Council makes right decision

The Auckland Council voted down Richard Northey’s strikers support motion:

Auckland Council has voted down a motion supporting wharfies involved a long-running industrial dispute with the Ports of Auckland.

Today’s motion was put forward by councillor Richard Northey, chair of the council’s Accountability and Performance Committee. He wanted the council to say it would be ”appropriate and desirable” to call for a resumption of collective bargaining, and that the port’s proposal to make 292 staff redundant by contracting out their jobs was ”either undesirable or premature”.

But the mayor, several councillors and the council’s legal team said the council could not intervene. The port is run by a limited company, Auckland Council Investments, at arm’s length from the politicians.

Council lawyers made it clear the council could not intervene and thus was unable to support the resolutions. The port company was legally able to operate with independence.

”It’s not a CCO (council controlled organisation) – it’s expressly excluded under the Local Government Act from being a CCO. It is a wholly owned subsidiary ultimately owned by council,” a lawyer said.

”CCO-type obligations and frameworks do not apply to the port company itself. Business decisions therefore are made by the port company board and not by Auckland Council Investments (which owns the ports) or council as ultimate shareholder.”

 


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • If Cr Northey had any integrity, he would resign. He made a conscious decision to try and undermine Len Brown’s leadership, and failed. There is no wiggle-room for him.

    Of course, it’s highly unlikely that Cr Northey will resign; after all, turkeys don’t vote for an early Christmas, and he wouldn’t get invitations to all sorts of functions, like the opening of MP’s offices…

    Integrity; yeah right!

    • Jester

      Oh for a picture of Northey and Shearer having a cup of tea.

    • At the minimum an Official Censure for a very bad motion – at Maximum if there was utter negligence if the motion was to pass – a free sacking.

      I noticed Dick Quax posted in his facebook and hyper-linked to this thread – and I see Cllr Casey and Lee having a slagging match in the comments department (if I am not so lazy arsed I’ll get a screenshot). Talk about conduct unbecoming again…

  • johnopkb

    The Employment Relations Act 2000 (enacted by a Labour government) expressly limits bargaining to the parties, that is employers, employees, and unions.  No other party may lawfully intervene in a collective bargaining process.

    Cr Northey, of the Accountability and Performance Committee, is all “performance” and no “accountability”.  

  • jackwhite

    Of course they voted it down,if it goes the workers way then the council committee,and board for port would be looking for new jobs,not that they do much anyway 12 meetings for port a year and get 1800 each for each meeting,not bad job for the boys.And lens history which way he goes see ya later len HAHAHA

    • Jester

      Well it is 12 more days a year than you fuckers are going to work. :)

  • Penny Bright

    http://www.nbr.co.nz/article/port-stalls-redundancy-action-gb-112977#comments

    (Local Government) OIA request to UNELECTED Auckland Council CEO – Doug McKay (15 March 2012)

    “WHO GOVERNS THIS AUCKLAND $UPERCITY COUNCIL?

    ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OR THE UNELECTED COMMITTEE FOR AUCKLAND?
    What is driving this Ports Of Auckland dispute has been the Auckland
    Council Investment Limited’s ‘Key Performance Indicator’ (KPI) that
    ‘POAL’s ROE (Return On Equity) increases from 6.3% to 12% over the
    following 5 years by 30/06/2016”. Councillor Richard Northey,
    Chair of the Auckland Council Accountability and Performance Committee
    asked the Chief Executive of Auckland Council Investments Ltd (ACIL),
    Gary Swift in a letter dated 20 January 2012 asked: “2. What was the origin and justification for the above KPI? …” The answer from the Chief Executive of Auckland Council Investments Ltd (ACIL), Gary Swift in a letter dated 27 January 2012 : ” I’m not exactly sure where the return on equity target of 12% originated….. I think Doug McKay may have suggested 12% when he met with the POAL Board. ……”
    KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS IN STATEMENTS OF INTENT ARE ‘GOVERNANCE’
    MATTERS – TO BE DECIDED BY ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES – NOT THE UNELECTED
    CEO OF AUCKLAND COUNCIL, DOUG MCKAY, WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR
    ‘OPERATIONAL’ MATTERS. Please provide the following information which confirms:
    1) IN WHAT LAWFUL CAPACITY, AND ON WHOSE LAWFUL AUTHORITY DID YOU,
    UNELECTED CEO FOR AUCKLAND COUNCIL DOUG MCKAY MEET WITH THE POAL BOARD
    AND ‘SUGGEST’ A 12% RETURN ON EQUITY (ROE) KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR?
    2) PLEASE PROVIDE THE MINUTES OF ALL/ANY MEETINGS BETWEEN THE POAL
    BOARD/ THE ACIL BOARD AND YOURSELF AS CEO OF AUCKLAND COUNCIL WHERE A
    12% RETURN ON EQUITY (ROE) KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATOR WAS DISCUSSED.
    3) PLEASE CONFIRM WHETHER A 12% RETURN ON EQUITY (ROE) KEY PERFORMANCE
    INDICATOR WAS EVER DISCUSSED BETWEEN YOURSELF AS A MEMBER OF THE
    UNELECTED PRIVATE LOBBY GROUP – THE COMMITTEE FOR AUCKLAND – AND THE CEO
    OF PORTS OF AUCKLAND, TONY GIBSON, ALSO A MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE FOR
    AUCKLAND. 4) PLEASE PROVIDE THE INFORMATION WHICH CONFIRMS HOW
    MANY CONTRACTS HAVE BEEN AWARDED TO COMPANIES WHICH ARE MEMBERS OF THE
    COMMITTEE FOR AUCKLAND, FOR THE PROVISION OF GOODS, SERVICES OR PEOPLE,
    SINCE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE AUCKLAND TRANSITION AGENCY (ATA); THE
    ESTABLISHMENT OF THE AUCKLAND COUNCIL, AND/OR ANY OF THE FOLLOWING
    ‘COUNCIL CONTROLLED ORGANISATIONS’ (CCOs): ACIL RFA ATEED ACPL Auckland Transport Waterfront Auckland Watercare or any subsidiaries thereof …..” Penny Bright

    • Nisugo Neep

      Yes. Thank you Shiny for once more demonstrating to people the truth of the principle that, if you have something to say to an audience that has no interest in your opinion and does not agree with your argument, then SCREAMING AT THEM AND BERATING AT LENGTH will never fail to convince everyone that you are right. 

  • Ratchet

    TL:DR

    Please revise into paragraphs and learn the correct use of the caps lock.

  • Geez Penny – might need to reorganise the format of the letter into here so we can read it without screwing our eyes over on the way out.

    Legitimate questions though however 

  • Pingback: Auckland Council does have Leadership – unlike CTU « View of Auckland()

39%