Whats your thoughts on the Fish and Game election results now that they're out?
http://fishandgame.org.nz/elections-2015-results
Printable View
Whats your thoughts on the Fish and Game election results now that they're out?
http://fishandgame.org.nz/elections-2015-results
Disappointed to be honest. Hoping Hawkes Bay would have had a better turn out and the opportunity to clean house was used.
There certainly was more interest in the Southland election this year with numbers of voters up by a long way over previous elections. It would seem the call to vote being arranged behind the scenes worked. I'm disappointed that Brad and Lindsay missed out however 8 of the 10 current councillors who stood again got back on.
I SEE THAT YOU.L BE BLOODY GLAD YOU DIDNT GO THE HB ROUTE:D
YOU,VE GOT BIGGER WORRIES THAN THAT KIWI JAMESQuote:
Disappointed to be honest. Hoping Hawkes Bay would have had a better turn out and the opportunity to clean house was used.]
if the drop to 8 wasnt legally done ie motioned seconded and passed then things could get more complicated:D
beware the circling eastern vultures to.i make it 3 3 2 in the faction stakes give or take with bates love for eastern the most upsetting?Quote:
RN, Dave CENTRAL HAWKE’S BAY 340
DULEY, Greg NAPIER 267
MACKIE, James CENTRAL HAWKE’S BAY 241
NIBLETT, Jeff HASTINGS 223
LUMSDEN, John NAPIER 218
BATES, Bruce HASTINGS 206
MCINTOSH, Pete (Pete Mac) HASTINGS 205
WILLIAMS, Kevin HASTINGS 203
eastern staff yes eastern councill interference in hb no. hope the new blood can get hb back to its glory days.
hard luck workingman only 10 in it:XD:Quote:
MCKENZIE, Craig ASHBURTON 241
you,d a been a gamebird asset.
No need for us to drop the numbers, we were always going to have an election. Interesting to see the ex manager made it onto the HB Council. Don't know how effective he'll be considering it looks like the majority of the incumbents got back on.
interesting thought mike given he seems to have got the council dropped to 8 and frightened the crap out of the incumbents to the point of attempted character assasination and election smearing.
maths not your strong point mike 3 sitters got the elbow messrs boaler doulding and jobey.
Was it Alice...in wonderland...things got curiouser and curiouser...oooopsss...
more like what a tangled web we weave EeBees.
here a little exercise for you voters/hb licence buyers search the minutes from aprill to june and see if you can find where the councill meet and voted on the numbers drop. good luck cos it dont exist..why aprill cos thats when elections nz were told apparently you,l see for yourself why june comes into it;).
Have you lodged a complaint?
how you know that mikeQuote:
we were always going to have an election.
always mike :DQuote:
Have you lodged a complaint?
but bloody southland voters didnt listen to my hidden genius:O_O:
Had a response?
wealth good looks and hb complaints all queus i wont be at the front of mike.;)Quote:
Have you lodged a complaint?
Well done Mike and all those who were genuinely elected. Thanks also to those that stood but missed out. There is always next time, and hopefully there is a next time. It certainly seems to me that Head Office and the Tourism sector they serve are seeking conglomeration by hook or by crook. Less councils, less councillors, less hurdles. I see that tourism is nipping at the heals of Dairy for export earnings so perhaps less hurdles are required? One thing that irks me a little as a paid up member of my industry lobby group is that I pay for that lobby. With F&G I am taxed to support and expand a sector and in doing so placing more pressure on the very thing we are taxed to enjoy. Very ironic and clever.
:TT TT::TT TT: Sorry I can barely see through the smoke screen. :fighting: It was a pretty serious rift aye. As the new council will be privy to all relevant information on the confidentiality agreement etc etc this council is to some degree predictable- odd for an "election". And now we wait on the "audit" the HB chairman spoke of. This audit will show the same degree of value from Head Office as they placed on the election I suspect. Lets hold our breath together.
as long as the ''bullshit/audit tells me how the process to get to 8 was done and it was a council voted and consulted process,i,l be happy;) but so far no.ones saying and theres no ''paper trail''??
given what i,ve seen nz council technicly werent involved but they were informed of the intent and a lawyer consulted at the highest level.
so if the process was dodgy i get the feeling plausable deniability will rear its ugly head and hb councill ''doing as it sees fit in its own region''. will be the official line.
great leadership aint it?? drop to 8 ''do as you like'' shoot wild hen pheasant and ignore the party line on ''properties with special conditions /interests'' do as you like???personaly i think they should look at letting the next four highest vote candidates in before the excrement hits the proverbial:ORLY:
What are you talking about GSPF? I had an OIA request with NZF&G on the issue of the HB election- which has been answered and there is no mention of lawyers. Have you seen something that suggests lawyers have been involved in checking the process? Could you elaborate. I hardly think public officials would be deliberately misleading or lie.
