Maybe there will be a Little accountability
The Post reports:
An independent review will be held into the procurement of Wellington City Council’s sleek new $600,000 library website, as new questions are raised about why a link to a commercial business based in the Bay of Islands – now removed – was being promoted on the homepage.
The Post revealed the true cost of the $595,801 spend on Te Matapihi ki te Ao Nui – a separate marketing site for Wellington’s central library and cultural hub – in May.
Mayor Andrew Little confirmed an investigation would be held into “not just the service provider” – but also the decision-making around it, including who got to sign it off, who didn’t, and how it got “out of control”. The terms of reference are still being finalised.
Critics labelled the site a “gold-plated” promotional stunt, a “glorified brochure” and an “atrocious” waste of ratepayer money because it provides little information for users wanting to book rooms, search catalogues, or join up it, instead redirecting people to the council’s actual library website.
Most reviews don’t actually end up with anyone being held accountable, but this waste of money is so bad, that I have a little hope that this review may actually lead to change.
I suspect part of the problem is simply a culture of not wanting to save money. A budget probably represents a target, rather than a cap. Actually for WCC a budget is often not even a cap!
Questions that should be asked are:
- Who set the budget for the website? Was it set before or after a tender?
- Who set the specifications for the website? What were they? Were they met?
- Was it a competitive tender?
- What was the difference between the highest and lowest bid?
- Did anyone at WCC ask if $600k is a good use of money for a website?