McKenzie tells watchdog he resigned “to get their attention”
A number of people have been asking where the watchdog Consumer Council has been during the whole debacle over the period of upheaval at Board level in NI Water… Sam McBride has an interesting series of emails in which their chief executive expresses her own personal support for Laurence McKenzie…
Some of it throws a rather different light on McKenzie’s motivation for resigning:
…on the morning of January 22, 2010, two days after Mr MacKenzie withdrew his resignation as NI Water chief executive, Ms McKeown wrote to him: “…good luck with a hard task in the knowledge that you’ve handled things correctly so far and no reason that shouldn’t continue”.
Mr MacKenzie responded: “Thanks for this, it means a lot at the minute! My biggest difficulty isn’t sorting out the issues but the fact that my board is against me completely.
“They really do not understand that as AO (accounting officer) I had no option but to tell the department. I see we are in for a meeting on Tuesday at your place. I’m looking forward to that.”
On the evening of February 17, Ms McKeown then wrote to Mr MacKenzie: “Hi Laurence, hope you are keeping well despite current issues.
“Relieved to read this week that your resignation offer was declined – not sure why you offered it as NIW badly needs your kind of leadership.
“Pl (sic) give me a call when review complete so that we can prepare for any media interest. Take care. A.”
In response to that e-mail, the NI Water boss said of his resignation, which was retracted within days: “A – the issue was not being taken seriously – had to get their attention. I will call you once the [Independent Review Team’s] review is complete.”
Quite apart from the cosiness of this chat between between the CEO of NI Water and the and the consumer watchdog, McKenzie, at least in this instance is putting light on the matter consistent with his communication with the Utility Regulator, in which he suggested there was ‘no deep concern’ over the issue of procurement…
His difficulty, it seems, was less the issue of procurement that’s been blasted from the roof tops and more a matter of getting the Board to agree with him…
Topic: Government, Society and Culture
Region: Northern Ireland
Ahhh the CEF!
Would you believe they are running a 1/2 day seminar on 9th December called “Public Accountability for Senior Managers”.
Content includes:
“The programme will cover:
•what is meant by corporate governance, accountability and responsibility in government;
•stewardship of public funds;
•regularity and propriety in the conduct of public business;
•the personal responsibility of the designated Accounting Officer;
•the role of the Northern Ireland Audit Office; and
•the work of the Public Accounts Committee.”
Bit late? Talk about couldn’t make it up!!
A company spokesman said those disciplinary procedures are aimed at finding out who was responsible for failing to ensure proper tendering for £28m in Northern Ireland Water contracts.
Surely as “Accounting Officer” MacKenzie is accountable?
- As per ACAS code, no disciplinary action should have been taken until all the facts had been established.
There is still an awful lot here that needs to be investigated!
‘Mr McKenzie was one of the key players in the recent controversy’
Shouldn’t that be ‘ongoing and deepening controversy’?
And probably in the process of a gagging order, as ongoing media speculation is prejudicing that “investigation”.
Feck me, even their wonderful Independent Review wasn’t able to identify those responsible.
Which in itself is more than a bit curious, as they must have been examining the audit trail of those contracts… But er not assigned to any member of staff . Funny how that one vital piece of information in each case seems to have disappeared into the ether…
Tend to agree with you on that one re the “needs to be investigated” bit.
CEF’s ‘strategic aims are to support the democratic process and the transformation of public services to better meet the needs of good government.’
Surely this means that CEs of organisations that are supposed to be holding public bodies to account – in the public interest – should not be CEF members.
Antoinette McKeown of CCNI and Kieran Donnelly of NIAO are both CEF members – as is Matt Baggott of PSNI.
How long are we stuck with these “interim directors” and have they any cedibility considering the circumstances of their appointments?
Had to laugh at the “cleanest Water in the Island of Ireland” sure why not make it in the UK? most of the water comes via. Dalriada Water anyways, NIW “buys” it off them.
JS :
what is meant by corporate governance, accountability and responsibility in government – HOW TO LIE
stewardship of public funds – HOW TO EMBEZLE
regularity and propriety in the conduct of public business – HOW NOT TO GET CAUGHT
the personal responsibility of the designated Accounting Officer – THE SCAPEGOAT
the role of the NIAO – TO COVER UP ANY ALLEGATIONS OF WRONG DOING
The work of the PAC – TO SWALLOW WHATEVER WE FEED THEM
The water seems to be the only clean thing in this whole sorry saga!
‘the “cleanest Water in the Island of Ireland”’
We can but hope some of the dirtiest hands in the island of Ireland don’t taint it.
“The non-executive directors of the interim board of NI Water met today informally with our CEO to be brought up to speed with NI Water affairs in advance of our board meeting in September.’
So just McKenzie’s ‘yes men’ were assembled to have a statement written on their behalf then?
ah, take me to the river
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vGD8aQ2GKr0
WTF, its Friday and it is the Revernd Al in top form
*this woman*
What about the men in this…
The more I read this the dodgier it looks, It would be very interesting to see if there are any other correspondence between parties at this stage.
Splodge I suspect it all means they wish those pesky politicians would feck away off and let them run the country – in all of our interests of course
CCNI will be putting our/their questions and concerns to the Minister in the middle of next week so if you want to have your voice heard NOW is your big moment
Where do we submit them, Nevin?
My question to Conor is ‘Will you accept Antoinette’s resignation right now, Minister?’
W M
point of clarification.
actually you should post your letter to Arlene Foster, minister of the Department of Enterprise Trade and Investment (DETI). obviously if a groundswell movement should arise this issue, postcards or emails might be a more efficacious medium. Acquaintances in S Tyrone Fermanagh say the minister is atune and astute to public sentiment.
