“Whatever Mayor Clark’s subjective intention or purpose may have been, we find that his language and other conduct in the interview was objectively offensive, demeaning and discriminatory."
He likely won’t resign. And when he’s out of office in the future, there will likely be a defamation hearing from him towards other councillors. He says ‘two occasions’ he has mis-spoke but I can think of at least one more. How long does the city have to endure this, where a Mayor’s personal attributes become the dominant headline over such business being undertaken in the role of Mayor? It happened under the last Mayor and it is continuing to occur… The city doesn’t necessarily need a publicist in the role of Mayor, it just needs someone who you point to and say “They are a ___” and hope that the final word is merely ‘Mayor’.
Here we go again, Nobby getting away with things he’s said because it’s “not his fault” . Maybe, just maybe if instead of saying “in hindsight I should of never of done the interview” you could and should of said “in hindsight, I should of never have used the word that I don’t like, I’m sorry I did and caused offence. You won’t hear it from me again.” But no you doubled down didn’t you!
Also if what you said in that interview was your view of “banter”, it’s easy to see why the fireman complained too.
"The last [Code of Conduct meeting] was pretty painful for me and my family to watch...."
It is terrible that his family is subjected to such "pain", but how "painful" does he think it it is for us, Invercargill citizens, to have to keep viewing his conduct and hearing his half-baked excuses and his inability to accept full accountability for his words, actions and conduct, which from a public standpoint appear to be misogynistic, racist and unbecoming of a mayoral figure in this day and age.
It is noted that he is unable to use the excuse of brain fade in this scenario. I wonder what his excuse is this time? Or is it once again his inability to hide what appears to be long-standing misogynistic and racist qualities . I am commenting on this being longstanding, due to dealings with this man in a work situation from many years ago.
What a waste of time and money. Majority of people voted Nobby and the councillors in to do a job they said they were going to. Surely its time to put it all aside and get on with getting things done.
The city looks like its already moving forward with the amount of projects that are happening/completed. Majority voted the Mayor in to do a job so how about we let him do that. All these extraordinary meetings are ultimately a waste of energy that could be focused on more positive things. The council don't have the power to sack Nobby so might as well get behind him and get stuff done.
The real penalty would be for the mayor to pay for the costs of the investigation and not expect ratepayers to have to foot the bill. But the councillors will never go down that path because of the precedent it would set for them all.
Its called accountability for the governance of public funds
He likely won’t resign. And when he’s out of office in the future, there will likely be a defamation hearing from him towards other councillors. He says ‘two occasions’ he has mis-spoke but I can think of at least one more. How long does the city have to endure this, where a Mayor’s personal attributes become the dominant headline over such business being undertaken in the role of Mayor? It happened under the last Mayor and it is continuing to occur… The city doesn’t necessarily need a publicist in the role of Mayor, it just needs someone who you point to and say “They are a ___” and hope that the final word is merely ‘Mayor’.
I find it funny he says “I’ve spoke at hundreds of events” yet you never see him at anything
Here we go again, Nobby getting away with things he’s said because it’s “not his fault” . Maybe, just maybe if instead of saying “in hindsight I should of never of done the interview” you could and should of said “in hindsight, I should of never have used the word that I don’t like, I’m sorry I did and caused offence. You won’t hear it from me again.” But no you doubled down didn’t you!
Also if what you said in that interview was your view of “banter”, it’s easy to see why the fireman complained too.
Stand aside and let Invercargill move forward.
The mayor states:
"The last [Code of Conduct meeting] was pretty painful for me and my family to watch...."
It is terrible that his family is subjected to such "pain", but how "painful" does he think it it is for us, Invercargill citizens, to have to keep viewing his conduct and hearing his half-baked excuses and his inability to accept full accountability for his words, actions and conduct, which from a public standpoint appear to be misogynistic, racist and unbecoming of a mayoral figure in this day and age.
It is noted that he is unable to use the excuse of brain fade in this scenario. I wonder what his excuse is this time? Or is it once again his inability to hide what appears to be long-standing misogynistic and racist qualities . I am commenting on this being longstanding, due to dealings with this man in a work situation from many years ago.
What a waste of time and money. Majority of people voted Nobby and the councillors in to do a job they said they were going to. Surely its time to put it all aside and get on with getting things done.
Maybe if he wants the city to move forward he should stand down?
The city looks like its already moving forward with the amount of projects that are happening/completed. Majority voted the Mayor in to do a job so how about we let him do that. All these extraordinary meetings are ultimately a waste of energy that could be focused on more positive things. The council don't have the power to sack Nobby so might as well get behind him and get stuff done.
People should be held accountable for their actions.
The real penalty would be for the mayor to pay for the costs of the investigation and not expect ratepayers to have to foot the bill. But the councillors will never go down that path because of the precedent it would set for them all.
Its called accountability for the governance of public funds
What a bunch of whiners… sounds more like sore losers and positional jealousy…don’t like what he says… don’t listen…. simple.
Pity he’s representing the city and not just him and his mates