Upset over building safety ad

A Horowhenua resident complained to the Advertising Standards Authority, claiming an advertisement paid for by councillors was misleading.

The complainant, V Harrod, approached the standards authority after nine Horowhenua District councillors placed an advertisement in NZME’S Horowhenua Chronicle community newspaper on April 5.

The advertisement, titled ‘‘the truth abut the council building’’, was the councillors’ way of publishing their views on the safety of the building, which has been an ongoing issue.

The advertisement came after mayor Michael Feyen funded an engineer’s report as he was not satisfied that two prior reports, funded by ratepayers, hit the mark.

The two previous reports, prepared by Opus and ISPS Consulting in 2014 and 2016, determined the building was safe.

But Feyen remains adamant the building needs improvements, based on his report, carried out by Structural Concepts, which shows there are ‘‘potential structural vulnerabilities’’.

All other councillors, except for Ross Campbell, organised the selffunded advertisement, which said the three reports confirmed the building was safe for normal occupancy.

Harrod’s complaint said it was a ‘‘disturbing development’’ that the councillors had been allowed to ‘‘publicly undermine’’ Feyen.

The advertisement was ‘‘misleading’’, as the engineering reports were being peer reviewed at the time of publication and no decision on the safety of the building had been reached, Harrod said.

‘‘How can the community newspaper claim to be independent in reporting news about an important and ongoing community matter of great public interest while accepting money for advertisements stating facts that may indeed prove to be entirely false and misleading?’’

Despite Harrod’s claim that the advertisement breached the code of ethics, the complaints board ruled the complaint did not meet the threshold to be misleading and it was not upheld.

Councillor Ross Brannigan, who spoke to the complaints board on behalf of the group, said there was a lot of ‘‘misinformation’’ on social media about the council building.

The advertisement provided balance and helped the councillors get their views across, he said.

‘‘By doing it this way we could use our words.’’

Feyen said councillors had a right to say what they wanted, but he still disagreed with their view of the building’s safety.

NZME’S response to the complaints board said it was ‘‘not in a position to fact check all advertisement copy’’ on behalf of clients.

‘‘We have ensured that future advertisements from these counsellors are labelled as such and the correct information and addresses are clearly stated.’’