Harbour Board welcomes clarification

Press, 13 June 1986, Page 25

Harbour Board welcomes clarification

Blenheim reporter A member of the Marlborough Harbour Board, Mr N. R. Johnson, has welcomed clarification by the Minister of Transport, Mr Prebble, of comments on allegations of misuse of public money. Speaking at a special meeting of the board, he said he was perturbed at reports about this.

Mr Prebble wrote to the board that he had no legal powers to appoint a commissioner to replace the board and enclosed an unsolicited letter from the Wellington Harbour Board offering its services to run the board’s affairs until a new board was elected. “I should also advise you that I have been extremely concerned by the facts as outlined by the Harbours Appeal Board. I am also concerned that there have been strong allegations made of misuse of public moneys. It appears to me that the decision does not, in fact, clear those involved of the allegations,” he said. Mr Prebble said in his letter that he had referred to the Auditor-Gen-eral a copy of the appeal decision and asked his office to investigate the allegations made.

The chairman of the Marlborough board, Mr B. J. Dalliessi, said that immediately before the special meeting at Picton, he had spoken by telephone to Mr Prebble and asked him to clarify what he meant by allegations of misuse of public moneys as there appeared to be no mention in the appeal decision of any allegations against the board.

Mr Prebble indicated that the Auditor-General believed there were a

number of aspects arising from allegations by the board heard in the appeal that he should investigate. One of these related to the allegation that Mr M. J. Goulden, general manager of the board, had changed first-class airline tickets to another class without first referring the matter to the board. This was described as conduct unbecoming of a general manager. Reference to a staff housing loan for Mr Goulden was another matter he had referred to the Auditor-General because of the decision by Mr B. J. Petrie (dissenting appeal board member) that the loan application was out of order.

Mr Dalliessi said that the third point raised by Mr Prebble related to evidence by a board member, Mr G. S. Fuller, in the inquiry on his interpretation of Mr Goulden’s entitlement to merit reviews independent of the Higher Salaries Commission.

“He is adamant that the Higher Salaries determination is the maximum that can be paid,” he said. Mr Johnson, (another member of the board), said he was delighted to hear that these were the matters referred to by Mr Prebble. He was perturbed that news media coverage had given the impression it was misuse of moneys by the board that was being investigated.

Mr Dalliessi said the board would welcome an inquiry by the Ministry into its affairs. It could be that the board was responsible in some aspects for the way it allowed money to be spent.