P.M. a complainant about remarks by social worker

Press, Volume CXVI, Issue 34123, 8 April 1976, Page 9

P.M. a complainant about remarks by social worker

CN-Z. Press Association) AUCKLAND, April 7. The Prime Minister (Mr Muldoon) was one of a group of Aucklanders who wrote complaining about remarks made by an Auckland City Council social worker (Mr I. F. Shirley) at a conference last month. -An Auckland City Coun-1 cillor, (Mr J. P. Anderton) said today, it was Mr Muldoon’s letter which was the prime cause of Mr Shirley being asked to clarify his remarks before a select group of councillors and some senior officers of the council. “Seven other ratepayers, all from the affluent Eastern; suburbs, also wrote com-i plaining about Mr Shirley’s I remarks,” said Mr Anderton. ; “What concerns me is that while copies of the rate-1 payers’ letters were circu- : lated to all councillors, Mr Muldoon’s letter was not re- 1 vealed.” The letter of complaint! from Mr Muldoon was, said Mr Anderton, written to the! Deputy-Mayor (Dr R. H. L. Ferguson) who passed it on to the Town Clerk (Mr J. Shaw). Dr Ferguson, two other councillors and council l

[officers then met Mr Shirley [to seek an explanation for (the remarks trade at a conJference of Australian and ■New Zealand social workers lir Auckland. At the conference, Mr Shirley said the city was ruled by a wealthy elite, growing increasingly remote from an impoverished class of residents. 'PARASITES’ j The wealthy elite were 1 described as “financial parai sites” who enjoyed residential preferences, access to 1 services such as elite private schools, private hospitals ■ and exclusive sporting and leisure clubs. The benefits, he said, also. 1 included 'political power and control over the country’s decision making processes. Mr Anderton said other i councillors were not informed of Mr Muldoon’s letiter and the social welfare | committee, to whom Mr I Shirley was directly answeriable, was kept in the dark. BACKDOOR METHOD ■ “If Mr Muldoon wanted Jto complain about Mr ShirJley, why did he choose such Ila backdoor metjod and why >i was his letter not revealed .. along with the rest?” asked JMr Anderton. “Why did he . not make his complaint offi■cially to the Town Clerk or ■ the ‘ Mayor as the other ! seven ratepayers did?”

I Mr Anderton said he ; iwanted to know if the Prime | Minister was going to use; (his office to intimidate and! harass individuals who, ini their private capacity, ex-i pressed views which the I Prime Minister found un- (: comfortable? Mr Anderton said he had; nothing but admiration and; respect for the Town Clerk!: and other senior council’! officers for the objective l professional way they had I handled the matter. i 1 “To the Town Clerk’s I i great credit, he pointed ou,t| in replying to Mr Muldoon, that it was . not council policy to attempt to curtail council officers’ freedom of expression when they were speaking in an individual professional capacity,” said ’ Mr Anderton. Repeated views Last Friday Mr Shirley repeated his views to the social welfare committee of the council. : “I have no intention of (denying one word,” he said. I Dr Ferguson tonight denied that Mr Muldoon had (made his complaint by a | backdoor method. “It was not a backdoor (method,” he said. “The letter (was written to me as Depjuty Mayor and went into the (usual channels,” he said.

I “There was nothing spe- ; cial about the letter and it i was not as strong as some ■of the others. There was no [deliberate attempt not to reproduce it and as far as 1 jam concerned it is available' (for the whole world to see.” ; UNTRUE ! Dr Fergusbn said it was (absolutely untrue to suggest (Mr Muldoon’s letter was the (cause of Mr Shirley being •asked to clarify his remarks, i Other letters were much (more critical. I Mr Shirley did not appear before a “please explain” session but the council were concerned that his statements, which were of public importance, had not been reported to the council earlier. 'But the council defended Mr ; Shirley’s right to express his ‘own opinion. Dr Ferguson said the complaints were discussed by the policy and finance committee because they raised questions of council policy and whether, if Mr Shirley was expressing the council's opinion. He said he was surprised to hear Mr Muldoon’s letter was not circulated. “There was no deliberate witholding of the letter and if they want, it 'they can have it.” he said.