Wednesday, 18 December 2019

Invermay

Invermay staff seek details on their future

Jock Allison
Jock Allison
AgResearch is refusing to answer questions about its commitment to keeping key staff at Invermay, as concern mounts that staff at the Dunedin research campus are being kept in the dark. Former Invermay head Jock Allison said yesterday he was aware staff at Invermay had been told the campus was safe, but not specifically that sheep genetics and genomics staff would remain in Dunedin.
‘‘Some of the staff are pretty cynical about where we are, as there has been no communication with any staff, saying they will not have to shift to Lincoln,’’ Dr Allison said.
It appeared AgResearch was still ‘‘hell-bent’’ on building a new facility at Lincoln, and there was no detail on whether the building plan was being scaled due to the decision to keep staff in Dunedin, he said.
If the Crown Research Institute continued to ‘‘obfuscate’’ over the issue, that would ‘‘indicate the need for more political action’’, Dr Allison said.
‘‘There is enormous obfuscation from AgResearch who have refused to discuss their [Future Footprint plan] with all and sundry for years.’’
Despite that, AgResearch would not answer specific questions from the Otago Daily Times last week or again yesterday.
The questions included exactly how many staff remained at Invermay, whether they had been specifically told they would no longer have to move, or under what circumstances they could yet be asked to relocate.
The organisation’s media liaison person declined the ‘‘offer’’ to answer questions, saying AgResearch did not have ‘‘anything further to add’’.
On Friday, the ODT reported a letter of expectation sent to AgResearch by Research, Science and Innovation Minister Megan Woods, stressed the need to maintain Invermay as ‘‘a centre of research for the primary sector, especially in respect of sheep genetics and genomics’’.
‘‘I expect you to maintain human and physical capital already developed at this site,’’ she wrote.
AgResearch acting chairman Dr Paul Reynolds wrote back to the minister, confirming the organisation was ‘‘committed to maintaining our human and physical capital’’ at Invermay.
Dr Allison said yesterday the letter of expectation had gone to AgResearch in July, but only recently emerged on its website, and months later staff at Invermay were ‘‘still being given the mushroom treatment’’.
He said it was ‘‘disgraceful’’ that AgResearch’s management and board ‘‘have not, and do not seem able to, communicate with staff [about] what the Megan Woods letter means to them’’.
It was a continuation of poor communication with staff in the six years since the proposal to relocate up to 85 Invermay staff to other campuses, as part of the Future Footprint plan, was first revealed, he said.
‘‘This has resulted in considerable staff unrest, and has meant that many staff have moved on, and the uncertainty has also cause problems with recruitment ... all of this eroding any career structure in Science with particularly toxic effects down here.’’
chris.morris@odt.co.nz


‘Invermay is here to stay’



Jock Allison, asked what
 lessons there were for the
future, replied: "Do what
 common sense tells you."
 .....Campaigners are declaring victory in the six-year fight to save Dunedin’s Invermay research campus and the dozens of top science jobs still based there.
Dunedin North Labour MP David Clark yesterday revealed a letter of expectation sent to AgResearch — which runs Invermay — by Research, Science and Innovation Minister Megan Woods.
AgResearch, as part of its Future Footprint plan, had intended to relocate top scientists and support staff — particularly those focused on sheep genetics and genomics — from Invermay to Lincoln.
But, after years of campaigning in Dunedin and in Parliament, the letter of expectation from Dr Woods stressed the need to maintain Invermay as "a centre of research for the primary sector, especially in respect of sheep genetics and genomics".
"I expect you to maintain human and physical capital already developed at this site," she wrote.
AgResearch acting chairman Dr Paul Reynolds wrote back to the minister, confirming the organisation was "committed to maintaining our human and physical capital" at Invermay.
Dr Clark said the letter was "as clear as the Crown gets about its intentions", and AgResearch’s response showed it got the message.
He was "delighted" by the outcome, which meant Invermay "has been saved".
"The Coalition Government has made its position on Invermay clear as day — Invermay is here to stay," he said.
AgResearch acting chief executive Tony Hickmott said Invermay would "remain integral" to land-based research and "crucial" to AgResearch’s four-campus plans.
And, if AgResearch continued to collaborate and deliver "quality research", "the future looks really bright for Invermay, as it does for all of our research centres".
The developments came too late for more than 40 staff who had already quit Invermay since the Future Footprint plan was announced in 2013.....

The "Get Vandervis" game continues, post-Cull


Lee Vandervis

Talk of judicial review





.......... Councillors at Tuesday’s full council meeting voted 13-0 to censure Cr Vandervis, after an investigation concluded he had been "loud, aggressive and intimidating" towards a Dunedin City Council staff member.
Cr Vandervis has continued to dispute the investigation’s findings, saying the complaint was "trumped-up" and politically motivated.
He also told Tuesday’s meeting his legal adviser, Len Andersen QC, had "advised me that I have good grounds for applying for a judicial review of any adverse decision made by the council".
That was because of "the failure of the investigator to adhere to the basic principles of natural justice".
It was a view rejected by council legal representative Michael Garbett, who was "satisfied that the process has been fair and consistent with the code of conduct"......

https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/dcc/talk-judicial-review 

--------------------------
 Apparently the video does not capture sound, which is convenient when it comes to playing the Get Vandervis game and explains Cr Jules Radich's otherwise odd term "loud-looking behaviour".

It's refreshing to see a member of the public objecting to the word "violence", which conjures mental pictures of blood, bruises, broken bones and ambulances, to mean "words that upset" someone. 

 


Vandervis censured over 'aggressive' parking ticket exchange

Dunedin city councillor Lee Vandervis has been censured by his colleagues after a investigation found he engaged in "loud, aggressive and intimidating behaviour" towards a staff member.

Lee Vandervis
Councillors at today's full council meeting voted unanimously in favour of issuing Cr Vandervis with a written censure to demonstrate his conduct was unacceptable. That was despite Cr Vandervis continuing to dispute key parts of the investigation’s findings, insisting he had not been afforded "natural justice" and maintaining the complaint against him was politically motivated.
...
..The Code of Conduct complaint against Cr Vandervis alleged he had engaged in "an uncalled-for verbal attack" on a DCC customer services staff member during an exchange at the Civic Centre reception on September 13.
  ....
The resolution to censure him at yesterday’s meeting came from Cr Mike Lord, who said he had also spoken to a trusted staff member who detailed the exchange.
Cr Vandervis had been "loud", and the situation "embarrassing" ...

Cr Jules Radich spoke in support of Cr Vandervis, saying if the exchange was over a $12 parking ticket — as the complainant had claimed and Cr Vandervis had denied — then it was "a very small matter".
He also questioned whether the video showed "much shouting or loud-looking" behaviour, and said he was "very reluctant" to censure Cr Vandervis over the incident.
"We have quite a lot of complaint going on here about not very much," he said.

Cr Marie Laufiso ...[said]... His conduct "is violence — and we should have no tolerance for violence of any kind", she said.
https://www.odt.co.nz/news/dunedin/vandervis-censured-over-aggressive-parking-ticket-exchange 

Comments

Once again DCC focusing attention on a verbal spat that occurred 3 - 4 months ago. I had hoped the new council would focus on current issues and bring some openness to council workings. But then seemingly we are stuck with the same internally focused stuff while keeping real decisions hidden as much as possible.
A new broom with the same old bristles.
His conduct "is violence — and we should have no tolerance for violence of any kind", she said.
Violence: 'behaviour involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something'
In case it needs to be pointed out, hurting someone's feelings is not violence, so please stop misusing the term.
-----------------------------