The makeup of the CCC’s CEO Performance and Employment committee is wrong and councillors should revisit it if they want their future monitoring of the CEO to be trusted.
In 1924, Lord Hewart the then Lord Chief Justice of England said, “Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done”. In this case justice is the need for confidence in the democratic process. Without this confidence the public, who voiced their dissatisfaction in the council processes during the last election campaign, will continue to distrust the institution and those who lead it.
At the council meeting last week, a recommendation was before them for the CEO committee to be made up of Jamie Gough, Sam MacDonald, Pauline Cotter, and the mayor.
Melanie Coker referred to an email which had been sent by Jamie Gough to the CEO during the election campaign. She was completely correct in raising this appalling email.
The Press reported on the debate https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/130355955/first-proper-council-meeting-approves-new-portfolios-following-accusations-of-bias
Councillor Melanie Coker was critical of the makeup of the chief executive performance and employment committee, which makes recommendations to the council on the chief executive’s salary.
“It’s interesting that councillor James Gough, who invited chief executive Dawn Baxendale to a dinner with himself, mayoral candidate Phil Mauger and councillor Sam MacDonald, are creating a chief executive performance committee.
“I feel that is clearly a biased grouping of people to be on a CEO performance committee.”
Coker was referring to an email Gough sent on August 3 inviting Baxendale to a dinner meeting to place “bets” on who would win seats at the election and discuss future priorities. The email was also signed by Mauger and MacDonald.
Deputy mayor Pauline Cotter, who was also on the committee, asked the council to add councillor Jake McLellan to its membership, and it agreed.
Coker wanted another councillor appointed to make it an even grouping.
What the Press did not mention was that not only should the committee set the CEO’s salary they also need to set her KPI’s which must be agreed to by the full council.
When the Councillors moved an amendment which recommended a change to the membership of the committee, the mayor, councillors Gough and MacDonald all voted against the call. They were the only ones who did so. This control and command behaviour is precisely why this committee composition should be revisited.
Let us now revisit the email sent by Jamie Gough at 11.11pm on August 3. Note the email was sent from, and to, non-council emails other than the one to Dawn Baxendale:
From: James Gough <james@gough.net.nz>
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:11 PM
To: dawn.baxendale@ccc.govt.nz <dawn.baxendale@ccc.govt.nz>
Cc: Sam MacDonald <sam@sammacdonald.co.nz>; phil.mauger@outlook.co.nz <phil.mauger@outlook.co.nz>
Subject: Dinner & Mutual Expectations
Hi Dawn,
Phil, Sam, and I have discussed and agreed a number of priorities which we would like to work with you to achieve next term should Phil be elected as Mayor, with a workable majority.
We are confident of as much; we believe unity on key foundation principals for next term – at best and even at an average case – will be entirely achievable. At a worst case, you can disregard it! Garry of course would have all the answers then anyway…
The three of us would like to get together with you sooner rather than later, at close of nominations, to discuss this further over dinner one evening. If this would be suitable, would either the evening of Sunday 14 August, or Monday 25 August work for you?
Alternatively we could do the following weekend?
Some sportsmen bets or light wages on various council seat predictions could be in order, for entertainment’s sake, however we primarily wish to discuss how you and the organisation can best be prepared to enable the direction we want to set to achieve our objectives to genuinely enable you in your role, and ultimately lift the performance, public trust, and reputation of council.
Let us know how you’re placed and speak soon.
Thanks,
James, Sam & Phil
An analysis of some sections of this inappropriate email from the people who now form the majority of the CEO’s monitoring committee:
- Phil, Sam, and I have agreed a number of priorities which we would like to work with you to achieve next term should Phil be elected as Mayor, with a workable majority.
This is not the way that council business should be conducted. The whole tone of the email smells of the right-to-rule and back-room deals. This sort of behaviour is precisely why so many people distrust politicians.
2.
Christchurch City Council’s CEO Performance and Employment Committee:
The makeup of the CCC’s CEO Performance and Employment committee is wrong and councillors should revisit it if they want their future monitoring of the CEO to be trusted.
In 1924, Lord Hewart the then Lord Chief Justice of England said, “Justice must not only be done, but must also be seen to be done”. In this case justice is the need for confidence in the democratic process. Without this confidence the public, who voiced their dissatisfaction in the council processes during the last election campaign, will continue to distrust the institution and those who lead it.
At the council meeting last week, a recommendation was before them for the CEO committee to be made up of Jamie Gough, Sam MacDonald, Pauline Cotter, and the mayor.
Melanie Coker referred to an email which had been sent by Jamie Gough to the CEO during the election campaign. She was completely correct in raising this appalling email.
The Press reported on the debate https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/130355955/first-proper-council-meeting-approves-new-portfolios-following-accusations-of-bias.
Councillor Melanie Coker was critical of the makeup of the chief executive performance and employment committee, which makes recommendations to the council on the chief executive’s salary.
“It’s interesting that councillor James Gough, who invited chief executive Dawn Baxendale to a dinner with himself, mayoral candidate Phil Mauger and councillor Sam MacDonald, are creating a chief executive performance committee.
“I feel that is clearly a biased grouping of people to be on a CEO performance committee.”
Coker was referring to an email Gough sent on August 3 inviting Baxendale to a dinner meeting to place “bets” on who would win seats at the election and discuss future priorities. The email was also signed by Mauger and MacDonald.
Deputy mayor Pauline Cotter, who was also on the committee, asked the council to add councillor Jake McLellan to its membership, and it agreed.
Coker wanted another councillor appointed to make it an even grouping.
What the Press did not mention was that not only should the committee set the CEO’s salary they also need to set her KPI’s which must be agreed to by the full council.
