‘Bullying’ and bad behaviour by councillor
Slagging off a colleague online has seen a New Plymouth councillor censured by the mayor for ‘‘bullying and poor behaviour.’’
On Tuesday New Plymouth District councillor John McLeod made comments about fellow New Plymouth District Councillor Stacey Hitchcock on a positive Facebook post by women’s empowerment page ‘We Are Women NZ’ which listed her achievements.
McLeod, better known to many as ‘Horse’, slated Hitchcock for having the council pay for her to be a member of the Institute of Directors, a personal development programme, calling it ‘‘snouts in the public trough stuff’’.
‘We Are Women NZ’ responded to McLeod’s public comment supporting their praise of Hitchcock and listing multiple reasons why they respect her. In response McLeod said, ‘‘thats debatable in my view (being on the inside).’’
While Hitchcock appears unfazed by the attack on her integrity, Holdom has called McLeod’s comments ‘‘bullying and poor behaviour’’.
‘‘I believe Councillor McLeod is out of line.
‘‘It’s out of line and inappropriate for him to attack councillor Hitchcock online especially when she’s done a fantastic job in her first 18 months,’’ Holdom said.
‘‘It reflects on the person saying it, not the person it’s about.’’
It is not the first time McLeod has publicly made insulting comments about his colleagues.
In 2012 McLeod took to Facebook to slam former NPDC chief executive Barbara McKerrow’s salary and called her a ‘‘piece of skirt’’.
In the same outburst he said fellow NPDC councillor Harry Duynhoven ‘‘had no balls’’.
Holdom said comments like this would be unacceptable in any other workplace and he would bring them up at NPDC’s next private forum.
‘‘It’s a poor reflection on councillor McLeod and he’s better than that.’’
McLeod stood by his comments. He said he saw no issue airing his grievances on a post by a page dedicated to celebrating women’s empowerment.
‘‘What about empowering men, or black skin, or yellow skin?
‘‘We’re all human beings,’’ he said.
He said his comments were factual.
‘‘Her, the Mayor, and Harry Duynhoven all put themselves in the Institute of Directors.
‘‘It’s snouts in the public trough because every penny is ratepayer money and shouldn’t be spent on ourselves.’’
In 2014 a byelection caused by McLeod cost $53,565 after he resigned from council when they voted for a Ma¯ ori ward.
Hitchcock, whose membership to the Institute of Directors is understood to have been paid for by the council last year, said she did not see McLeod’s comments as sexist but would be speaking directly to him about the issues he raised.
‘‘If I take issue with anything like he’s done I would do it face-toface rather than Facebook.
‘‘I won’t engage online. ‘‘He’s an adult he can use whatever forum he likes but personally I would speak to someone directly.’’
McLeod claimed Hitchcock’s Institute of Directors membership was $552 excluding GST but as she is under 40 it actually costs $280 including GST as well as a $75 joining fee.
And in fact this year Hitchcock was footing the bill herself.
‘‘I have no problem with the council paying for professional development as it is all about being a good governor and it’s the same as any other company paying for their employees to be on boards or have professional development,’’ Hitchcock said.
‘‘But the invoice has come to me not the council this year and I will happily pay it.’’
Holdom said the Institute of Directors membership was some- thing that was offered to all councillors, including McLeod, at the council’s cost and was something that benefited the wider community.
‘‘Councillor McLeod’s comments are a personal attack on her contribution.
‘‘Our community benefits greatly from councillor Hitchcock’s contributions,’’ he said.
‘‘We should be encouraging more women to run for council and appointing more women to boards,’’ Holdom said.