Auditor-General writes to ECan councillors

The Auditor-General's Office has written to three Environment Canterbury (ECan) councillors as concerns about potential conflicts of interest over water use heat up.

Details of the letters' content are not known.

However, councillors Mark Oldfield, Bronwen Murray and Pat Harrow confirmed yesterday they had received letters.

The issue of possible conflicts of interest comes ahead of this Thursday's scheduled vote of no-confidence in ECan chairman Sir Kerry Burke.

South Canterbury representatives Oldfield and Murray proposed and seconded the motion to take the no-confidence vote.

Burke, who supported the introduction of water-management charges to keep rates rises low this financial year, had earlier warned councillors they could be dismissed if they were found to have made money from undeclared conflicts of interest.

Burke had sent the Auditor-General a record of events on the water-charging discussion.

It included Burke's advice to councillors and an earlier Auditor-General's opinion councillors who were water consent-holders would be "prohibited from discussing and voting on a proposal to move to a greater user-pays charging regime".

He also passed on council meeting minutes and agendas.

Christchurch Central Labour MP Brendon Burns complained to the Auditor-General in July, asking the office to investigate whether regional councillors holding water consents and with irrigation interests should have been able to vote on a proposal for water-management charges.

In July, ECan's general rates rose 10.6 per cent rather than 2.7 per cent because the council delayed the introduction of at least a part-charge on water management for a year.

Burns, the party's water spokesman, said yesterday the issue was becoming entangled in the vote on Burke's chairmanship.

"It's curious that this seems to have spilled over into water matters, in terms of the ECan chair's role. But that is not my providence or my responsibility. That is up to ECan councillors to decide."

Ratepayers had a right to know what was appropriate for a councillor to vote on and what was not, he said.

Burke said he had not seen the latest letter.

"It is fair to say it is clearly something in the background of the matters the council is considering this week but it is primarily at this stage a matter between colleagues and the Auditor-General's office."

Harrow and Oldfield said it was not appropriate to comment and Murray said it was in the hands of her lawyer. A spokeswoman for the Auditor-General said the office was not expecting to produce a public report on the issue.

- © Fairfax NZ News