When the Councillors moved an amendment which recommended a change to the membership of the committee, the mayor, councillors Gough and MacDonald all voted against the call. They were the only ones who did so. This control and command behaviour is precisely why this committee composition should be revisited.
Let us now revisit the email sent by Jamie Gough at 11.11pm on August 3. Note the email was sent from, and to, non-council emails other than the one to Dawn Baxendale:
From: James Gough <james@gough.net.nz>
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:11 PM
To: dawn.baxendale@ccc.govt.nz <dawn.baxendale@ccc.govt.nz>
Cc: Sam MacDonald <sam@sammacdonald.co.nz>; phil.mauger@outlook.co.nz <phil.mauger@outlook.co.nz>
Subject: Dinner & Mutual Expectations
Hi Dawn,
Phil, Sam, and I have discussed and agreed a number of priorities which we would like to work with you to achieve next term should Phil be elected as Mayor, with a workable majority.
We are confident of as much; we believe unity on key foundation principals for next term – at best and even at an average case – will be entirely achievable. At a worst case, you can disregard it! Garry of course would have all the answers then anyway…
The three of us would like to get together with you sooner rather than later, at close of nominations, to discuss this further over dinner one evening. If this would be suitable, would either the evening of Sunday 14 August, or Monday 25 August work for you?
Alternatively we could do the following weekend?
Some sportsmen bets or light wages on various council seat predictions could be in order, for entertainment’s sake, however we primarily wish to discuss how you and the organisation can best be prepared to enable the direction we want to set to achieve our objectives to genuinely enable you in your role, and ultimately lift the performance, public trust, and reputation of council.
Let us know how you’re placed and speak soon.
Thanks,
James, Sam & Phil
An analysis of some sections of this inappropriate email from the people who now form the majority of the CEO’s monitoring committee:
- Phil, Sam, and I have agreed a number of priorities which we would like to work with you to achieve next term should Phil be elected as Mayor, with a workable majority.
This is not the way that council business should be conducted. The whole tone of the email smells of the right-to-rule and back-room deals. This sort of behaviour is precisely why so many people distrust politicians.
2. The three of us would like to get together with you sooner rather than later, at close of nominations, to discuss this further over dinner one evening. [A later email invited the CEO to bring along her husband]
Baxendale responded to this inappropriate email inviting them to meet in her office.
If it was for Mayoral candidates, why did she meet with Gough and MacDonald as well. Why did Mauger not meet Baxendale on his own?
3. Some sportsmen bets or light wages on various council seat predictions could be in order, for entertainment’s sake,
This is probably the most offensive element of the whole letter. That these elected reps would even contemplate inviting their only employee, the CEO, to gamble on who might be elected by the citizens of this city is staggering. It stinks of old boys’ smoke-filled clubs where power is gambled over a decent game of cards and a good single malt whisky.
It’s worrying that an elected rep in 2022 would write in a tone which would have fitted perfectly into 19th century politics. Is this how these three view the Council as an institution and us as the ratepayers?
4. We want to set to achieve our objectives to genuinely enable you in your role, and ultimately lift the performance, public trust, and reputation of council.
Having proposed meeting away from the Council. Having sent this from a private email address to other private email addresses. They then invited the CEO, and her husband, to join their tidy little cabal. Then they camouflage their motivations as wanting to lift the public trust of the population in this city toward the CCC. What place ethics in public life?
Then Phil Mauger said on TV that he didn’t read this until the meeting. If this was correct, how did he know that it was on and when to turn up?
Next week, in the interests of brevity this week, I will analyse the issues the 3 people just appointed to this CEO committee raised with the CEO when they met her as requested in their email.
What should be the role of the CEO committee:
The council has one employee. The CEO appoints all staff. This relationship must be monitored with diligence. I’m sure the CEO would want this to be a professional relationship rather than a group who attempted to influence her having bets on, in a smoke-filled room at the Canterbury Club. It’s in the CEO’s interests for the relationship to be professional. And ours as ratepayers paying her salary.
The committee’s key function is to set the CEO KPI’s, getting them affirmed by the full council, and monitoring the performance against these. This committee should have a balance of opinions from around the council table, including the mayor. They should meet with the CEO to agree on her KPI’s. These should be adopted by the full council. 4 times a year they should meet to measure performance against the KPI’s assisted in their role by an outside HR specialist. Preferably not the one involved in the CEO’s appointment. After each quarter they should report to the full council on progress.
The sort of issues which should be on CEO’s KPI’s could be:
- Citizens survey results.
- Staff satisfaction results.
- Financial results including capital spending.
- Implementation of strategic planning.
- Service targets and agreed Levels of Service.
- Any additional monitoring which elected reps would like specially attended to.
Since the current CEO has been in office some of these items have headed southwards. They should be carefully monitored and analysed.
This account is an appalling display of people in authority blatantly plotting to subvert and manipulate Council processes. With their actions these Councilors, the Mayor and the CEO are forever compromised There has to be public withdrawal by the CEO of the intentions articulated in Gough’s letter, and an apology from all involved. Even then, the CEO can never again be trusted as it appears from the communications promulgated so far, that she opted not to shut down this approach from the three stooges. Seems like the only matter not traversed in the communications, was how would this special group represent a value proposition for the ratepayers of Christchurch. And if the CEO is as competent and incisive as the media make her out to be, why would she need to have a select group of businessmen smooth the path for her??
We can not have New Zealand’s second largest city managed one way for the ratepayers, and another way for a distinct subset of elected people.
And lastly, just who is the CEO. This woman was selected to come here from the UK, and was therefore presenting a stunning lineup of prior employment and related academic qualifications which trumped anything available in New Zealand – sorry, just don’t believe that.