What is it that you are specifically wanting to achieve through your posts here? Or rather, what can be achieved through your posts?
It seems to me that the voters have put on the 8 candidates that they wanted the most. You seem to now want the the next 4, or those who the voters wanted the least.
If it is a constitutional issue that you are raising, once again, be specific about what the breech is and how you intend to go about having it remedied.
In regards to the reduction to 8, "good men are few, one is worth ten thousand if he is the best".
there better be another election...some of us are paying attention...maybe not all the time, some much of the time...
@gsp follower...plausible deniability...seeing as they can all sign their names, I doubt that wimpish bollocks will gain any traction...be like shooting an overfed tame mallie if you ask me...
yes i can tim i have an email from one b johnson to one peter mac saying he,d consulted an office solicitor at doc head office who he names.
he goes onto say the HB COUNCILL can do this change themselves and notify warwick lampp of the decision.
problem is i can find no evidence or trail of the councill ever making that decision???
what i dont want is behind closed door decisions predicated on the thought that we dont know whats good for us?? after all we pay the bills and a countrywide licence gives us the right to expect every region to behave to the highest standard.Quote:
What is it that you are specifically wanting to achieve through your posts here? Or rather, what can be achieved through your posts?
It seems to me that the voters have put on the 8 candidates that they wanted the most
specificly i want to see that the decisions made are ,fair. consulted on,voted on or at least proposed and seconded and passed and there for all to see.if this flys who,s next more specificly i want to stalk up on the big rawhiti damn like i used to without having to hire a guide or pay an access fee or have them driven over me.
[the arguement i had over southland and subgauge lead, the lack of the consultation process
i was am prepared to live with either outcome there]
yes tahr but no man/councill is a island if it is used as a precedent to pass the shaft on down the line.look at easterns hen pheasant take and put and take ducksQuote:
n regards to the reduction to 8, "good men are few, one is worth ten thousand if he is the best".
certainly shouldnt the voters/licence buyers have had the same information and opportunity to be consulted on something as big as the first ever councill numbers drop ever??since voters dont know who each other is voting for.Quote:
It seems to me that the voters have put on the 8 candidates that they wanted the most
what diff would returning the councill to the the 12[ out of respect to the next 4 highest polling candidates and thier voters] untill this is adequetly sorted?? would seem less complicated than having to stir up the minister to get another election and or bringing eastern councill in to take over by stealth. they do already know where the money is or is going tho:psychotic::O_O:;)..??
stealth for the wealth...
thats what i dont get either EeBees how come your reasonably flush but you cant get keep staff??
it sure as hell aint the climate or working space:D
the same as southland if enough people say enough wellington will have to listen .Quote:
Or rather, what can be achieved through your posts?
if the nzc is as politised as im lead to believe then they,l follow the key theory.[ oil the biggest squeak.]bad as southlands actions were this, if its played out the way it looks,it demands that nzc take the same stance as they did against southland and at least send hb back to survey/consult thier licence buyers.
The council at no stage consulted its licence holders of their intentions to reduce councillor numbers and have bypassed all required processes
when they voted on an item that was in General business, and stated that it was a proposal to look at the possibility of reducing numbers, so no motion, no record of who moved it, no record of who seconded it., NOTHING AT ALL and that is the most telling fact that they have acted improperly.
There is one possible explanation, that confirmed minutes have been altered for some reason on the website? That could explain the need to access computers, and why there is no trace of a bone fide decision? But not why there would be a need to do such a thing. I doubt the incentive would be worth the consequence?
