By David

I spent a few minutes this week discussing a couple of events that occurred in Auckland swimming and that caused me concern. I was unsure whether to discuss them on the Swimwatch blog. Every recommendation I received, there were three, advised me to leave things alone. I was assured that any problems had been resolved and any errors would not occur again.

And then I came home and was watching a discussion on the terrible plight of the three Al Jazeera journalists held in an Egyptian jail simply because they reported news that the state did not like. One British journalist used an expression I had not heard before. He said, “Good journalism should be a thorn in the side of power.” And that is right. Staying silent does no one any favours, no matter how much Wellington Swimming may wish that was the case. I see Wellington’s May Board Meeting disappeared into committee, that’s another word for secret, again while, I’m picking, they debated how to avoid the western world’s rules on free speech and have Swimwatch closed down. This time they spent twenty-five minutes on the subject. There must be better things for them to do.

However the subject of this blog is not Wellington. Regular readers may have noticed very little has been written on Swimwatch about Auckland in the past four years. And what has been written is largely complimentary. I have much admiration for the honest and good job Brian Palmer did of managing Auckland Swimming. Of course I did not agree with his every decision, but the professional, open style of his governance was beyond reproach. For years he was the custodian of values that less principled swimming people would have loved to see dismantled.

Brian Palmer did not need to write excellence, integrity and accountability at the conclusion of his correspondence. He lived by the words. They were obvious in his every action. And many of those who do need to write them disliked him for it.

I very much hope the legacy of Brian’s business integrity is not about to change. Two events occurred in Auckland swimming this week that may be cause for concern.

The first involved a decision by the current Board to use the 2014 Annual Meeting to reduce the constitutional size of the elected Board by two. This would prematurely bring the Board size in line with the new Swimming New Zealand imposed regional constitution. Being as the new constitution was not due to be adopted for probably six months I saw the reduced number of elected positions in the Notice of Meeting and asked Auckland Swimming why the meeting was not being run in accordance with the current constitution. I immediately received a reply that explained the wish of the Board to prepare for the new constitution. I was told a memo would be distributed explaining the decision.

Sure enough that afternoon a memo was distributed. This is what it said.

Clarification to Notice of Meeting Auckland Swimming Association AGM 2014

We have received enquiries in regard to the number of positions for the Board at the AGM, and the Board would like to offer the following explanation:

There are four vacancies open for Board members under the current Constitution. It is the Board’s recommendation to the AGM that we offer two elected Board Member positions, in preparation of adopting the new Regional Constitution later this year, to bring the total Board Members to six (four elected and two independent). This will need to be agreed by the AGM. If the AGM decides against this, when we do adopt the new constitution, we will need to reduce the number of Board Members to six in total.

I hope this helps clarify this proposal in the Notice of Meeting.

That is a good explanation. However it came too late. It was sent out only after some of us, possibly only me, asked what was going on. When something like this happens it is human nature to wonder what other tricks are the Board getting up to without our knowledge. Possibly, hopefully none, but the constitution is an important document and should not be by-passed without an explanation. For years Swimming New Zealand has practiced that sort of sleight of hand. Hopefully this error by Auckland is not a portent of things to come. Our message is tell us upfront and, like Brian Palmer, you will earn our absolute support.

The second incident involved a decision to reduce the size of this weekend’s Level 1&2 swim meet. On Thursday we received the following email.

Dear Members

Due to a huge number of entries into LME Level 1 & 2 being held this Saturday 21^st June, both LME and ASA have made the decision to remove the following events from the programme:

Session One:

Mens 1500m Freestyle

Womens 1500m Freestyle

Mens 50m Freestyle

Womens 50m Freestyle

Mens 50m Backstroke

Womens 50m Backstroke

Mens 400m IM

Womens 400m IM

On current psych sheets this session would run for 6 hours, by removing these events it will now take approximately 3 hours 45minutes.

Session Two:

Mens 400m Freestyle

Womens 400m Freestyle

Mens 50m Butterfly

Womens 50m Butterfly

Mens 50m Breaststroke

Womens 50m Breaststroke

On current psych sheets this session would run for 5 hours, by removing these events it will now take approximately 4 hours. Any Level 2 swimmers who wish to compete in these events will be offered the opportunity at the Level 1 on 19^th July space permitting. This will be offered with 1 week’s notice on a first come, first serve basis.

We are aware that this situation is not ideal, however it would be unacceptable for volunteers to attend such long session. Entry fees for these removed events will be reimbursed in due course.

Although the notice of this change was unacceptably late I understand the reasons. Certainly something had to be done. Deleting events was certainly one alternative. However I was surprised to find the huge number of Counties’ swimmers entered in the meet. Including swimmers entered in the scratched events there were 386 entries from Counties, or about 4 hours of swimming.  Why didn’t the Auckland Board comply with its constitution responsibility of protecting the interests of Auckland swimmers and simply reject entries from outside Auckland? The decision to hurt Auckland swimmers to accommodate 302 entries from Counties, in accepted events, was a bad one. The interests of Auckland swimmers should have come first.

However, just as important, the email sent out from the Auckland Board contains no hint of an apology. “We are aware that this situation is not ideal,” is not sufficient. “We are really sorry” takes so little and means so much. The quality of never admitting error is a Swimming New Zealand hallmark. I do hope Auckland Swimming is not learning at the feet of its parent. Auckland used to be far better than that.

And so my apology for telling three friends I would not write this story. “Good journalism should be a thorn in the side of power,” just seemed too important to ignore.