Good to know that it’s the “systems” that do all the work and make the decisions (or not). So if we can get the “systems” operating properly we can replace the CEO and staff with AI and robots. Would be much cheaper, more reliable and much quicker response times.
"Systemic failure"--If I recall correctly, that was the exact phrase used to justify why nobody got into trouble over Cave Creek, some thirty years ago now.
You write "Elected members have a responsibility to scrutinise what is in front of them, even more so when it involves risk to life." However, as an ex-staffer at a council, what you fail to take into account is the sheer ineptitude and self-interest (nay personal greed and ambition) of elected members. In the council I worked for there would have been 1-3 elected members with expertise in one specific area, farming, or if one is in luck, the environment. The remainder were a collective of ambitious clods, or wives of farmers who cared about the community but had little to offer barring being nice (though at our council some expressed a considerable amount of racism). None had any experience beyond marriage or a small business, none had any relevant professional expertise in governance, auditing, finance, risk management, project management, engineering, town planning, business strategy or law. None had been on any board worthy of note. Quite a few were so old and inept they feel asleep at my Audit and Risk meetings. Their only contribution to the day was to snore. Every election, voters have to choose from which clods are the best from a group of clods. Then we have overly ambitious Chief Executives (CE) and their coterie of wannabe CEs - engineers who can't make it in the private sector, cliquey 'lifer' administrators, and an assortment of other commercial sector failures all vying for cradle-to-grave placement on NZ's local government job scheme. They easily pulled the wool over the eyes of the EM clods. No-one really knew why they were there, or what they should be doing. Projects worth 150K got 1M in budget, then hailed as a success when they came in at 250K. No one is interested in the hard questions or doing the hard tasks, only ticking checkboxes in the annual report. It's kumbaya around the boardroom table (Zoom now) and then a photo opportunity opening a toilet block or jetty. This is repeated ad-nauseam around the country with varying degrees of activism or or ideology. Local government is a failed experiment from mother England and it needs to GO. To be replaced by professionals who are continuously measured for performance and quality standards - with community and cultural input - who report back to central, or something else entirely new.
Grenfel chooses to ignore the fact that the 'terms of reference' that he wrote in partnership with the mayor specifically precluded the investigation and report from commenting on any individual or grouping liability or accountability.
So let me make it clear when the CEO refers to the report not attributing any specific blame to any individual or grouping that is not because there is none but because the report writer was not given permission or the framework to make any such recommendations or comment.
Would be extra embarrassing if you were a councilor on the Mauao management committee and received this report while being employed by the Crown owned research institute responsible for research and monitoring of geological hazards including land slides
GRENFEL & MAUAO TRUST BOTH KNEW JUNE 2025 OF THE RISK -
THEY HAD A MEETING ABOUT IT.
RESIGN GRENFEL.
RESIGN MATEMOANA MCDONALD
Good to know that it’s the “systems” that do all the work and make the decisions (or not). So if we can get the “systems” operating properly we can replace the CEO and staff with AI and robots. Would be much cheaper, more reliable and much quicker response times.
"Systemic failure"--If I recall correctly, that was the exact phrase used to justify why nobody got into trouble over Cave Creek, some thirty years ago now.
You write "Elected members have a responsibility to scrutinise what is in front of them, even more so when it involves risk to life." However, as an ex-staffer at a council, what you fail to take into account is the sheer ineptitude and self-interest (nay personal greed and ambition) of elected members. In the council I worked for there would have been 1-3 elected members with expertise in one specific area, farming, or if one is in luck, the environment. The remainder were a collective of ambitious clods, or wives of farmers who cared about the community but had little to offer barring being nice (though at our council some expressed a considerable amount of racism). None had any experience beyond marriage or a small business, none had any relevant professional expertise in governance, auditing, finance, risk management, project management, engineering, town planning, business strategy or law. None had been on any board worthy of note. Quite a few were so old and inept they feel asleep at my Audit and Risk meetings. Their only contribution to the day was to snore. Every election, voters have to choose from which clods are the best from a group of clods. Then we have overly ambitious Chief Executives (CE) and their coterie of wannabe CEs - engineers who can't make it in the private sector, cliquey 'lifer' administrators, and an assortment of other commercial sector failures all vying for cradle-to-grave placement on NZ's local government job scheme. They easily pulled the wool over the eyes of the EM clods. No-one really knew why they were there, or what they should be doing. Projects worth 150K got 1M in budget, then hailed as a success when they came in at 250K. No one is interested in the hard questions or doing the hard tasks, only ticking checkboxes in the annual report. It's kumbaya around the boardroom table (Zoom now) and then a photo opportunity opening a toilet block or jetty. This is repeated ad-nauseam around the country with varying degrees of activism or or ideology. Local government is a failed experiment from mother England and it needs to GO. To be replaced by professionals who are continuously measured for performance and quality standards - with community and cultural input - who report back to central, or something else entirely new.
Grenfel chooses to ignore the fact that the 'terms of reference' that he wrote in partnership with the mayor specifically precluded the investigation and report from commenting on any individual or grouping liability or accountability.
So let me make it clear when the CEO refers to the report not attributing any specific blame to any individual or grouping that is not because there is none but because the report writer was not given permission or the framework to make any such recommendations or comment.
Would be extra embarrassing if you were a councilor on the Mauao management committee and received this report while being employed by the Crown owned research institute responsible for research and monitoring of geological hazards including land slides