Why am I not surprised that Helen Clark was involved in the initial debacle. This feels quite similar to what is going on in the USA albeit on a different scale. USA - Flood the country with immigrants and then allow them to vote. Our version is put young (indoctrinated) people into our councils so the agenda can continue it's roll out.
It's even worse than that, Peter, in that the councillors voted 7-all, including the mayor's vote, and then the mayor purported to use a casting vote to carry the motion. There is NO casting vote in local authority meetings. The Local Government Act is crystal-clear on that. Clause 24(2) of Schedule 7 states:
"...the mayor or chairperson or other person presiding at the meeting -
(a) has a deliberative vote; and
(b) in the case of an equality of votes, does not have a casting vote (and therefore the act or question is defeated and the status quo is preserved)."
The Council's standing orders reference this clause but state the exact opposite, claiming that the mayor does have a casting vote.
This is, at best, stunning incompetence, as the Council cannot write a standing order that contravenes the law.
The decision taken through the casting vote is accordingly invalid.
One also wonders how many other illegal decisions on divisive matters have been forced through on a casting vote.
Nicely put Peter. I have decided that as a ratepayer I want to vote for council representatives, and Iwi representatives for Maori should be consultants only, separate from elected Councillors who represent the voting public. So I will try and preserve democracy by voting against Maori Wards, because Maori have been consulted long before Wards were introduced.
It's even worse than that, Peter, in that the councillors voted 7-all, including the mayor's vote, and then the mayor purported to use a casting vote to carry the motion. There is NO casting vote in local authority meetings. The Local Government Act is crystal-clear on that. Clause 24(2) of Schedule 7 states:
"...the mayor or chairperson or other person presiding at the meeting -
(a) has a deliberative vote; and
(b) in the case of an equality of votes, does not have a casting vote (and therefore the act or question is defeated and the status quo is preserved)."
The Council's standing orders reference this clause but state the exact opposite, claiming that the mayor does have a casting vote.
This is, at best, stunning incompetence, as the Council cannot write a standing order that contravenes the law.
The decision taken through the casting vote is accordingly invalid.
One also wonders how many other illegal decisions on divisive matters have been forced through on a casting vote.
Why am I not surprised that Helen Clark was involved in the initial debacle. This feels quite similar to what is going on in the USA albeit on a different scale. USA - Flood the country with immigrants and then allow them to vote. Our version is put young (indoctrinated) people into our councils so the agenda can continue it's roll out.
It's even worse than that, Peter, in that the councillors voted 7-all, including the mayor's vote, and then the mayor purported to use a casting vote to carry the motion. There is NO casting vote in local authority meetings. The Local Government Act is crystal-clear on that. Clause 24(2) of Schedule 7 states:
"...the mayor or chairperson or other person presiding at the meeting -
(a) has a deliberative vote; and
(b) in the case of an equality of votes, does not have a casting vote (and therefore the act or question is defeated and the status quo is preserved)."
The Council's standing orders reference this clause but state the exact opposite, claiming that the mayor does have a casting vote.
This is, at best, stunning incompetence, as the Council cannot write a standing order that contravenes the law.
The decision taken through the casting vote is accordingly invalid.
One also wonders how many other illegal decisions on divisive matters have been forced through on a casting vote.
Nicely put Peter. I have decided that as a ratepayer I want to vote for council representatives, and Iwi representatives for Maori should be consultants only, separate from elected Councillors who represent the voting public. So I will try and preserve democracy by voting against Maori Wards, because Maori have been consulted long before Wards were introduced.
It's even worse than that, Peter, in that the councillors voted 7-all, including the mayor's vote, and then the mayor purported to use a casting vote to carry the motion. There is NO casting vote in local authority meetings. The Local Government Act is crystal-clear on that. Clause 24(2) of Schedule 7 states:
"...the mayor or chairperson or other person presiding at the meeting -
(a) has a deliberative vote; and
(b) in the case of an equality of votes, does not have a casting vote (and therefore the act or question is defeated and the status quo is preserved)."
The Council's standing orders reference this clause but state the exact opposite, claiming that the mayor does have a casting vote.
This is, at best, stunning incompetence, as the Council cannot write a standing order that contravenes the law.
The decision taken through the casting vote is accordingly invalid.
One also wonders how many other illegal decisions on divisive matters have been forced through on a casting vote.