Letter to the Editor - Tuesday March 5, 2013

No crap please

The Age letters on February 26 are a vintage selection.

Robin Shepherd presents a dispassionately principled plea for a more principled approach to the position of Pamapuria principal Stephen Hovell.

He raises the telling point that James Parker had managed to manipulate a range of government agencies, including the police, so why scapegoat Mr Hovell?

The Evans cartoon is brilliant (as usual) with the scope of its application of the plain packaging principle.

Deputy mayor Anne Court provides a timely reminder to everyone that council is required to be a good employer.

This could have been an inhouse memo but can be taken as indicative of how councillors communicate with staff and each other these days. I do hope the FNDC CEO reads the Age.

Dr Reynold Macpherson raises different issues concerning council failures to communicate and Cr Di Maxwell makes it clear she won't take any crap.

Dr Macpherson also made this rather clear but Cr Monty Knight evidently found the message "verbose and ponderous".

So here's a translation, Monty: Dr Macpherson won't take any crap - got it?

Speaking of which, the responses from the mayor and Cr Knight to Dr Macpherson's allegations of council perfidy and manipulations over Te Ahu Charitable Trust serve more than anything to support the impression that "something is rotten in the state of Denmark".

The headings of their letters 'Accusation disgraceful' and 'Attack from within' provide tabloid description of a content that conveys nothing of any relevance to the issues raised.

We are well aware of the selfless devotion Messrs Brown and Knight have applied to Te Ahu project and with gratifying results.

We would do well, however, to stand with Dr Macpherson in questioning why they are apparently now possessed of a cunning plan to tear up written agreements regarding governance and to fail to negotiate a service level agreement between the FNDC and Museum Trust.

They need to engage with the issues and inform us whether they are trying to usurp the rule of law and due process, as lucidly described.

If so, they need to explain why they are doing so. If not, they need to explain why the facts and reasoning as presented are wrong.

This is, after all, part of their job description, and Te Ahu situation is not the only one where this applies.

Watch this space.

It was nice to read from B L Ansell that WINZ budgeting advice has been marvellous. Some of the other contributors may consider, to paraphrase Dr Macpherson, that what wrong has been done can be undone, and so can the people who done it.

Please, no more crap.

MIKE RASHBROOKE

Opua