Ms Foster (DUP) stood in for First Minister Robinson during some recent dificulties.
what about this link between the previous consumer council head and NI Water?
Oh no, hang on. This involves the grievously wronged Chris Mellor, aka St Christopher of Mellor. So it doesn’t fit into general conspiracy theory here. Move along
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/local-national/consumer-championrsquos-business-emails-to-company-she-policed-14844876.html
Alternatively, you could stop crying your eyes out and make a more cogent argument against the sacked NEDs.
All I’m getting from you is ‘you’re all bullying poor Larry, waah, waah, waah’.
Make your case!
As for the link, it simply demonstrates that NICC is routinely rotten, and the current CE has just picked up in a culture that ‘could give rise to a perception’ the same as the last one.
Remember: if you are going to offer a more cogent defence of Larry, you need to come up with a better argument than ‘but Larry said there were procurement issues’.
Dear me, have you thought of a holiday? I haven’t mentioned “Larry” once. Maybe you would like to explain why you are spending so many hrs whingeing about how Mellor (ex-CEO) was treated. Then you can get back to linking NIW with the CIA and lost tribe of Israel.
CCNI represents the public interest, William, so there are some questions you can put to it via its press office. Details on its website.
Questions to the Minister can be routed through his SpAd, Stephen McGlade private.office@drdni.gov.uk
thanks for the link MH
it provides a very useful context for the emails between the current NIW and NICC currently under discussio. the relationship discussed in the article could prove a useful template to others in the medium and long term planning of their, uh , career strategy. sadly, words like “back scratch yours mine” might come to mind of some of the commenters here. who knows? lets see.
again, thanks, a very useful contextual article in the current circumstances. like the say, northern ireland is open for business.
‘Maybe you would like to explain why you are spending so many hrs whingeing about how Mellor (ex-CEO) was treated.’
Because of the way he was treated?
Mick has explained this in fine detail two or three times now. What bit of it aren’t you getting?
Now, are you going to outline the failures of the NEDs, since you obviously believe they failed in their duties, and back it up with some evidence that demonstrates their failures.
Do that and I’m happy to type the words ‘I was wrong, Mopp Head was right’ out 100 times.
‘Then you can get back to linking NIW with the CIA and lost tribe of Israel.’
Didn’t Moses part a body of water? (The NIW Board could use him. He’d be a dab hand with leaks)
And I think the same book that features Moses mentions someone walking on water. I don’t recall if the author of that chapter was Antoinette McKeown.
given that you have made clear Govt procurement rules are neither here nor there with you, then I think the debate might be best left to your wee friends here. I suspect the NEDs weren’t playing down the rule breaches when they were trying to convince Murphy to spare their asses. And if they were as serious as they then admitted, then the man who was acting ceo for 14 months might just have a smidgen of responsibility. Then again, it could all be a plot involving DRD, NIAO, Appointments Commissioner, PAC, Consumer Council and Lord Voldemort
That’s a really very interesting link MH…More later, when I have time…
‘you have made clear Govt procurement rules are neither here nor there with you, ;
Who said that? Where?
WT,
That’s one way of interpreting it, though I am not sure that was the intention of the person who leaked the emails to the BelTel in the first place…
What’s also interesting about that story is: 1, the currency it still retains on ‘the hill’, and 2, the fact that nothing actually came of it.
The trail of strangeness actually stops at the email correspondence… ie the business talked about was never consummated…
Well ask “you wee friends”and the Minister in DRD, just how seriously they were taking Procurement, FOI , DPA and Human Right laws (etc) in 2007 and 2008.
(Hint: the” independent investigations” were carried out to support their stance at the time)
In other words, it’s a bit feckin rich to be so “morally “motivated now.
And if you are the best Keyboard Monkey, that Connolly House has to offer, it’s no wonder that party are in terminal decline…..
The TOR for the IRT was based on the NIW audit report (15 Jan 2010 version 1) yet the IRT report made reference to the audit report dated 27 Jan 2010 which was version 4 and an addendum of Feb 10.
Why was the audit report changing (from version 1 to 4 and then an addendum) while the work of the IRT was proceeding and who was making the changes and why ? Surely this was varying the TOR and questions Independence yet again.
Version 4 of the audit report makes some interesting points.
Only 24 contracts were listed as being in breach in some way or another.
The total spend of these contracts is circa 8m but much of that was spent prior to any breach having occurred. For example total spend on the biggest contract is 3m but only 0.6m was spent after the contract was wrongly extended. Thus the spend as a result of the breaches is less than £5.5m. At very best competitive bidding this might have reduced prices by, lets be generous, 10%. So worst potential loss is say around £550k. Given NIW annual spend is around £400m that means a loss at worst of ~ 1%.
If the NED’s were dismissed on this basis then what are we saying that if losses of this sort can be shown to exist elsewhere in government then all these boards must be fired ? Wow its going to be a busy few months! It seems from what you have all said that the procurement failures at NIE were larger yet no one fired their Board ?
As a tax payer I do not want to see poor use of public funds but this issue as a bit of maths shows is very minor compared to very much more serious losses that have been uncovered. However, the regulator, the consumer council, NIAO and even the media have all avoided any investigation or comment on these – perhaps thats the plan!
If heads are to role then lets understand the criteria for dismissal and apply it in all areas.
[...] of less than – 0.2% [equal to 0.15% by calculation.]This low level scale of problem fits with McKenzie’s story to both the head of the Consumer Council and his submission to the Utilities … that there was nothing in NI Water’s procurement that would give him deep concern…So a [...]