Let's Go Invercargill: What was it? Is it still a thing?
“Since the night of the election, when we had a beer at Ziff’s [Cafe & Bar], there has never been a meeting or a gathering of any kind of the so-called [Let's Go Invercargill] ticket.”

Want to get our Southland Tribune editions sent direct to your email inbox? Simply enter your email address.
As Invercargill City Councillors prepared on Friday to discuss Mayor Nobby Clark’s breach of the council’s Code of Conduct, Cr Ria Bond raised a conflict concern.
Bond and fellow councillor Ian Pottinger had lodged the Code of Conduct complaint against Mayor Clark following his TV interview with comedian Guy Williams.
Through a written statement Bond indicted the four councillors - Tom Campbell, Grant Dermody, Barry Stewart, and Allan Arnold - who ran for election alongside Mayor Clark as part of the Let’s Go Invercargill team should disclose “a perceived conflict of interest”.
“Declaring this perceived conflict from councillors upholds the integrity, transparency and fairness that today’s meeting agenda will be upheld with the respect and fairness it deserves,” Bond stated.
But what is the Let’s Go Ticket? And is it even still a thing?
Clark and Cr Alan Arnold were the key drivers behind setting up the Let’s Go Invercargill team in the lead-up to the 2022 election.
It is understood they did so following encouragement from some pretty big players in the Invercargill business scene who also backed the Let’s Go Invercargill ticket financially.
Questions were raised by other mayoral candidates around what sway the financial supporters of the ticket could have during the council term.
Clark quashed those suggestions though.
“I can confirm there are backers, plural. Not one,” Clark said in the lead up to the election.
“[But] the condition, when I put my name forward, was that the backers would stay out of the picture and would have no influence in the next three years.
“They just want a more proactive approach to governance. I was clear they would not be in this to buy influence, and that was not their intent.”
A list of those backers was never made public. Only donations over $1500 for each individual candidate are required to be declared.
All up the Let’s Go Invercargill ticket spent $59,694.76 on its 2022 election campaign with that money spread across its 11 candidates.

Before the election Clark stated that he had become frustrated as a councillor around the lack of progression on certain matters and that he had become a “lone voice” on the council.
At the time Clark said the Let’s Go Invercargill concept was about a desire to get a group of largely new councillors elected. A common focus centred on getting on with building the museum.
“We need a can-do attitude and I don’t see that at the moment,” Clark said before the 2022 election.
Clark headlined the Let’s Go Invercargill ticket as its mayoral candidate and the net was cast wide to find other potential council candidates.
Clark approached about 25 people with netball legend Wendy Frew and current councillor Steve Broad understood to be included. Although both declined.
The Let’s Go Invercargill ticket ended up putting up 11 candidates, including Clark.
Clark, Campbell, Dermody, Stewart, and Arnold, were all elected while Kerry Hapuku, Peter Marshal, Bevan Smith, Karl Herman, Kevin Brown, and Rick Murrell were part of the ticket but missed election.

Bond was overseas and did not attend Friday’s extraordinary meeting to deal with Clark’s breach of the Code of Conduct.
However, Cr Alex Crackett did raise the perceived conflict of interest matter for those who were involved in the Let’s Go Invercargill ticket on her behalf.
Deputy Mayor Tom Campbell - who was chairing the meeting and was part of the ticket - responded.
“The ticket was a means by which prospective candidates for council could share expenses, it was never a political party of any kind.
“Since the night of the election, when we had a beer at Ziff’s [Cafe & Bar], there has never been a meeting or a gathering of any kind of the so-called ticket.”
Comments made in the lead-up to the election do mirror what Campbell said on Friday around the focus of the ticket being about sharing election expenses rather than creating a bloc vote which stuck together. The website that promoted the ticket is no longer live.
There was a strong message during the campaign that change was needed for Invercargill.
“We are linked by our passion for our city, and we see a need for change in our city council,” Alan Arnold said before the election.
Arnold suggested local body politics had a record of people elected due to name recognition and having celebratory status.
Clark also said it was difficult to stand alone if you didn’t have an existing public profile.
Those councillors who were part of the Let’s Go Invercargill did not feel the need to declare a perspective conflict of interest when dealing with Mayor Clark’s code breach.
Campbell said the other option would be to appoint an independent committee to deal with Clark’s breach, given some might suggest all councillors have a conflict given they have worked with Mayor Clark since at least the start of the term.
However, Campbell added council CEO Michael Day recommended against that given those “non-conflicts” could be managed.
“It is up to each councillor to make a personal judgement as to whether they are conflicted.
“I would make the point that a councillor who asked the Mayor to resign last month might also feel conflicted, so it is true to say that by virtue of having worked with the mayor for the last 20 months - and by the way I never knew Nobby at all prior to that - there are all sorts of things that might cause conflict.”
Meanwhile, the council ended up agreeing that there had been a material breach of the council’s code of conduct following a TV interview with comedian Guy Williams which screened in March.
The council has requested that a sincere apology be made by Clark in person in public at a full council meeting and that a letter of censure also be sent to Mayor Clark.
That meeting was an absolute crock. In particular, I hated how they said that punishing him would not achieve anything and that we've got bigger things to focus on. That's basically saying that you can just get away with what he did and there'll be no consequences. You can just issue a half-a$sed apology and put it behind you. He should have been asked to resign.
It really has come across as a “we want the numbers” type game and when you watch any voting they all stick together