Horizons Regional councillor Elijah Pue has been cleared of breaching conflict-of-interest rules after an independent legal review found he had no financial interest in a Ngā Wai Tōtā work programme decision.
The review by law firm Simpson Grierson concluded Pue’s participation in the decision on May 26 was lawful. It found that speaking on the item, moving resolutions and voting on them did not breach legislation.
Pue is the Māori constituency councillor for the part of the Horizons region affected by Ngā Wai Tōtā.
The complaints arose from Pue’s cultural and governance connections to central North Island iwi Ngāti Rangi.
Two public complaints alleged he had a conflict because of his affiliation with Ngāti Rangi and governance roles, including as a trustee of Te Tōtarahoe o Paerangi Trust, which appoints a representative to Ngā Wai Tōtā.
The review found those connections existed but did not amount to a disqualifying pecuniary conflict or unlawful bias. It also found no basis for invalidating the council’s decision.
“Looking at all the circumstances and the context I could see there wasn’t a level of conflict or impartiality,” the law firm’s Jonathan Salter told councillors.
At a council meeting in Palmerston North on Tuesday, Pue said the investigation confirmed his position that he had acted appropriately.
But he said he was disappointed by the process that led to the investigation, particularly because the original concern came from a complainant who asked to remain anonymous.
“What troubles me is that council moved quickly to protect the privacy of the person raising concerns before first considering the merits of those concerns, or the impact that process would have on the person who was the subject of them,” Pue told the council.
The complaints were received in an email to councillor Gordon McKellar and a text message received by council chair Nikki Riley.
Pue said he understood anonymity had been requested because a complainant feared being disadvantaged in a Resource Management Act process.
He asked why an anonymous communication had been sufficient to trigger an external investigation at ratepayer expense.
“What was the basis upon which ratepayer funds were committed to engaging a lawyer to investigate a matter that could have been resolved by simply asking the relevant questions in the first place?”
Councillor Jono Naylor also said he was concerned at the time and energy being put into addressing anonymous complaints.
“We can’t do this every time we receive an anonymous text.”
Pue said he did not object to the investigation.
“If questions are raised about my conduct, integrity or decision-making, then those matters should be examined.”
However, he said the concerns could have been raised directly with him.
He also raised concerns about what he described as inconsistent treatment of councillors.
Pue said another councillor had declared an interest in relation to the same agenda item but had not been subject to an equivalent complaint or external investigation.
“In my case, I declared a conflict in writing, I declared it again at the meeting and explained the extent of it, and the matter progressed all the way to a formal investigation at the ratepayer’s expense.”
Pue said he had not received an explanation that accounted for the difference in approach.
The review said the underlying decision in May involved funding for Ngā Wai Tōtā.
A key matter was a recommendation on the council’s financial commitment to the Ngā Wai Tōtā work programme and the development of Te Tāhoratanga, the catchment policy document associated with natural-resource management.
The review said Pue was clearly “interested” in the issue through his iwi affiliations, governance responsibilities, support for Ngā Wai Tōtā and his role as the Māori constituency councillor for the relevant area.
But Salter said that was not a disqualifying conflict. Cultural connections were not considered financial interests and the circumstances did not create a serious appearance of bias.
The review concluded that a court would be unlikely to invalidate the council’s decision because the matter was administrative and linked to statutory obligations.
It said the council’s commitment was an ongoing policy obligation reflected in its planning documents and that Pue’s constituency and iwi connections were publicly understood.
After the meeting, Pue said he wanted to get back to work.
“I’m an elected member, I’ve got work to get on with and a community to represent, and I need to do that without interruption.”
The complaints remained in the public-excluded section of the agenda during the meeting but councillors agreed they would be made publicly available.
Council chief executive Michael McCartney said it was appropriate to have the complaints considered independently.
“I felt it was prudent to have a level of surety around the process, so that the matter can be put to bed with real confidence.”
LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air
