Letters to Editor
Seat debate
A Waipā District Council employee has advised two ratepayers that their time and effort and small amount of money restoring seven old seats at War Memorial Park has been in vain. The council would still spend $58,000 of ratepayer money replacing selected seats, including the restored ones, and rubbish bins.
Over the past few months with what I have been reading and hearing I gained the impression that it is council staff dictating or influencing how Waipā district should be run and that is perhaps upsetting some of our elected councillors and community board members. But maybe I am wrong.
After penning you the above letter relating to your story “Take your seat” (Te Awamutu News May 29) I thought I would walk down to the War Memorial Park to have a look at these restored seats for myself. What a good job these guys had done, but lo and behold I ascertained that as soon as your paper was published, council were down at the park and cut the steel supports of the next seat these men were going to work on and so no seat was there to be repaired.
This is not the behaviour one would expect from our council staff, surely.
Darryl Nix
Te Awamutu
People who care
Many thanks to The News for enlightening us ratepayers on the recent happenings at the Memorial Gardens. Thank goodness for the practical people featured in your front page article who take an interest in these gardens and all that dwells within.
These folk are certainly worthwhile citizens and care not only for the gardens but also for the almost out of control spending of the present and previous councils. Enlighten us more please.
Janet Smith
Te Pahu
Transparency
Andrew Bydder in “No More Smoke and Mirrors” (The News May 27) raises important concerns about the lack of transparency in local government, a matter that is not only evident in our own Waipā District Council but also across many councils throughout New Zealand.
Local councils exist to manage regions effectively and to provide essential services to their communities. However, their core responsibilities are increasingly being sidetracked by “pet projects” and initiatives that fall outside their primary purpose with little or no visibility or accountability.
While I fully support Andrew’s position, I believe it does not go far enough. Unfortunately, when residents request information from the Waipā District Council under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA), much of the content is heavily redacted. With all due respect, the council is not the GCSB or the New Zealand Police. There is no justifiable reason for such excessive secrecy from an organisation that is supposed to serve the residents and ratepayers of Waipā.
To be clear, I understand that some limitations must exist—particularly when it comes to personally identifiable information, staff-related matters, and contracts that are still under negotiation. But beyond these specific and justifiable exceptions, the default approach should be full disclosure to residents and ratepayers, not just the “media”.
The residents and ratepayers of Waipā and indeed all of New Zealand deserve unfiltered access to the truth. Currently, too many meetings are held behind closed doors, and information is withheld, making it nearly impossible for the public to see the full picture. (Abridged)
Ian Hayton
Cambridge
Road names
Editor’s note – we have received considerable feedback to our question: what do you think? about the debate over road names in Waipā. Watch out for further coverage on this issue next week. To publish a letter, 300 words to editor@goodlocal.nz
Letters to Editor. Photo: Pixabay
