I have frequently written about the habit of Swimming New Zealand (SNZ) to lie about what they are doing or to ignore the rules of the sport in order to get what they want. The New York Times has kept a count of the lies told by Donald Trump in his two years in office. I think he is over 4000 lies. Remember, on day one of his Presidency, he told the world the crowd watching his inauguration had been the “largest ever”. Clearly that was not true. Although I would never say SNZ could out-lie Donald Trump I’ve always thought it symbolic that some of their lies come from the same insecurity. Remember when they told an event sponsor that the entries for various championship events were growing every year. Last year was the “largest ever”. That wasn’t true either.

But today it is not so much a lie that needs to be discussed, but a chronic inability to comply with the organization’s constitution or rules. It seems Johns and Cotterill just don’t care; if they need to do something, to hell with the rules. Most of the breaches I observe I never write about. If I did this website would talk about nothing else. For example the National Secondary School Championships are about to be held in Wellington. SNZ rules clearly say that all swimmers must be members of SNZ. For some reason though SNZ has allowed meet conditions to be published that allow non-registered swimmers to enter. I’m all for non-registered swimmers being allowed to swim but I’m for the rule of law even more. Conflicts like that are unacceptable.

Just as the decision to sign Lauren Boyle’s world record form confirming that the Kilbirnie Pool complied with all FINA rules was both illegal and a lie. The reputation and honesty of the officials that signed that form and then argued for its validity will forever be stained. I sincerely hope the Secondary School Championships are going to start from the deep end of the Kilbirnie Pool.

Why do Johns and Cotterill continue to refuse to give me the Report into a complaint made against my coaching? This is clearly a travesty especially when the Constitution says, “21.1 The Board may adopt a policy to require adherence by Members to processes that it considers will assist with fair, efficient and timely resolution of  disputes.” There is certainly nothing fair, efficient or timely about this decision. In addition the SNZ Code of Conduct requires Johns and Cotterill to:

 Respect the rights, dignity and worth of others.

 Be fair, considerate and honest in all dealings with others.

 Be professional in, and accept responsibility for, your actions.

 Make a commitment to providing quality service and performance.

 Be aware of, and maintain an uncompromising adhesion to, standards, rules, regulations and policies.

 Refrain from any form of abuse towards others.

 Refrain from any form of discrimination towards others.

The decision to deny me access to this Report puts Johns and Cotterill in breach of the Constitution, these seven Code of Conduct rules and natural justice. I have not decided whether the Sport’s Tribunal or the Human Rights Commission should finally resolve this case. But SNZ should rest assured it will be pursued to the full extent of the law. Whether SNZ feel their current refusal to provide the Report is worth $10,000 in legal fees will be interesting to see.

But of particular interest today are two major SNZ regions, Wellington and Auckland. Both are either incapable of counting to six or chose to collectively offer the members their middle finger.

We begin in Wellington. Swimming Wellington merged with Wairarapa Swimming five years ago in July 2013. One result of the merger was an increase of one in the number of Swimming Wellington Board members; from six to seven. This was perfectly legal.

Today I see that the Swimming Wellington Board still has seven members. That was fine for the period 2013 to 2016. But after 2016 the Constitution required that the Board return to a maximum of six members. I thought, how come Swimming Wellington has operated in breach of its Constitution for two years?

It appears that at some time in the past two years the President or as he labels himself the consultant in jeans, contacted Swimming New Zealand and asked for permission to allow the Region to have seven Board members. I don’t know the content of their reply. However Swimming New Zealand must have approved because the extra Board member is still there.

If that is what happened, it is a disgrace. No one can trust a Board that ignores the organisation’s Constitution. And as for Swimming New Zealand giving their approval, that is just as bad. Effectively a backroom deal changed the Wellington Constitution. Swimming Wellington’s Constitution told them both what any change to the Constitution involves. Here is what the Constitution says.

As you can see only Wellington members can change the Constitution. For two years, it appears, Mark Berge has allowed an improperly constituted Board to govern the affairs of the Wellington Centre. The fact SNZ have done nothing to correct the breach is shameful.

And then we come to the Auckland Region. Their Annual General Meeting was held last night. As you would expect a new Board was elected. The Auckland Constitution requires a Board of six members. For several years, and for no good reason that I know of, Auckland has operated, contrary to its Constitution, with a Board of five. Here is what the Constitution says.

Three questions arise from the decision to re-elect a Board of five members.

Why did Auckland go to the trouble of holding an Annual Meeting that appeared to ignore its Constitution? The Constitution says six, after years of operating illegally why weren’t six members elected?

Does the fact that the Board has been unconstitutional for several years make null and void all decisions made by an illegally constituted Board? Certainly if Auckland Swimming was trying to fine a swimmer of mine for missing a race or something similar I would appeal their right to levy the fine on the basis that the Board was not properly formed. In fact the unconstitutional make-up of the Auckland Board calls into question every decision made by the Auckland Board for several years.

Finally why is it that Cotterill and Johns allow SNZ regions to operate outside their constitutions? It is ironic that at the time of the Moller Report SNZ insisted that all regions have the same constitution. The rules had to be the same for everyone. Having got that, the management of Cotterill and Johns appears to be so slack that regions can do what they like and SNZ will turn a blind eye. Well run businesses have rules and then ensure they are followed. I guess that means we can assume SNZ is not a well-run business.