Chair Refuses To Apologise, Rejects Use Of ‘Kia Ora' In Council Email
A chair of a southern council group is unrepentant about his behaviour at a recent meeting, which was dubbed "disrespectful" by a council leader.
Mataura catchment liaison committee chair Hugh Gardyne has also rejected the use of 'kia ora' in an email reprimanding him for his actions.
The committee Gardyne oversees is one of eight in the region that supports Environment Southland with local river work.
In May, Gardyne gave a blunt presentation to councillors, alleging catchment management was in "a state of paralysis" under the watch of the council chief executive and that communication was ineffective with the general manager in charge.
He was shut down at the end of his talk, when he mentioned an abatement notice later revealed to be one issued by Environment Southland against itself.
A letter from Environment Southland chair Nicol Horrell on 28 May warned Gardyne of his behaviour, saying parts of his presentation were factually incorrect and disrespectful.
"My intention is both to correct your understanding of the facts, and to inform you that councillors will not tolerate any criticism levelled at staff in public meetings or disrespectful behaviour," Horrell wrote.
He added it was incorrect to suggest catchment work was in a state of paralysis and accused Gardyne of not having all the facts.
"I would be interested to know from where you are getting your information."
The letter ended with a suggestion that Gardyne apologise to the chief executive and manager in question, but Gardyne has defended his actions, saying his criticism was about questioning professional ability.
"It doesn't, in my opinion, deserve a response or an apology."
Gardyne said he would speak at council again in the future and the response from the general manager had been "great", following the presentation.
Separately, he also took exception with the use of 'kia ora' in the email sent by Horrell, which delivered the reprimanding letter.
Gardyne requested he instead be addressed with 'hello' or 'dear'.
Horrell told Local Democracy Reporting using the te reo Māori greeting was commonplace and he didn't think its use would be Gardyne's biggest issue.
"I would have thought that that's almost a wee bit racist."
In a letter back to Horrell, Gardyne doubled down on perceived issues with river management and questioned whether the chair's concerns were shared by other members.
Environment Southland oversees eight catchment liaison committees, which help the council develop annual maintenance programmes and budgets, as well as provide a local point of contact.
Gardyne has been involved with the Mataura group since the early 1990s.
Last month, the council said it was working to improve communication with its catchment committees.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Scoop
35 minutes ago
- Scoop
Rally Auckland 2pm To Protest Suspension Of 38 Disability Workers
What: Disability workers protest rally When: 2pm Sunday 8 June Where: Te Roopu Taurima Head Office, 650 Great South Road, Auckland Who: Speakers include PSA National Secretary Fleur Fitzsimons Disability workers will be making their concerns loud and clear at a rally today to protest the outrageous suspension without pay of 38 workers at disability residential care provider Te Roopu Taurima. Te Roopu Taurima o Manukau Trust is the country's largest kaupapa Māori community disability provider. It operates residential whare in Te Tai Tokerau/Northland, Tāmaki Makaurau/Auckland, Waikato, Waitaha/Canterbury, and a residential mental health whare in Whangārei. The trust CE Karen Smith late on Friday afternoon gave notice of suspension of 38 workers who support people living at Te Roopu Taurima houses without pay for six weeks in response to low level strike action taken in support of their collective agreement. "This is an oppressive over-reaction designed to intimidate and bully these workers. It's unheard of for New Zealand employers to adopt such a hostile tactic in these circumstances," said Fleur Fitzsimons National Secretary Public Service Association Te Pūkenga Here Tikanga Mahi. "The strike action only involved not doing some tasks in order to try and put pressure on the employer to listen to these workers." "The trust has a vision to 'strive to place tāngata at the heart of our services', this shows the trust is not living its own values. "Many of these workers are Māori, Pasifika, and migrant workers who deserve fair wages and conditions." The action comes after Te Roopu Taurima tried to introduce harsh terms of employment including restrictions on secondary employment and 90 day trials as well as a pay increase that fails to meet the increased cost of living facing these workers and their whānau. The PSA and Te Roopu Taurima attended independent and confidential facilitation run by an Employment Relations Authority member in Auckland over four days. The Authority member then provided recommendations to settle the collective agreement. "The PSA did not get everything we wanted but nevertheless agreed that we would recommend the outcomes to our members. Te Roopu Taurima was still not satisfied though. "This is an insight into the future of industrial relations in New Zealand under this government. It has emboldened employers to try to take away the small number of remaining employment rights that working people have and use every underhand tactic they can to get there. "Workers and the community must stand up and fight back." Note The Public Service Association Te Pūkenga Here Tikanga Mahi is Aotearoa New Zealand's largest trade union, representing and supporting more than 95,000 workers across central government, state-owned enterprises, local councils, health boards and community groups.
