Bydder told Waipā mayor Susan O’Regan to “get off your fat arse” and called her council staff “r******d, s*****c c***” in a public submission online.
The comments drew 23 complaints, including from Hamilton mayor Paula Southgate, other councillors, ratepayers and members of the disability community, prompting the council to appoint an independent investigator.
Tauranga lawyer Mary Hill’s findings and recommendations that Bydder be censured, made to apologise and attend conduct training, will be heard at an extraordinary council meeting on September 17.
In the report, seen by RNZ, Hill said Bydder’s comments amounted to offensive behaviour, involved personal attacks on the mayor and former Waipā chief executive Garry Dyet, and were unreasonable, unwelcome, insulting, and degrading to the public including the disability community.
Hamilton councillor Andrew Bydder. Photo / Supplied
Hill said complainants labelled the comments abusive, derogatory, threatening, ablest, sexist, bullying, harassment, unprofessional, lacking respect and dignity, and undermining the reputation of the council and the Waikato.
Bydder argued he was acting in a private capacity when he made the comments about Waipā's handling of public consultation on the Cambridge Connections project - work that involves the placement of a third bridge in the town.
He also suggested he had not interacted with the public and made allegations that Hill had been “actively dishonest”, “tried very hard to lie” and had “falsified” complaints during the investigation, which Hill rejected.
He wanted to be involved in the selection of the investigator, requested clarification over whether Hill’s appointment was personal or through the law firm where she was partner, raised the possibility all the complaints came from a false email address, and said Hill’s timeframes for his responses were unreasonable.
However, Hill’s timeline showed she gave Bydder 20 working days and several chances to respond.
She said other than to claim the right to free speech as justification for the comments and to advise he would not apologise to the council, Bydder had not engaged in the process.
Hill found Bydder’s comments breached the council’s code in two areas, respect and relationship to the public.
“The code applies at all times, not only in councillor Bydder’s official capacity but also as a representative of council and the wider community.”
Hill said councillors had a public profile and their conduct in any public setting had the potential to undermine their reputation as elected members and in turn the reputation of the council - which she said Bydder’s comments did.
She did not accept Bydder’s suggestion he hadn’t interacted with the public, because his submission was public and he knew it could be published online.
She said while Bydder had the right to freedom of expression, the code - which he agreed to when he became a councillor in 2022 - restricted the manner in which he expressed that opinion.
Hill said an expletive used by Bydder was one that “most reasonable members of the public would consider highly confronting, and disparaging comments of a personal nature in relation to a senior public official”.
The other words were widely considered to be derogatory and discriminatory about people with disabilities.
Several of the complainants called for Bydder to resign.
Hill recommended if the council agreed with her findings, it should censure Bydder, require him to attend relevant training and work with a mentor, and that he apologise to O’Regan, even though she had not sought an apology.
It also recommended he make a public apology to a disability organisation, but Hill said if Bydder was unwilling to accept the recommendations then the council should invite Bydder to consider whether he is suited to the role of an elected member.
Bydder wrote to council chief executive Lance Vervoot last week pointing out that complaints about former councillor Dave Macpherson over offensive language, which Bydder said were rejected because Macpherson was acting in his private capacity - established a clear precedent.
He said he had asked the council for detail around that under the Official Information Act and this had not been provided, denying him the chance to properly argue his case.
A complainant, who did not want to be named, told RNZ they were disappointed with Bydder’s handling of the investigation after he released Hill’s report to another media organisation.
“Having read the report it’s abundant that he’s learnt nothing from this experience. And he’s breached the entire process by releasing the report to the media prior to the council meeting.”
