Will the HBRC claw back Andrew Newman’s pay rise?

Fenton "Jong-un" Wilson

Fenton “Jong-un” Wilson

In April last year we posted about the extremely dodgy Hawke’s Bay Regional Council providing a massive pay increase for their CE, Andrew Newman.

If there is one ratbag that should resign over the failure of the dodgy socialist dam it is Andrew Newman, the CE of the HBRC.

This man is a disgrace, having wasted $13.2m of ratepayers and taxpayers money on a project that was so deeply flawed that the council was warned repeatedly over many years that their half witted approach to nutrients management was never going to be acceptable.

Instead he gets a massive pay-rise which takes him well into the 1% and makes him one of the very highest paid people in Hawkes Bay.

The council came under fire in February when it emerged it had approved an $84,000 back-dated pay rise for HBRIC CEO Andrew Newman.

Mr Newman, who stepped aside as the regional council’s chief executive to drive the Ruataniwha project, currently receives a $380,000-a-year pay package.

The pay rise was a disgrace at the time because only months earlier an independent evaluation had said Newman’s relationships with key stakeholders were not good and he only deserved a 2% pay rise.

The dodgy Hawke’s Bay Regional Council pushed through the pay rise regardless, without informing new councillors of this independent advice.  

If Andrew Newman had been successful in getting the dam built there may have been some merit in paying him a vast amount of money. But he hasn’t been.

Lets look at the failures on the dodgy socialist dam so far:

  1. External investors Trustpower and Ngai Tahu pulled out of investing.
  2. The council’s own model, the Tukituki River Instream Model, which was never adequately peer reviewed, was only released due to high court intervention.
  3. At the Board of Inquiry the TRIM model author admitted it was not fit for purpose.
  4. The BOI did not let the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council turn the Tukituki Toxic in its draft decision, so the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council got the decision changed.
  5. The High Court gave the appellants to this decision victory on all 12 points and referred the decision back to the BOI.
  6. The High Court awarded costs to the appellants.
  7. The Hawke’s Bay Regional Council has been totally unwilling to release confirmed water sign ups amid rumours that they are not getting much water sold.
  8. The investment company will run out of money by the end of March unless they get a fresh injection.
  9. Relationships with key stakeholders are rumoured to be even worse now than before as the key stakeholders know they will beat the Hawke’s Bay Regional Council every time they go to court.

Chairman Fenton “Jong-Un” Wilson and Councillors Scott and Dick should be held to account for giving this massive pay-rise without it being based on any success.

They would be wise to carefully consider their options before there is a serious witch hunt to find out why the council has wasted so much money on the dodgy socialist dam.

 


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.

  • Murray Smith

    For the second time today.

  • cows4me

    They should go ahead with the dam, just make sure the dam is down stream from the HBRC.

    • MaidenMarewa

      You should see the streams near HBRC. The one that is about 20 mins walk from their office is so green and polluted it is disgusting and smells really bad. There is another about a further 10 minutes walk that is so polluted it stinks even on the coldest winter day. They don’t give a damn about what is in their own front yard.

  • Luis Cannon

    Many thanks to Whaleoil for keeping this issue alive. Whatever the outcome (dam or no dam) a valuable historical record is being created. Where failings are occurring, any cost over runs and cronyism including attempted bypassing of legal requirements can be sheeted home to those involved.

33%