Public access to information debated
A recent recommendation to the District Council to enforce a penalty clause of a council contract was at the centre of a debate over procedure in meetings last Wednesday.
The council Finance and Administration Committee had resolved to recommend to full council that the penalty clause of a contract with Eastern Builders be enforced. The decision came about after the building firm went over time on a council job by 10 weeks.
Councillor Errol Sue was concerned the builder had not been notified of the committee decision by council but could have read about it in the Bulletin. "If I hadn't been notified and read it in the paper I would be pretty upset. I do believe that if council considers
these things that they do go into committee when it involves money, when it involves anyone," said Cr Sue. Council debate 'in committee' is closed to the public and the press. "The penalty clause is in the contract, the only need for resolution was in fact if you weren't going to charge (the penalty)," said Cr Bill Harding. "I don't understand what you're
talking about really. It's in the contract." "We are a council of people representing the people, and the press releasing that information - I don't believe that is acceptable," said Cr Sue. "Someone did say at that meeting (Finance and Administration Committee June 8) that they had actually been told that it was in his contract and it was going to happen," said Cr Ellen Gould. "The concern is, was
this particular firm notified before the press release," said Cr Sue. "It was in the contract," said a number of councillors. "I don't condone that sort of attitude from council," said Cr Sue. "We're not really talking about the one particular item, we're talking about the whole system of council decisions," said Cr Ken Summerhays. "In that case I would think that should any item such as this come
up we would have to hold it in committee, if it's a money matter or personal," said Deputy Mayor Bruce Thompson. Cr Tom Punch pointed out that committee decisions were not passed in total until a full council meeting. District Manager John Murrihy said that with the committee structure that exists there was no way to avoid the situation were a committee decision could be made public and then overturned by council: "for example, grants to Ruapehu College, I've Tead that in the newspaper. Now, you as a council could
have turned that down tonight." "The point wants to be made to the press that the committees recommend to council that these things b e fact, they're not actual fact until passed by full council," said C r Punch. Last Thursday, District Manager John Murrihy pointed out tc the Bulletin that council contract documents are not able to b e withheld from the public and that anyone could read a council contract such as the Eastern Builders one and ask about penalty clauses, the completion date of the contract and whether clauses were enforced.
Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/WAIBUL19880628.2.21
Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka
Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 6, Issue 248, 28 June 1988, Page 6
Word count
Tapeke kupu
511Public access to information debated Waimarino Bulletin, Volume 6, Issue 248, 28 June 1988, Page 6
Using this item
Te whakamahi i tēnei tūemi
Ruapehu Media Ltd is the copyright owner for the Waimarino Bulletin. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Ruapehu Media Ltd. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.