Invercargill mayor Nobby Clark at odds with council over blacking-out inappropriate language
Photo:
Supplied / Otago Daily Times
Invercargill Mayor Nobby Clark believes his council should not redact feedback from the public, even if it is difficult to hear.
His comment comes at a time when councils are dealing with an increase of inappropriate language in public submissions.
In Invercargill, it is a problem which has led to staff blacking-out some parts of feedback.
The council raised the issue in a report last week as it works to introduce an official policy for dealing with community input.
Clark told Local Democracy Reporting he noticed inappropriate language on annual plan feedback, but was mindful the forms were given out and taken away for people to submit on.
"You can't then redact what you don't like to hear."
There were parts of society that had strong views which might be filtered, but ignoring them was perilous, he said.
"I personally wouldn't redact it. The rationale is that it's important the public know the sort of feedback we get."
Council policy and engagement manager Rhiannon Suter said submissions could be redacted if they contained offensive language, threats, were potentially defamatory, or could lead to abuse of the hearing process.
A recommendation would now be made to council to adopt a submissions policy, which would clarify expectations around appropriate language, Suter said.
"It is hoped that this will see a reduction in the number of submissions needing redaction."
A report prepared for a committee meeting showed the council relied on an "internal approach" for handling feedback instead of an actual policy.
In relation to inappropriate language, it gave the example of last year's consultation for Te Unua Museum of Southland where 14 of 286 responses - or almost 5 percent - had to be redacted due to content.
A number of other councils were also addressing the issue which was on the rise across the country, the report said.
It also discussed social media comments, which didn't meet the criteria for being a formal submission but were summarised by staff for inclusion in documents.
That approach would continue under the new framework, but with an allowance for receiving submissions via social media if requested by the author.
The council was not aware of any other councils taking that approach.
A final decision on whether language should be redacted would remain with the council's manager of governance and legal, Suter said.
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
5 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Energy Minister on dwindling gas supply
The dwindling supply of gas is speeding up the discussion around transitioning away from it. Energy Minister Simon Watts spoke to Corin Dann. Tags: To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following: See terms of use.
RNZ News
35 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Suspension of salary 'unjustified'
Fiji's suspended chief prosecutor, New Zealander Christopher Pryde Photo: Christopher Pryde Fiji's chief prosecutor claims the President's suspension of his FJ$250,000 (approximately NZ$184,000) salary is illegal and unjustified. Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu stopped Christopher Pryde's pay and benefits over two weeks ago after a public backlash about his absence from office. Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka called out the director of public prosecutions last month for failing to turn up for work for almost seven months after he was reinstated in January. Pryde - living in self-imposed exile in Aotearoa - told RNZ Pacific the suspension was unlawful. "I am still the director of public prosecutions, the suspension of my salary is in breach of my contract and illegal under the Constitutution," he said. On Monday Pryde released a copy of the President's letter, claiming "excerpts" from it previously run by local media were "false and defamatory". The crux of Ratu Naiqama's argument is that the 60-year-old was meant to resume work on 20 January, after a Tribunal exonerated him from a "misbehaviour" charge. Two days later he was hit with corruption charges, and the Judicial Services Commission extended his reporting date until 9 May. "I understand you failed to do were still on full pay while not working. You have breached clause 1 of your 4 September Service Agreement," the President wrote. "Pursuant to section 117(5) of the constitution, and acting upon the recommendation of the JSC, after having consulted the acting Attorney-General, your salary and other benefits are suspended forthwith until further notice." The decision came just before Fiji's anti-corruption agency (FICAC) announced plans last week to extradite Pryde on corruption charges. Pryde told RNZ Pacific that the President's decision was "unlawful, since the Constitution does not permit the suspension of my salary". Pryde, hired during the reign of convicted former president Frank Bainimarama, claims they are "bogus" and designed to intimidate and get rid of him. He believes the Fijian government wants to stop him prosecuting those maligned in a Commission of Inquiry report into the former head of the agency. Pryde wrote a lengthy response to the president on 4 August, and said his decision was unconstitutional and "legally flawed". "The suspension is arbitrary and a clear breach of natural justice, particularly in the absence of a formal suspension," he wrote. "It is clear to me that you received and acted upon wrong legal advice on this issue. "The decision by the JSC to recommend to you the suspension of my salary whilst at the same time refusing to deal with the complaints against me demonstrates malice by members of the JSC.... and is an attempt to intimidate me into resigning my position." Pryde said the JSC had an obligation to address the corruption charges he was facing, by either dismissing them or establishing a Tribunal to formally investigate the complaints. He said the JSC was the only legally-mandated commission to determine complaints against him and could not delegate this function to FICAC. Pryde, who lives in