Bydder was found in breach of the Hamilton City Council’s code of conduct for the comments, including telling Waipā mayor Susan O’Regan to get off her “fat arse” and do her job properly.
Bydder also asked Waipā District Council staff: “What the f*** are you r******d s*****c c***s doing?”
The public submission related to consultation for a third bridge in Cambridge, where Bydder lives, and attracted 23 complaints - including one from Hamilton mayor Paula Southgate.
Independent investigator Mary Hill found Bydder should apologise to O’Regan and publicly to disability organisations IHC and the Cerebral Palsy society. However he refused to and has so far ignored a recommendation to undergo conduct training.
“The deadlines have passed. Nothing’s happening. I’m not doing anything. I don’t believe the council can do anything. They could ask me to resign - I’m not going to. It’s a complete waste of time.”
He said he was disappointed at the outcome.
Bydder said he had been unable to mount a proper defence because the council withheld information on past code of conduct complaints until after the investigator concluded her report.
He pointed out he has already publicly apologised for any offence during the council meeting to decide whether he was in breach of the code.
Cerebral Palsy Society chairperson Daniel Clay said the organisation had not received an apology from Bydder.
“The word s*****c describes a medical condition associated with Cerebral Palsy and should not be used in a derogatory way,” Clay said. “People living with Cerebral Palsy have enough challenges in life without these sorts of comments being made.”
Hamilton City Council chief executive Lance Vervoort.
On Tuesday morning,Hamilton City Council chief executive Lance Vervoort released a statement saying the code of conduct process was limited in what it could do to manage poor behaviour and performance by elected members.
“I share the disappointment expressed by Andrew Bydder’s council colleagues that the apologies requested of him have not been made by the deadline set. This is a lost opportunity for him to engage with the people and communities he has caused offence to.”
Vervoort said Bydder also signalled he would not carry out the final recommendation, to undergo conduct training by 1 December.
“This was proposed to support him to meet the expectations of an elected member of Hamilton City Council, by fellow councillors and members of the community, and provide him with insights into his professional conduct.”
He said given the lack of options available to enforce Bydder to comply with the penalties, the council would not pursue the matter, which had cost $40,380.
Andrew Bydder was found in breach of the Hamilton City Council’s code of conduct. Photo / Hamilton City Council
“This does not change the outcome of the code of conduct process, which found that the complaints identified material breaches of the code.
“It is hoped he revisits his refusal to comply with the decisions of council, so this code of conduct process can reach a full resolution.”
The council’s code of conduct was now being reviewed.
Vervoort said the council supported the efforts of Local Government New Zealand to seek reform of the code of conduct process for all councils.
In July, soon after RNZ revealed Bydder’s submission, Southgate and O’Regan wrote to the local government minister asking for the establishment of an independent arbiter to deal with council code of conduct complaints.
However, Simeon Brown rebuffed the request, saying he had no intention of intervening and expected councillors to meet their obligations under the Local Government Act.
Southgate also called the outcome disappointing, for different reasons, “especially to the people and communities concerned”.
“I have always said the public deserve professional standards from their local government representatives.”
She said it was a shame local government had few levers to deal with poor behaviour in the workplace and this must change.
“I believe we need an independent body which can deal swiftly with disciplinary matters, including the ability to impose robust sanctions on those who have been breached the codes to which they have sworn an oath.”