258- Altering, concealing, destroying, or reproducing documents with intent to deceive
(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who, with intent to obtain by deception any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration, or to cause loss to any other person,
And yet they are now blaming the previous manager for not putting it on the June agenda. surely when the councillors receive the meeting agenda prior to the meeting that not a single one of them noticed it was on the agenda, that is just sloppy and just pure arrogance to blame someone else for their own failings.
not the point elections nz were saying they were informed of the decision the morning after the aprill meeting.??
when clearly no decision had been rightfuly made
they,re digging themselves deeper holes with the switching dates of when it was muted discussed anywhere from 12 to 18 months.
problem is the damning evedence of the aprill 2015 minutes and no trail before or after??
if theres a confidentiality agreement tim between all parties what could the penalty for abandoning the listing vessel?;) and fessing up first?if such had happened..Quote:
258- Altering, concealing, destroying, or reproducing documents with intent to deceive
(1) Every one is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding 10 years who, with intent to obtain by deception any property, privilege, service, pecuniary advantage, benefit, or valuable consideration, or to cause loss to any other person,
im pickin a labour court case wouldnt prejudice a criminal one and for owning up or reporting criminal action the employment court couldnt dock you for such???.
h bayers ultimatly it is your axe to grind make yourselves heard in hb and wellington email is a wonderful easy thing.you can keep sending till you get a reply unless your emailing hb with the questions i asked tho it appears:D but numbers will tell it did against southland on a case of no consultation and nzc bypassing.
come on the bay and the maggiesQuote:
:)Tony H
Donor Member
*****
Offline
Browning, knocks em dead
Posts: 795
Napier
Gender
To all those people in Hawkes Bay, please attend the next council meeting at Fish & Game office Tue 20th of October at 6pm. There will be an item on the agenda to discuss the validity of the current councils decision to drop to 8 member's.
Be there to give your support or show your disagreement to this decision, either way you should attend. I have been informed that the media may be in attendance, See you there]
Thanks GSP Follower, I have sent several requests for this exact information, when did the council inform Election NZ and the national office and what was their response's, did they know of the underhanded, backdoor politics used to get it through.
Its plain as day that they have completely Fk'd this up, but who else higher up gave them the ok to carry on, how far up the chain does this go. All this info is being passed over to the media.
This should serve notice to all the other councils around the country to make sure they do things by the book because the licence holders are watching
Yes there seems to be a lot of that going around, and people are looking to cover their own rear ends, so as not to be exposed by the actions of this council.
But as they say "the truth will win out in the end"
If you go to only one meeting this needs to be the one that people need to attend and bring this council to task, these people have forgotten what they are there for.
the councill didnt the manager did at least that the evidence i have.Quote:
when did the council inform Election NZ and the national office
who authorised him or gave him that impression god knows again no paper trail..
but as to if its being played for the benefit of several parties with multiple scapegoats each thinking the other is the patsy that could be the 64,000 $ question.
hopefuly but i suspect what could be a even more costly gag order employment agreement might stymie that.Quote:
"the truth will win out in the end"
its hard to see thier endgame but believe me its there.
but you guys taking back your region would stuff all the games.
getting eastern councill well away from the region would be one of my 2nd moves.
you will find a substancial cost hAS BEEN INCURRED before you even get the truth.:XD:
ALL THE BEST TO YOU ALL.
so important and forward thinking and licence buyer friendly it wasnt even in the minutes niether was any mention of consultation which i doubt was given a 2nd thought;)Quote:
At the April meeting we again discussed it and voted unanimously to move to 8 councillors for the 2015 elections, but it wasn’t included in that meeting’s agenda. The Manager was instructed to include it as an agenda’d item in the next meeting in June.
why is that the only proposal or vote not in the minutes something that ground breaking would at least be recorded as proposed seconded but a unanimous vote not even recorded.??
yet again not even recorded in the summary of resolutions this groundbreaking nzc inspired bit of public minded cost saving licencee minded altruism in action??
pull the other one it plays dixie.:D:D
why would it need to be on the june agenda what were you gonna do vote on it twice ????
i could understand it if you were gonna take time to consult your licence buyers but no you ''voted unanimously'':Dtui,s anyone
KWB, when you're copying and pasting stuff from the FishnHunt forum just copy the whole lot rather than only the bits you can twist to suit your view. Greg Duleys posts tell quite a bit.
This would be the crappiest, most negative, most tin foil hat worthy thread that I've ever followed on a hunting forum.
Part information, misinformation, assumptions, accusations, denigration and constipation.
And it's pure politics, which I thought was discouraged here?
does it now mike is that before or after the attacks from bj and jd on anyone who dissents??.id a thought you would be most aggreived mike after southlands iniative was sent back for licence holder consultation but this flys with none??
does it explain why any disccussion, vote or mention of licencee consultation wasnt recorded in either the minutes or the resolutions??
or why it would need to be on the june agenda when they,d already voted''unanimously'
'you may think that tahr but check the hb minutes for yourself.Quote:
This would be the crappiest, most negative, most tin foil hat worthy thread that I've ever followed on a hunting forum.
the last thing i want is this carryon going region to region.
i can back up everything i say it remains to be seen if hb can.
thats funny i reckon he followed councill instructions to the tQuote:
(the candidate you support despite his failure to follow correct procedure or the councils instructions, a bit of a double standard here don’t you think?)