Christchurch, said he had already explained his absence from the job in a statement on 24 July. "As outlined in my previous statement (11 April 2025), I remain ready to return to work as soon as the JSC and FICAC have concluded their investigations into further allegations against me, raised by the acting DPP, Nancy Tikoisuva, just prior to my intended resumption of duties in Fiji. "I need an assurance from the JSC that these allegations will not result in a sudden suspension from office and a cutting off of my salary, as happened last time," he wrote. "I also need an assurance that I will not be arbitrarily arrested upon my return to Fiji and served with a stop departure notice. "I can only speculate that the reason for the unconscionable delay in making any decision on these fresh charges against me is a deliberate ploy to ensure I remain outside Fiji and am unable to make any decisions on the results of police investigations stemming from the COI report." Pryde was suspended from the role on full pay in April 2023, pending an investigation into allegations of "misbehaviour" by the then-President, Ratu Wiliame Katonivere, under direction of the Prime Minister. He was charged after being he was seen talking to the former Attorney-General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum at a cocktail party in February 2024. Sayed-Khaiyum was under police investigation at the time they met and his file had been forwarded to Pryde's office, although he claimed he had not yet read it. Fiji's Attorney-General at the time, Siromi Turaga, said their meeting was tantamount to misconduct. In April last year he was also charged with receiving superannuation payments that had not been approved by the JSC. Pryde's superannuation ceased; then his salary and all contractual benefits were "unilaterally' cut off by the Fijian government in July 2024. However he was cleared of all allegations last December, following a week-long investigation by a Tribunal, which recommended he not be removed from his position.
RNZ News
35 minutes ago
- RNZ News
Complaint laid against early childhood advocate for 'deliberately misleading' parents, sector
Dr Sarah Alexander. Photo: RNZ Insight/John Gerritsen An organisation representing early childhood centre owners and managers has filed a complaint against a sector advocate, who the Ministry of Education says is causing confusion in the sector. Dr Sarah Alexander runs an advocacy website called the 'Office of Early Childhood Education'. Until recently the organisation had a group called the 'Early Childhood Advisory Committee' - which is the exact same name as an Education Ministry entity. The Early Childhood Council has filed a complaint against Alexander alleging her organisation is deliberately misleading the sector. The Commerce Commission said it would be speaking to Alexander to remind her of the obligations under the Fair Trading Act. The Ministry of Education told RNZ that Alexander was not affiliated with central government and some elements of her advocacy work had caused confusion in the sector. Since RNZ contacted Alexander, some of the wording on her website has changed. Alexander said she stood by the work of her organisation and had not been contacted by either the Commerce Commission, or the ECC. The Early Childhood Council claimed Alexander and her website - the 'Office of Early Childhood Education' (OECE) - was "deliberately misleading" and confusing parents and childcare centres. The website publishes newsletters and articles about the sector and ECE centres, and states that Alexander is the "Chief Advisor". Until recently it said the "Office" was the "lead public advisor on early childcare and education". The website says it is the "national body for the sector and leading authority on ECE", and represents "all stakeholders and parts of the sector". It has a "specialist ECE newsroom" with paywalled articles, some of which include details of coronial inquests and criticisms of childcare centres and policies. The earlier version of the OECE website. Photo: Screenshot/Office of Early Childhood Education Website The updated version of the OECE website. Photo: Screenshot/Office of Early Childhood Education Website Before it was changed not long ago, the OECE organisation had a group called the "Early Childhood Advisory Committee" (ECAC), which is the identical name of a Ministry of Education entity. "This is not connected to the Ministry's official Early Childhood Advisory Committee. The Ministry has noted that the naming of this internal OECE group has caused some confusion within the sector," ministry deputy secretary of policy Andy Jackson said. "The Ministry's ECAC has a different membership and mandate and operates under formal terms of reference to provide advice on government initiatives and the operation of early childhood education at a national level." The Ministry of Education said the OECE website was an independently operated advocacy organisation that published opinion and commentary on the sector, and was not affiliated with central government. "It is not a government agency, statutory body, or formally affiliated with the Ministry of Education (MoE)," the Ministry's deputy secretary of policy Andy Jackson said. "The 'Chief Advisor' title held by Dr Sarah Alexander is not a government-appointed role, nor is it a position within the Ministry." Jackson said officials regularly engaged with a range of groups across the ECE sector. "From time to time, we meet with Dr Alexander and members of the OECE's ECAC to share information and respond to queries," he said. The Early Childhood Council has filed a complaint against Alexander alleging her organisation is deliberately misleading the sector. Photo: Screenshot/Office of Early Childhood Education Website The Ministry of Education said Alexander was a member of the Ministry's Early Learning Regulatory Advisory Group, which is an unpaid advisory body of around 15 sector representatives. "Dr Alexander's involvement allows her to contribute perspectives on early learning policy, but it does not represent a leadership or decision-making role within the Ministry," Jackson said. Alexander told RNZ she never said the OECE had a decision making role. "But we do provide advice to the Ministry and have done for many years. Until the end of last year, the OECE and MoE had bi-monthly meetings," she said. Alexander said the Ministry has never had an issue with the name of the OECE's advisory group. "In fact, some Ministry officials have said anyone can have an early childhood advisory group - there is no trademark or anything illegal about this," Alexander said. The new 'ECE Advisory Committee' page. Photo: Screenshot/Office of Early Childhood Education Website Early Childhood Council chief executive Simon Laube said while the name change was "really encouraging", there were still things the Council considered were "deliberately misleading". "They are not an 'office' at all. Our complaint to the Commerce Commission still stands, we will be very, very interested to see what they make of it," he said. Laube felt Alexander was causing concern and confusion in the sector. "Using things like 'Office of' and calling yourself 'Chief Adviser'... leads many people to think that they are a government department, when they're not," he said. The Commerce Commission said it would contact Alexander. "Following our assessment, the Commission will be contacting Office of Early Childhood Education to remind them of their obligations under the Fair Trading Act," general manager of competition, fair trading and credit, Vanessa Horne said. Alexander said she had not been contacted by either the Commerce Commission, or the ECC. She said her organisation's advice was based on years of research and consultation with practitioners, academics and other experts in the field. Others in the sector are also worried about Alexander's OECE website, and her advocacy work. Montessori Aotearoa NZ chief executive Cathy Wilson told RNZ that while Alexander's heart may be in the right place, her claim on the website that "The OECE is the national body for the early childhood sector and public advisor on ECE in Aotearoa NZ" was false. "She is not the voice of the sector. She's absolutely not representing any peak body whatsoever," she said. Wilson said she regarded some of the material produced by the OECE as fearmongering. She said while the changes Alexander had made to her website were promising - the organisation's name was still a problem. "She still is inferring that she speaks for the ECE sector, that inference hasn't gone away," Wilson said. Childcare centre owner and advisor to advocacy group Advocates for Early Learning Excellence Kelly Seaburg said despite the changes, many in the sector still had serious concerns about Alexander's advocacy work and website. "She isn't truly engaging with the sector in a meaningful way. It's just very one sided and that concerns me. "If you are putting yourself out to be an expert leader, someone who's in touch with what's actually happening on the ground, but when I see some of their recommendations, they don't seem to be in touch with reality," she said. Seaburg urged media organisations to be careful when interviewing people and double check the facts, as well as ensure a story had been thoroughly researched. Dr Sarah Alexander is called the 'Chief Advisor' on the OECE website. Photo: Screenshot/Office of Early Childhood Education Website Alexander has been interviewed by RNZ when she represented the 'The Office of Early Childhood Education', and in her former role with the now-closed 'Child Forum'. The Ministry of Education told RNZ it respected the right of individuals to advocate on issues they felt strongly about, but it was important that such advocacy was conducted respectfully, particularly when it involved the experiences of others. "Responsible advocacy should avoid using personal or sensitive situations to advance individual agendas and instead focus on supporting informed, constructive dialogue across the sector," Jackson said. Laube said over the past six months the ECC had worked with a number of childcare centres who felt targeted by Alexander, who wrote stories on her website or commented publicly on cases. He said the OECE had published critical articles about providers on their website, questioning their childcare practices. "She went after them. It's very, very stressful for providers because their reputations are everything - they rely on parents trusting them with their children every day. "I've had people completely in tears. It can be really traumatic for the provider," Laube said. The Ministry said early learning services were encouraged to refer to the Ministry's official communication channels - such as the ECE Bulletin - for accurate and up-to-date information on government decisions and guidance. Alexander said she stood by the mahi she and the OECE did. She said the OECE had a code of conduct that they encouraged all ECE services to follow, and their objectives were highlighting what was best for tamariki, ensuring high-quality care and education and a well-functioning early childhood sector. "We dig deeper. We do OIAs. We ask questions. We draw on research and evidence. We analyse data. We identify lessons that can be learnt and changes that could help to improve," she said. In response to RNZ's questions about the allegations of targeting childcare centres, Alexander said there was a huge cost to teachers and on children and families when the owner or operator had "not properly fulfilled their obligations, leaving things to go wrong". "The ECC may like to consider the very high costs to children, families and teachers, and ensure their centre owners comply fully with regulatory requirements and provide a safe and quality care and learning environment for children always," she said. "The business lobby in the ECE sector is strong, and it's important that the sector has other groups that advocate for best practice, outside of business interests," she said. The ECC told RNZ they were an incorporated society that filed annual reports and was transparent about its work and membership. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero , a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
