Sorry seems the hardest word for Upper Hutt council

Friday, 24 November 2023

Upper Hutt City Council has wrongly claimed it had followed advice from the Ombudsman and issued an apology to a local resident, Logan McLean.

The council subsequently issued the apology, after being asked by The Post to provide proof that it had done so.

McLean had run a long running campaign over noise complaints associated with the Farrah’s bread factory in Silverstream.

In March, the council issued an apology to complainants after an independent review found that council staff had not taken noise complaints seriously, despite spending $250,000 on testing the noise levels, and had been too soft in their dealings with Farrah’s.

The March apology came after a damning review by lawyer Linda Clark of Dentons Kensington Swan, who made a series of wide ranging recommendations, including the need for council staff to undergo training in the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.

McLean’s latest victory came after the Ombudsman ordered the council to apologise over a complaint regarding the results of a community survey. He had asked the council for the results of a survey of residents’ views of the council, which he believed painted politicians in poor light.

McLean believed the survey had not been made available to the public due to political interference, prior to the October 2022 election.

He complained to the Ombudsman over the delay in releasing the survey results to him.

Chief Ombudsman Peter Boshier ruled that there was no evidence of political interference but recommended that the council apologise to McLean for the delay in responding to his request.

This week, McLean was angered to read in the agenda of the council’s risk and assurance committee that the council’s interim chief executive had issued the apology.

He told The Post he did not attend the council meeting on Wednesday because he was disillusioned by the way he had been treated by council officers.

Prior to the meeting, he had written to the committee chair, Chris Carson, pointing out the mistake in the agenda.

“I think it is important that the committee be aware that no such apology has ever been received by the complainant. I am particularly concerned, as this is far from the first time that this committee has been provided incorrect information relating to Ombudsman investigations and their outcomes.”

On Thursday, The Post asked the council for evidence that it had apologised to McLean.

Three hours later, a copy of a letter dated that day - Thursday November 23 - was received, from acting chief executive Kate Thomson.

“On behalf of the Council, | would like to apologise for our failure to respond to your first request as soon as reasonably practicable, as required by the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987.”

McLean said he was not surprised as it pointed to a larger problem in the council.

“It is so disappointing that the Upper Hutt City Council are continually failing to to meet the required standards of transparency, yet no one appears to to be prepared to fix what is clearly a deeply ingrained cultural issue.”

Thomson subsequently acknowledged that it had been wrong to claim that the apology had been sent.

The council had been in the “process” of drawing up the apology, she said.

“Regardless, the issuance (and receipt by Mr McLean) of the apology is overdue and we acknowledge that.”

Elected members were not aware that the apology had not been issued, she said.

The report had been written with the expectation that by the time the meeting took place, the issue of the apology would have been resolved, she said.

Chris Carson did not respond to a request to comment.