Click photo to enlarge
Jim Harland
The Dunedin City Council took on Stop the Stadium's
processes at the Court of Appeal in Wellington this week,
claiming the group did not stick to the rules within its own
constitution.
That claim was denied by Stop the Stadium's counsel, who said
while internal documents had not been released to the
council, the rules had been followed.
Part of council chief executive Jim Harland's affidavit
questioned whether Stop the Stadium was legally entitled to
commence proceedings.
He said under the group's constitution, it could only begin
proceedings if the decision to do so was agreed by a
management committee at a meeting, and in accordance with the
constitution.
The council's solicitors requested the minutes in May, and
again in July, after receiving no response.
"That request was met with a response from the group's
barrister on July 31, advising `I will not be providing the
information you ask for'.
"The refusal of the group to provide the information must
call into question whether or not the group has acted in
accordance with the constitution, and accordingly, whether or
not the proceedings have been commenced properly.
"The failure to provide the information, which is neither
contentious or privileged, invites only one conclusion: Stop
the Stadium Inc failed to comply with its own constitution in
commencing both the High Court and Court of Appeal
proceedings."
Asked about the matter in the Court of Appeal on Tuesday,
Stop the Stadium counsel Len Andersen said the internal
workings of the group was "not an issue for the respondent".
Mr Andersen said a letter had been received from the
council's solicitors saying if Stop the Stadium did not show
internal documents it would be assumed they were not in order
and that would be drawn to the attention of the court.
"I think that's improper," Mr Andersen said.
There was "a considerable amount of heat in terms of the
personalities" within Stop the Stadium and there was content
in the minutes that had nothing to do with what the council
was requesting.
Mr Andersen told the court if it was concerned about the
issue, he could arrange an affidavit that would show
everything was done in the proper fashion.
Yes, another round of spin from the Council
I concur with MikeStk - amazing spin because they have been caught out. Let's try to divert attention is their ploy. And rich, indeed, that Mr Harland is concerned with STS sticking to their rules, when the Council has failed so miserably to do exactly that. And it isn't as if the public has not reminded them of it. But no, "we" know best and really there are just "pockets of dissent" (quote from the Mayor). Yeah, right. I hope the Council and its handling of this whole sorry affair of the stadium gets a right telling off by the Court of Appeal for the deviousness in the consultation process. I am told that 'devious' is not a nice word to use but do you know one that fits better?
A bit rich
Mr Harland's comments are a bit rich considering the number of times the council set its own rules and conditions for building the stadium and the blithely ignored them. Really this is just propaganda - clutching at straws and trying to spin the issue before they lose. The council knows it misrepresented its case in the local court and was probably pretty amazed it got away with it at the time.