA) has had Audit NZ sacked from providing audit services to Kaipara District Council.

In an opinion piece last week at Otago Daily Times, City ratepayers let down again, Russell Garbutt cleverly and succinctly summarised the depth of the problem with the Office of the Auditor-General (OAG) investigation into Delta Utility Services Ltd. He also noted: “It may seem strange, but if a local government body goes feral, the body which investigates this and the one which provided audit services to that local body are both business units of the Auditor-General.”

Dunedin City Council (DCC) has ‘overseen’ the Auditor-General’s probe into property purchases at Luggate and Jacks Point by Delta Utility Services Ltd, which also involved the council’s holding company (DCHL). A more scandalous, politically slant and irresponsible report from a Government agency it would be difficult to imagine.

(Thank-you, Mayor Dave Cull and the individual Stuart McLaughlan.)

Criminally, the OAG’s Delta report is what passes for ‘honest and comprehensive’ investigation of fraud and corruption in New Zealand… such that the main Delta complainant, Cr Lee Vandervis of Dunedin City, who holds evidence obtained from over 350 emails, was NOT interviewed by the Auditor-General. Nor was his evidence examined.

The fact that for years Audit NZ has refrained from investigating or bringing attention to underhand dealings of the DCC and with respect to DCHL, Delta, Aurora, and Dunedin City Treasury Ltd (DCTL), to identify just some of the ‘group companies’ involved in financial mayhem with public funds, is fully SYMPTOMATIC.

And now we have DCC — and DCHL (again) — in relationship with Dunedin Venues Management Ltd, tied directly to Otago Rugby Football Union (ORFU) and The Highlanders through shared staff and facilities at the Stadium, and the facilities at Logan Park. Meaning that DCC continues to squander millions and millions of dollars of public funds each year, yet Audit NZ is nowhere to be seen under ‘the Roof’. Don’t mention the black hole, Carisbrook.

█ Inquiry into property investments by Delta Utility Services Limited at Luggate and Jacks Point. The Auditor-General’s Overview and Full Report are available at http://www.oag.govt.nz/reports/2014/delta

****

WHERE TO FROM HERE ???
In yesterday’s Business section of the Sunday Star-Times came inklings of hope that the tide of fraud and corruption created by local bodies and ‘their mates’ is up for possible scrutiny through a change of legislation. Greater public and professional awareness of fraud by local councils and their companies (as well as private trusts and other means used to launder public monies) is coming to bear.

[Message to ALL: Those of us working quietly away to expose Dunedin City Council and Otago Rugby will never give up in a month of Sundays.]

SST Business 30.3.14 (page D5)

****

NEWS: SFO has got into Mighty River Power and there are ‘reasons’ for non-disclosure of MRP fraud to the NZX…

A consultant says:

The following article goes on to cite other cases, one from last year mentions two men sentenced to prison and home detention following the payment of $849,000 in council funds for road and berm projects that were never completed.

█ Think DELTA, think AURORA, think DCC, think DCHL, think DCTL, think CWP, think CST (CSCT), think DVML…

█ Think of the individuals you know by name who fail to be prudent and conservative with Dunedin Ratepayer and Resident monies, whose actions (deliberate or otherwise) have been fraudulent and corrupt.

█ These entities and the individuals you know by name have been aided and abetted by Audit New Zealand, the Office of the Auditor-General, the Department of Internal Affairs, and indeed the Serious Fraud Office which doesn’t always show a clean pair of hands in assisting investigations by other Government agencies — if ‘supervised by’ mayors, local body politicians, local body employees, Members of Parliament, and Ministers of the Crown.

Welcome to the underbelly of New Zealand local government and the parties it pleases. STEAL from the poor to FATTEN the rich, by any means. Backed by Central Government.

—

SST Business 30.3.14 (pages D1 and D8) [click to enlarge]

*Links to articles not yet available at Stuff.co.nz.

—

Related Posts and Comments:
30.3.14 Paul Pope on local body annual plans
27.3.14 Jeff Dickie: Letter to the Auditor-General Lyn Provost
25.3.14 Delta blues . . . and Easy Rider
20.3.14 Delta: Report from Office of the Auditor-General
14.3.14 Delta: Mayor ignores Cr Vandervis’ official complaint
22.3.14 DVML, ‘Money for jam…..fig jam’
19.3.14 ORFU: Black-tie dinner, theft or fraud?
17.3.14 ORFU: Black-tie dinner on ratepayers

For more, enter the terms *carisbrook*, *cst*, *cull*, *cycle*, *dcc*, *delta*, *dia*, *draft annual plan*, *dvml*, *farry*, *orfu*, *nzru*, *pokie rort*, *pokies*, and *stadium* in the search box at right.

—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

LGNZ: OAG report on Kaipara

Updated Post 7.12.13

Link received.
Saturday, December 07, 2013 4:29 PM

Anonymous says:
[An acquaintance] has been very involved with uncovering the Kaipara scandal. We’ve decided it is a genetic fiesty gene. You may be interested in putting up the following Youtube link… There are very similar parallels with the DCC!
See what you think.

Published on 22 Nov 2013. Ecocare Bear.