Quote:
-----Original Message-----
From: Pete McIntosh [mailto:pmcintosh@fishandgame.org.nz]
Sent: Wednesday, 8 April 2015 9:37 a.m.
To: Robert Sowman
Cc: Bryce Johnson
Subject: Reducing council members
Hi guys our council last night decided to limit the councillor numbers to 8 for the up and coming election.
What is the formal process we need to follow?
Do I need to speak to Warwick?
Regards,
Pete Mac
Peter McIntosh
Regional Manager, Hawkes' Bay
Fish and Game New Zealand
P.O Box 7345, Taradale, Napier 4141
New Zealand
Tel: (06) 844 2460
Fax: (06) 8442461
Cell: (021 ) 274 6119
www.fishandgame.org.nz
Quote:
KWB, when you're copying and pasting stuff from the FishnHunt forum just copy the whole lot rather than only the bits you can twist to suit your view. Greg Duleys posts tell quite a bit.
nice to see you both care enough to check in on me merritt and mike:ORLY::DQuote:
I see our old mate kwb has been looking on her too and copying and posting bits he wants to pick out on the other forum.
KWB, you forget that we weren't dictated to from above. We willingly consulted off our own bat because of the feedback we got from licence holders. We then made our own mind up to not pursue our initial motion. We were entitled to carry on with it if we'd chosen to.
You and others seem to forget that councillors are voted in to make the decisions and they're entitled to do that. They can elect to do consultation where they see fit but aren't forced to on every decision. They have been elected to make decisions for the likes of you and Tony H who would never consider standing.
And don't think Merritt and I mention you cause we care about you. Its simply you can't be avoided when you're present on a forum.
rewriting history again mike ??
dont be a hater mike
hate the game not the player ;)
now wheres that email from nzc of the time mmmmm
certainly but if consultation is good for one regions over such important things isnt it right for everybody??Quote:
You and others seem to forget that councillors are voted in to make the decisions and they're entitled to do that. ]
and why not put the discussion and decision for all to see like every other decision was yours included??
How would you have any idea if I was considering standing or not, is this just another fact you have plucked from the far reaches of your rear end. You may wish to actually speak to me before you make a post stating what my own intentions were. Or are you working on the same principle the HB council had been doing. "we thought we had done it, but in fact we never did".
How about you ask someone who was at the meeting last night where the council admitted they had stuffed up the vote to reduce numbers. so please stay away from the keyboard until you have some actual facts and not assumptions and unfounded accusations which seem to be how you operate.
Greg Duley had already admitted the fault lay with the council as they relied on the manager (who didn't do his job correctly and add the matter to the agenda) when they should've picked up on it. He's also explained how other matters (manager related also) got in the mix and distracted them from finalizing this issue the correct way. Understandable for a bunch of volunteers.
With your intimate knowledge of this where were you months out on this issue? Why didn't you raise it in time for them to resolve it before the election?
I've not heard what the outcome of the meeting was last night, can you fill us in? Will there be an other election? If so will you stand?
speak to the point mike why would they need to add a already voted on and presumembly passed unanimous vote??did the manager sign off on the minutes as a true record and not date them or the chairman??Quote:
Greg Duley had already admitted the fault lay with the council as they relied on the manager (who didn't do his job correctly and add the matter to the agenda)
when you guys voted on the subgauge issue the one thing i,l give you is you put it out for everyone to see.
how can you blame the manager for discussion and vote that basicly was had in secrecy and whether by accident or design went unrecorded.??
you baited the thread mike then seem to have a awful lot of oars in the water for a disinterested party as did many of the usual suspects. i give you respect for not hiding behind a obscure username you know who i am and i know who you are.Quote:
No need for us to drop the numbers, we were always going to have an election. Interesting to see the ex manager made it onto the HB Council. Don't know how effective he'll be considering it looks like the majority of the incumbents got back on.
the level of nastiness and personel attack in the closed threads made a nonsence of the reasons some were supposedly banned for..
please hb hunting or anyone else who was there give us who werent a rundown if you dont mind
as it seems the other threads have been shutdown not before the bullying electioneering character assination or attempted intimidation but certainly before we get a meeting report.did you meet sam:D