The CCO should reconstitute its Board of Directors
Thakur Ranjit Singh
Auckland, August 22, 2020
As a senior alumni of former National Minister Steven Joyce at Massey University, and an MBA postgraduate student at Palmerston North campus in 1982, I consider myself more than qualified to comment on the governance issue of Auckland Council, dubious events at Watercare and questions on fiduciary duties of its Board.
As somebody who sat on boards of a Bank, Suva City Council and a Media organisation in Fiji, among others. I consider myself more than qualified to comment on this issue.
With my past trade, commerce, industry and real-life experience, I was saddened to see fellow Fijian, Chief Executive of Watercare Raveen Jaduram made a fall guy of a dysfunctional organisation, a questionable Board and support leadership from Auckland Council.
From the thick smoke emitting from Watercare crisis, the only light seems to be coming from a brave and conscientious Councillor who seem to have conscience and guts to say that the emperor has no clothes on.
Councillor Daniel Newman, who had worked at the Watercare praised Mr Jaduram for a grand job he had done in the past. While the fall guy was primarily targeted for his huge salary, however the Mayor, Council Chief Executive and the Board of Watercare are equally to blame for planning failures. Ultimately, Watercare Chief Executive is not accountable; the ball stops at the Mayor of Auckland and the Chair of the Board.
Pertinent questions
As a migrant from Fiji who attended university in New Zealand in 1980s, I was perturbed at the lack of any academic teachings of my time in the current management of Auckland Council.
Have good management theories of yesteryears gone obsolete now? Are overpaid and highly qualified officials and board members at Auckland Council and Watercare so blatantly clueless, incompetent and ignorant about good management practices in strategic management, forward planning and good perceptive governance?
Boards in Fiji required visionary short-term (current year) mid-term (five years) and long-term (ten years) plans with proper brainstorming and assessment of exhaustive environmental factors.
Among others, this included SWOT Analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats) for strategic planning. The fact that the big brains in Auckland’s main city failed these basics in management shames their universities and business schools for having alumni with questionable qualifications and aptitude for the respective positions.
This applies to the Mayor, the Chairwoman and board members of Watercare and former Chief Executive of Auckland Council who all revealed very wanting management and leadership skills and aptitude in letting down Watercare.
Appalling and disgraceful
What is further disgraceful and appalling is the manner in which poor Kiwi Fiji Indian was thrown in front of a bus by the people who all deserved to go under the same bus. The career and professional Chairwoman Margaret Devlin and her Board owed a fiduciary duty of care to safeguard interests of Auckland ratepayers.
Together with the Mayor and (former) Chief Executive of Auckland Council, they all failed us.
Were they sleeping on the job while Auckland drowned in a drought?
I suggest that the Chamber of Commerce, the Institute of Directors or the relevant organisation to audit the action, or lack of it, of the Board of Watercare, and its dereliction of its fiduciary duties. And business schools in Universities need to use this debacle at Watercare as a case study on how not to run such a crucial organisation.
In fact Councillor Newman very aptly described the Watercare Board:
The board has been as active as an Easter Island statue. There has been a complete absence of energy and it’s been left to the governing body of council to work with senior management within Watercare to fill the gap
Did the Board and Auckland Council ask and seek the right and prudent questions and answers? Newman has also questioned the suitability of this Hamilton-based professional Board Chair who he claims had no interest in Auckland and sits on many other boards outside Auckland.
Multiple roles
New Zealand Herald reported in its August 19, 2020 issue that Ms Devlin is paid $108,000 when the median of similar Chair of Director’s fee is $60,000. It also reported that this professional Board Chair is also involved with some other ten or so organisations:
As well as chairing Watercare, Ms Devlin is a director of Waikato Regional Airport, MetService, IT Partners Group, Aurora Energy, independent chairwoman of Waikato District Council’s Audit and Risk Committee, Chairwoman of Women in Infrastructure Network Advisory Board, Councillor at Waikato University, Deputy Chairwoman of Wintec, Chairwoman of Lyttelton Port Company, Director of Infrastructure New Zealand and Chairwoman of Hospice Waikato. Last month, the Tasman District Council appointed her to the board of Waimea Water.
Perhaps ratepayers of Auckland City need to ask the mayor how could a person involved with so many organisations with so many diverse interests be depended on to look after such a major City portfolio? And how could she do justice to this highly paid directorship with so many roles away from Auckland?
New Board for Watercare
Aucklanders would be justified to seek immediate removal of the whole Watercare Board which could not now be trusted to provide prudent direction to the incoming Chief Executive.
They already failed us miserably.
In other civilised City Councils, the poor-performing Chairperson and the Board, with the Chief Executive and the Mayor of Council would have lost their jobs.
Unfortunately, in a wanting culture at Auckland Council, a lesser Chief Executive is made the fall guy of an organisation where the overseers were all sleeping on the job while the dams ran dry.
Thakur Ranjit Singh is a media commentator, a journalist and community worker. He runs his blog, Fiji Pundit.’ Email: thakurji@xtra.co.nz. The above article reflects the personal views of the author.