Newsroom
an hour ago
- Newsroom
Let's call ‘taxing the rich' what it really is
Opinion: Last month the Government, under urgency, halted all pay equity claims thereby disproportionately affecting women who experience pay inequality. This is one of many policies that included gutting government departments and cutting public service spending to accommodate a massive wealth giveaway in the shape of tax cuts to landlords (a policy designed to supposedly stabilise rents but which seems to have had little impact). As reported in March last year, the tax giveaway to landlords is estimated to cost the country $2.9 billion. To put this in perspective, that is more than the amount paid in Treaty settlements since 1985, which is about $2.7b. In other words, in one year, the current Government awarded landlords more money than has been paid out to Māori in 40 years as compensation for historical wrongs. I note this to introduce my central concern that economic policy, as has been the case for the last four decades, is dominated by the central myth (now axiomatic for almost every government) that all our ills will be solved if we keep giving as much money as possible to the rich. This is based on three central assumptions of current economic dogma that those who question are branded as 'radical leftists'. These assumptions are underpinned by the beliefs that wealth trickles down; deregulation is good for business; and the state should stay out of the market and everything should be privatised. First, wealth, especially when given away in tax cuts, does not trickle down. It stays at the top. Ever-increasing wealth inequality as measured by the Gini coefficient or any study of income trends show this. Second, seen from a purely corporate perspective deregulation is no doubt a path to profit. However, it is also socially disastrous as costs of deregulation are outsourced via public bailouts following financial crises, for example, that are directly caused by the rolling back of legislation designed to safeguard the wider economy. Third, the state has always been an economic entrepreneur funding all kinds of technological innovation, such as the internet, but this often goes unreported in the dominant economic journalism. All this results in top-heavy, financially starved economies as governments continually try to make the wealth giveaways fit into a budget by stripping support for public services or selling off public assets at knockdown prices. (There is a tendency to undervalue the future social benefits of publicly owned resources.) Such sales are no more than an attempt to generate a short-lived financial hit that dissipates as quickly as the resources we all once owned. The fact that the global economic outlook as well as specific national economies remain so fragile and unstable, and are increasingly unable to secure the basic needs of their populations in terms of health, education and social support, is surely enough evidence that the principle of continually moving wealth upwards doesn't work, certainly not for society as a whole. However, because it has become communal liturgy, recited from almost every media pulpit for the last 40 years, it has become increasingly difficult to challenge. Just as there is no economic justification for structuring an economy in which only the very wealthy are the true beneficiaries, there is also no moral justification. From inside this dogma, the moral justification has always been that it is the rich in the form of investors and entrepreneurs that are the only wealth creators, and so they deserve to reap the wealth they create. But you only have to see the collapse in wealth creation during the pandemic when workers could not work, to know that workers also create wealth. Yet many are told they do not even deserve a living wage. Supressed wages is of course one way to structure an economy (there is no such thing as 'the' economy, by the way) to ensure wealth moves upwards. This results in a phenomenon called corporate welfare where the state has to step in to pay benefits to allow workers to actually live. What this means is that the money taxpayers pay out in social welfare is really a direct contribution to shareholder dividends. Welfare often compensates for the company not paying enough to workers so it can pay more to investors. This is another example of the outsourcing of problems for which the government picks up the tab. Just as the Joker begrudgingly loves Batman for maintaining the order he gets to break, the neoliberals love the government because they know it will be compelled to bail them out – a phenomenon known as the 'Greenspan Put' named after the US Fed chair who first bailed out the banks in 1987. Tax breaks are, of course, the main way to benefit the wealthy by directly increasing the wealth they keep and by breaking the public purse and public services. This then opens up new opportunities for privatisation and profit that will benefit a very small group. And I haven't even mentioned our non-existent capital gains tax. The assault on the Te Tiriti ō Waitangi is another example of efforts to structure an economy to favour the wealthy. Aside