It's going to cost ratepayers $70,000 for a by-election to find someone to replace outgoing NZ First List MP Clayton Mitchell as a Tauranga City Councillor.
Following last Saturday's general election, in which NZ First won 8.85 per cent of the party vote, Clayton is headed to Wellington as one of the party's 11 MPs.
As a result Clayton is giving up his Tauranga City councillor role after honouring a promise he made to the public after asking whether they think he should keep his council position if he ends up in Parliament.
Read more here.
Mayor Stuart Crosby doesn't think the by-election will be held until 2015.
SunLive asked people in the community what they thought of the situation.
Watch the video above to see what they had to say.
10 comments
No bucket of money
Posted on 28-09-2014 08:18 | By Murray.Guy
There is NO recruitment bucket. Please get it right. This money will came from a legitimate ratepayer expenditure that has been budgeted for. Councillors are self employed contractors, NOT employees. Councillors say, "Pick me, pick me. For three years I agree to provide a service to you." In the 'real world' a contractor who chooses to default on an agreement would be meeting re-tendering and all associated costs, refunding monies paid to date. Both Clayton Mitchell and NZ First made this choice for their personal gain. It is corrupt on their part to expect ratepayers to pay for their greed and personal ambitions. Being legal, the way it is, is far removed from being right, being what should happen.
Change the Rules!
Posted on 28-09-2014 08:49 | By Mary Faith
Council should change the rules to cover this eventuality. There should be a clause in the councillors contracts that state that if for any reason (other than sickness) they resign - then they should pay out of their own pockets for any by-election. Clayton Mitchell has no integrity if he doesn't pay up and has proved he has no loyalty. He'll probably make an excellent MP with this lack of attributes!. Don't forget he isn't an elected MP - just 'list'.
NZ1st.
Posted on 28-09-2014 11:20 | By sojourner
Simple, NZ1st. wanted him, they should now pay.
Should be easy for Clayton to pay
Posted on 28-09-2014 12:49 | By Phailed1
I've no problem with Clayton deciding to run for MP. The pay and perks are huge compared to the pay of a councillor. But he should use the difference between his councillor salary and his MP salary to pay the cost of the byelection. Otherwise us mug ratepayers have to foot the bill. The maths is say $140k for MP minus say $65k for councillor leaving $75,000 to pay for the byelection. I guess he also gets income from the bar business as selling alcohol is probably profitable?
Has His MP Salary Started Yet?
Posted on 28-09-2014 13:25 | By carpedeum
If it already has- then his Council slalary should go topay for the by election No double dipping please
Here's a bright idea
Posted on 28-09-2014 20:51 | By Bobby
Why not just appoint the next lowest polling candidate from the same electorate? Because the system doesn't allow it, thats why! Clayton didn't invent the system, and he should not be expected to pay for its flaws.
@Murray Guy
Posted on 29-09-2014 10:04 | By Councillorwatch
Regarding your comment about "greed and personal gain" is that what all politicians do? Do they all makes choices for personal gain eg getting a salary, airpoints etc? When it comes to you having been a councillor or even having thrown your hat in the ring for NZ First as reported in Sunlive, was that somehow different?
Councillorwatch, you're not well, get help ..
Posted on 29-09-2014 20:12 | By Murray.Guy
Many who put their hand up to represent communities, organisations and clubs share the same principles of wanting to give back to a community, share skills and add value. They also all attract the same anonymous poison pens such as yourself Councillorwatch. This previous Councillor made NO expense claims nor benefited from any airports, paying my own way in all areas outside of a fixed remuneration. I chose to put aside personal business interests at significant personal cost. The term was three years, not until a better offer presented itself. I know that I was not alone in this. I was approached by local NZ First folk who asked if I would consider accepting their nomination - I agreed. This was rejected by Winston Peters and Board. Your attempt to draw parallels between my contribution and that of Clayton Mitchell are as misguided and typically offensive. Get help!
Kicking an old dog
Posted on 30-09-2014 18:39 | By Sambo Returns
sic him Murray attack him back, do not let Mr "the same old tune" Councillorwatch kick an old dog and get away with it!!!!
you should pay
Posted on 20-10-2014 16:24 | By The Tomahawk Kid
Who should pay for by election? The suckers that voted for for just another immoral busybody do-gooder without principles. This is a perfect example of the importance of principles (or the lack thereof) to anybody entering the political arena. You can NEVER be sure how those without a concrete set of principles to abide by - will vote on any given subject - they flip flop around because their policies and choices are made on personal feelings, or those of the biggest gang. And that is no way to instil confidence in your electorate when you cannot be certain of how they stand on certain issues. Mr Mitchell suffers from this afliction (as do every one of the others) - and that is WHY you are always so disillusioned with your politicians (both local and national).
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to make a comment.