Mangawhai, Kaipara: When Government Goes Bad!!
Mangawhai Ratepayers and Residents Association (MRRA) goes to court in 2014. Please make donations now at http://www.MRRA.org.nz. We need your support to challenge Kaipara Council’s illegal contracts, illegal loans, 100% rates increases and abuse of law. If successful, our court ruling will help all Kiwis stop out-of-control spending by Councils around New Zealand

****

[via Far North email copy to Whatif? Dunedin]

OAG report on Kaipara
3 December 2013

Dear Mayors, Chairs and Chief Executives

This afternoon, The Office of the Auditor General released its report on the Kaipara District Council’s delivery of its wastewater project at Mangawhai and very shortly will be briefing media. The 400 plus page report (and summary report) is a sobering read. Media coverage is likely to be severe and we need to be ready for that. We would ask that you pass this communication on to all members of your council.

—

In summary, the Council’s management exhibited a lack of basic financial and project management expertise and little acknowledgement of relevant risks. Kaipara’s councillors also failed to assume governance responsibility for the project, assess its risks and ask the appropriate questions.

It would appear that the only positives [sic] outcomes are that Mangawhai now has a wastewater system that works and has capacity to cater for future growth. Although governance failures are not new in private, public or local government sectors, the report has highlighted significant management and governance failures and successive poor performance with Kaipara District Council’s delivery of its wastewater project.

This performance is not acceptable for local government, whether in the past, present or in the future. As all of us are acutely aware, it reflects very poorly on the sector. However, the issues have occurred – we now need to learn the lessons and take ownership of the broader governance concerns that the OAG has raised.

OAG’s report outlined areas for public sector entities to be aware of based on lessons learnt – these are outlined below. Without doubt there are many strongly governed councils in New Zealand but, as with any organisation, we can always improve. If a focus on governance ensures that a Kaipara is not repeated then the entire sector will gain from that, just as the reputation of the sector is tarnished when things go wrong on such a scale.

As we’ve discussed previously, LGNZ is introducing initiatives to lift the bar. The success of these initiatives will depend on member buy-in. In this regard, the Kaipara episode provides a powerful incentive for the membership to come together to support one another in ensuring that collectively we will strive to ensure that poor performance on this scale is never repeated.

Post-elections training for elected members is now complete. In early 2014, we will launch governance training in conjunction with the Institute of Directors to assess and improve current governance practices in councils. Councils will need to fund this training. In the light of Kaipara, I encourage you to think of such training as an investment in good outcomes and not as an unjustifiable cost.

LGNZ is also soon to introduce its centre for advice and best practice, and has articulated a strong future focus for the sector on financial effectiveness and value. Indeed, a soft launch is already underway with some councils already accessing LGNZ for advice on matters that will form a key focus of the Centre of Excellence.

Governance will be a core focus in the coming triennium. I recommend that you and your council review the report – the 40-page summary may assist here – and consider the relevance of the messages for your council. LGNZ will shortly issue a media release and I will front media as required – we need to acknowledge where there have been failings and show what we are doing to lift performance.

I will continue to write on this subject – including an article which may feature in national media in coming days and in IoD’s [Institute of Directors] Boardroom magazine later this month. It is important that our stakeholders and the public know we are strongly committed to good governance. The video clip on our recent major issues seminar held in Wellington on 21 November – “Why good governance matters in local government” – is available here on our website – this is useful viewing.

I have also provided my speech here. Michael Stiassny, Vice-President of IoD, has made several pertinent points for the sector to consider. We will continue the dialogue, and if you have any feedback for Malcolm [malcolm.alexander @ lgnz.co.nz] or myself [lawrence.yule @ hdc.govt.nz] on this subject, or any other, then please email us.

Kind regards

Lawrence Yule
President

Local Government New Zealand

OAG’s advice to public entities on lesson learnt:

Accountability
● Public entities should be meticulous about legality
● Good record-keeping is the foundation of effective accountability
● Workshops can supplement formal Council meetings, but not replace them
● Contractors need to be tied into public sector accountability mechanisms

Governance
● Understand the role and stick to it
● Common sense is a legitimate governance tool
● Understand what you need assurance on and where you will get it from
● Audit committees can provide useful support

Management
● There are limits to contracting out
● It is important to maintain appropriate financial management capacity and capability and to stick to your sphere of competence
● Project governance and management is important

PPP arrangements
● Do not underestimate what is involved in a PPP arrangement
● Accounting should not drive the decision to enter into a PPP
● Transfer of risk is not an end in itself
● PPPs are unlikely to succeed fully if the contract is not for “the complete package”

Feedback [info @ lgnz.co.nz]

——————————————————————-

[via scoop.co.nz]

Kaipara review shows a need to lift governance performance
Tuesday, 3 December 2013, 2:33 pm
Press Release: Local Government NZ
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1312/S00024/kaipara-review-shows-a-need-to-lift-governance-performance.htm

—

Related Posts and Comments:
12.11.13 Northland council amalgamation
29.6.13 Audit NZ and OAG clean bill of health —Suspicious!
21.4.13 Councils “in stchook” —finance & policy analyst Larry.N.Mitchell
19.3.12 Local government reform
21.2.12 Kaipara this time
—

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr