Something that's not quite tika
Mayor John Carter stated that the council's practice was not to debate issues via newspaper letters columns (Northland Age, February 2).
Fair enough, but do he and his council have a practice regarding not answering questions from ratepayers such as myself, Des Mahoney and others, and our very respected Northland Age editor?
Mr Jackson raised some very pertinent questions for the council in his editorial 'Why are we waiting?' and then there was a response from a council spokesperson stating these questions required an answer, but then went on to disregard most of what was relevant, in particular as to what happened to the $3 million spent on the now apparently defunct Sweetwater bore.
As Mr Jackson says, one assumes that an assiduous search would at the very least produce the relevant cheque butts.
Surely the council has regular audits, as even the previous council would have been required to.
Last year, when the Chief Ombudsman, Peter Boshier, put government agencies on notice over releasing official information, he stated that; "There's the likelihood of political management of just waiting to see how things go in case the story goes away, and the longer something is left unanswered, the less relevant it becomes.
Perhaps Mayor Carter and the council may see fit to respond to the questions editor Jackson asked and some others via Mr Boshier's office, because they are not going to go away, as they will be submitted to him in due course.
I am also aware that Mayor Carter did not respond to a RNZ attempt to question him regarding his presence on a video on a Chinese shopping channel that made outrageous claims for manuka honey.
Unfortunately, wrongly or rightly, when persons in public office do not respond to questions put to them, it gives an impression that something is not quite tika (correct or authentic).
I F Burke