Comments on: Will “Auckland Transport” survive?

By: ingolfson

ingolfson — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 20:36:54 +0000

“there will be plenty of good candidates, but the problem I see is that people will be be given the job along political lines.”

So the first Auckland Council (who will hopefully be both a bit more progressive, and mightily pissed off about being given little say in their own city) should “clean house”. Quick.

By: admin

admin — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 10:00:13 +0000

Ah damn rtc and here I was waiting for the call!

By: rtc

rtc — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 09:56:42 +0000

@cambennet – there will be plenty of good candidates, but the problem I see is that people will be be given the job along political lines. Joyce is not going to fill the board with people like jarbury, it will be filled with like-minded people that share Joyce’s views. Do you really think that after all the crap he has had to deal with this year with ARTA and ARC disagreeing with his funding priorities that he would emply people who hold such views?

By: CamBennett

CamBennett — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:41:40 +0000

Sorry the edit option is not coming up so i’ll finish in another post. My original point was that they can de dismissed any time and don’t get a payout. However you are quite right Max i’m sure there will be plenty of candidates for the job, it’s also a good point you make about NZTA. I didn’t think about that.

By: CamBennett

CamBennett — Tue, 09 Mar 2010 00:37:27 +0000

“though as noted, they usually get golden parachutes” – Exactly my point.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:35:36 +0000

Yeah I saw that. Pretty ignorant reponse if you ask me: the whole point John is that this one will be HUGE and suck up over half of Auckland’s rates. That’s a bit different to some CCO managing a swimming pool.

By: max

max — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 21:59:54 +0000

John Key noted in today’s Herald that he wasn’t going to change much. “There’s already lots of CCO’s in the Auckland Region, so why should you worry” – that kind of stuff.

By: Jeremy Harris

Jeremy Harris — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 21:46:08 +0000

If they don’t make substantial changes, you will have 20 councillors sitting around with not much to do but raise an unholy stink 24/7 till it is changed…

By: max

max — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:46:10 +0000

To my non-lawyerly reading, the bill allows sacking of directors at any time, including long before their official term is up. It also says that they can have no expectation of a severance payment for dismissal.

This goes at least a little way of assuaging my fears with AT – but as others have noted, there’s still a lot wrong with it, and since there are no requirements for them to do X, Y and Z, even if we get an Auckland Transport that plays nice, they have no requirement to KEEP playing nice at any stage.

As for who would take such a job as director? Come on, CamBennet. There’s a lot of money and power right there, and corporate types can be hired and fired any time anyway (though as noted, they usually get golden parachutes). Further, the same situation (as far as I know) also exists at NZTA’s board, and they have even retained some of the Labour appointees, some year or so after National came into power. So the ACTUAL turnover is unlikely to be as high as you make it out.

By: admin

admin — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 19:32:02 +0000

A director isn’t really an employee though…. so different rules may apply there.