from the persistence of a colonial mentality hostile to all things Māori, Te Tiriti remains a firm barrier to expanding corporate appropriation of public resources. Should the Regulatory Standards Bill get passed (another piece of legislation aimed at weakening democratic control of resources and opening them up to private exploitation), Te Tiriti will be all that protects us. As our society is placed under increased stresses and strains beneath the extreme weight of amassed, socially useless wealth that sits with a very small class of people, there have been increased calls to tax the rich. I think we need a different slogan. In keeping with the dogma, conservative supporters have made tax a dirty word. Rather than tax being an individual or corporate contribution to the maintenance of a functioning society, the corporatist right has over the past four decades tried to make it a synonym for theft. The idea that taxing the rich is really a form of theft also makes it easy for the dogmatists to present the call as a form of envy; a petty resentment of the successful. Instead of a call to 'tax the rich', the call should be to 'reclaim the wealth'. I believe this phrase more adequately represents the request to return a greater share of what was commonly created. It is also a call to give back even just a small amount of what was taken through the design of an economy knowingly and carefully organised to purposefully benefit the few. Even if the progenitors of the dogma genuinely thought it would be a social good, which is hard to believe because they themselves do not believe in society, there is no reason to believe the fantasy now.
Otago Daily Times
10 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
Carving out a legacy
Jacinda Ardern, Gordon Ramsay and a member of the Rothschild family all own one of his pounamu pendants, but Lake Hawea's Jeromy van Riel is wanting to spread a simple message through his work. The te reo Māori teacher has been doubling as an artist since 2005, when he began carving intricate Māori designs using stone. "I Arrived in Wānaka and thought I would never be able to teach Māori here as there were no Māori. That was right at the beginning of what I'd call the Māori renaissance." He was ahead of most when he started swapping tools for greenstone with miners in 2005, before any new pounamu that was found would be handed to South Island iwi, Ngai Tahu, by law. "They had it in bucket loads. I was meeting all of the carvers and miners. In those days, people would have containers full of it. "I wasn't earning a huge income, but I knew the direction stone was taking and I knew it would become more exclusive and hard to get. All my pocket money went into investing in stone." van Riel got through a financially unsure Covid period in 2020 by making more carvings from his home during lockdown. One of his first big customers was then Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern. "She cooked breakfast for everyone at Waitangi so I carved this piece for her and thought 'I will set her aside for her', in case I did meet her." They met and he gave the pendant to her as part of a contract, he said. "I gave it to her with a clause that every day she was being human with us, your people." van Reil believed that until any of his pieces were around someone's neck, they were not complete. "I am wanting to tie a forgotten history to an unimagined future and whoever is wearing these pieces is the bridge between these things." "It's in stone and has to be authentic and last forever and the person wearing it is the most important element. A carving is not finished until it is on the intended recipient." The purpose of his carvings was to connect the generations, and people. "The kids and the elders, I try carry that through with my carvings. To make something culturally significant to tell old stories and to carry it through to the next generation. The big thing for the old people is carrying history through our babies, and we need a vehicle to be able to do that." He has some work in Te Papa in Wellington, but van Reil said he had not managed to get his pieces into a Wānaka art gallery. However, it had not stopped him getting noticed by one of the world's richest families, the Rothschilds. "I was told to make a very special piece and wasn't given many details except the person was called madame and I arrived and there is the richest person in the world." Not capitalising on others' riches, he cut a nice deal. "Typical Invercargill boy, I did them a good deal like I would do for my neighbours." He also made celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay a pendant after spending time with him in the Matukituki Valley for one of Ramsay's television series. van Riel had about 50 unsold pendants of pounamu and said he did not market himself well, but would be proud to hand on much of his work to his three children. "I have never made a fortune out of stone and I do it because I have hope in people and I want to promote a message of good and hope and love. "Stones are like people — we spend time with them and polish them so when we hold them up to the light, they shine."
