Auckland Mayor Len Brown coughing up $40k towards E&Y report on his affair, Auckland ratepayers to pay $210k

Auckland Mayor Len Brown coughing up $40k towards E&Y report on his affair, Auckland ratepayers to pay $210k
Len Brown

Auckland Mayor Len Brown will pay $40,000, or 16%, of the $250,000 cost of a report by Ernst & Young.

The report, commissioned by then Auckland Council CEO Doug McKay last October, saw E&Y probe the use of council resources in the mayoral office in respect to Brown's affair with Bevan Chuang, and look into any improper preferential treatment in relation to Chuang’s engagement as an employee, contractor or advisor within the Auckland Council Group.

The full report, which was released on December 13, can be viewed here.

Here's a statement issued today quoting councillor Christine Fletcher;

Following publication of the EY report last year, Auckland Council's Governing Body agreed that a group of councillors comprising Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse, Christine Fletcher, George Wood, Dick Quax and Penny Webster would hold confidential discussions with the Mayor to agree a financial contribution from him towards the final cost of the report.

Speaking on behalf of the group of councillors, Christine Fletcher, Chair of the CEO Review Committee said today:

"Following discussions with the Mayor through Chief Executive Stephen Town, there has been a full and final agreement that he will make a contribution of $40,000 towards the final cost of the EY report. This is in addition to the Mayor meeting his own legal costs of $20,000.

"In the interests of open process and the public interest, we are releasing these numbers."

Auckland Council Chief Executive Stephen Town confirmed the cost of the EY report and legal work was approximately $250,000.

And here's a statement from Brown's PR people;

Mayor Len Brown says:

"I have agreed to make this payment out of respect to my fellow Councillors and to acknowledge the upset this issue has caused. I continue to be totally focussed on the issues that matter to Aucklanders."

"I do not intend to make any further comment on this matter."

We welcome your help to improve our coverage of this issue. Any examples or experiences to relate? Any links to other news, data or research to shed more light on this? Any insight or views on what might happen next or what should happen next? Any errors to correct?

We welcome your comments below. If you are not already registered, please register to comment.

Remember we welcome robust, respectful and insightful debate. We don't welcome abusive or defamatory comments and will de-register those repeatedly making such comments. Our current comment policy is here.

7 Comments

Should have never commisioned an external report at this cost.  If an organisation the size of that council could not do it fast, cheap and effective internally.  Then they need to start replacing people until they can.

You clever accountant types, should realise that Len never paid for anything.
 
His money came from the stupid people who voted for his antics, via salary.
 
Then they have to pay for his pecadillos on top.
 
What a mere bagatelle to dear old Len, 40K or forfeit a million dollar bounty, he would not get if fired.
 
No brainer for him.
 
No brains, some accountants and ratepayers.
 
Follow the money. Follow the leader. Follow the heck you say? DOH.
What the heck is a mere 250K wasted. It was not theirs to waste in its entirity.
Just another example of how stupid people are, when it is after tax income that pays for all of these delinquent enquiries.
Nothing to some, I say it is a lot to a lot of people, their lifes savings, in fact and dwindling. 
Yet, you keep voting for them.
How dumb can a million people be. They keep on wasting your money.
Amalgamation was supposed to save money.
Councils have never saved a bean.
They spent it.
Full stop.
And it just cost another quarter of a million smackers.
And Len is still licking his lips with anticipation. Whatever next??.
 
 

The people who voted are not the ones who pay:
His money came from the stupid people who voted for his antics, via salary.
The ratepayers are a minority surely. Everyone votes, only ratepayers pay. Is this the root of our problem? Also, should council workers get to vote, they have a serious conflict of interest?
I can see that if only ratepayers had votes it would lead to a different set of problems, but at the moment the voting system clearly favours irresponsible spending.

Actually, no one has paid for the report. Auckland City has borrowed around 900 million worth of Norwegian Kroner. So you could argue that we have borrowed the money to pay for the report and that it will take years and years to pay it off. The report, the cost of the report and the borrowing to pay for it are all signs of a system that has lost its way. We have allowed ourselves to be ruled by elites that extract wealth from society and add nothing. And I am nt just talking about Len, really Len is a smaller part of the problem.

 

Plan B.
The entire fiasco is compounded by idiots in debt, to pay idiots collectively more than the previous idiots we used to term PubLic Servants and serving Members of Parliament.
This to pay the overheads on the overheads to ensure the overheads can swan around the world to meet with the overheads and game players of each National and notional Debt.
I could explain it better, but eventually it drives me nuts. So I prefer simple words for simple people. 
It is why anyone who has a brain, cannot get their head around modern economics, because economics has nothing to do with piling on debt, screwing around with figures, exchange rates, bailing out derivatives and bankers and ...and and.
The mortgage slaves and fidlers ought to get together and start a clamour of discontent, a choir of discordency..
They used to riot over this in many countries. Wars have been started for less.
I prefer the Icelandic approach. 
Get rid of the problem.
In France they block the roads, not bail out Mayors, the Wastrels etc.
Let us stand for no more nonsensense.
Stop fiddling the books.
Please may we start at the top and work our way down.
My brain hurts.
Let us call it PLAN Z.
I do not care, but can we get started.
 
 

Brown may or may not be a fool.
However the result showed that someone put a value on some upgrades that really had zero value in the first instance and Brown also accepted some free rooms. Again they have zero vale to anyone as the rooms would have otherwise have not been occupied. Hence the real value of his 'offences' was ZERO!
Typically the councillors exercised totally inadequate control on the cost of the investigation.
I find them guilty of wasting $250,000 of my money ( in part anyway)
As Delboy would say "What pack of plonkers" 
None of the above absolves Brown but it is intensely irritating to me as a ratepayer.

Or more simply, SNAFU!