Thank you for contacting the Help Enquiry Portal  
  
Your enquiry regarding "Official Information request - Official
Information Request under LGOIMA – Environmental Plans & River Accord
Involvement (DMPFarm)" has been received and will be assigned to the
appropriate Horizons Staff Member.

The Enquiry Portal is not monitored outside of business hours (Monday -
Friday, 0800 - 1700, excluding Public Holidays).  If this enquiry is
urgent, please call 0508-800800 to speak to the after-hours operator.
You can add details to your enquiry by replying to this message.

Thanks

Help Team

Dear Gerard,

Official information request for Environmental Plans & River Accord
Involvement (DMPFarm)

I acknowledge receipt of your official information request dated Wednesday
2 July 2025.

We received your request on Wednesday 2 July 2025. We will endeavour to
respond to your request as soon as possible and in any event no later
than Wednesday 30 July 2025, being 20 working days after the day your
request was received. If we are unable to respond to your request by then,
we will notify you of an extension of that timeframe.

A copy of your request has also been sent to:
Chief Executive Officer Michael McCartney
Rachel Keedwell Chair Horizons
Bruce Gordon
If you have any queries, please contact us by replying to this email. If
any additional factors come to light which are relevant to your request,
please do not hesitate to contact us so that these can be taken into
account.

Yours sincerely
On behalf of LGOIMA
[https://bit.ly/3k26P3T]

To: Chief Executive Officer Michael McCartney
Cc:- Rachel Keedwell Chair Horizons
Cc: Bruce Gordon ex chair and audit committee member

Horizons Regional Council
Email: [email address]

Subject: Official Information Request under LGOIMA – Environmental Plans &
River Accord Involvement (DMPFarm)
Kia ora,
This is a request for official information under the Local Government
Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA).

1. As a confirmed owner of DMPFarm (as per your rates records and previous
correspondence), I have been seeking access to information held by
Horizons Regional Council (HRC) relating to Environmental Farm Plans
(EFPs) and any associated grants, reports, or site visits relevant to my
property.

2. I have previously been advised that I may be charged for the provision
of this information, on the grounds that it may take substantial staff
time to locate. I have referred this matter to the Ombudsman for
consideration.

3. In the meantime, through my own research, I have located public
references which should greatly assist your team in identifying the
specific documents I am seeking.
In particular, I refer you to the document:

• “13170 Annex A – Horizons 2013 Environmental Committee”, which discusses
EFPs, grants, and implementation progress under the Manawatū River Leaders
Accord.

Notably:
• On pages 18–19 of the report, it refers to Derek Ryan of HRC visiting
"all dairy property owners" and signing up the farmers to the Accord.
• Derek Ryan is also listed as an author of an EFP related to my property
(DMPFarm) and remains employed by HRC as a Project Coordinator for
Environmental Plans.2025
• The same document ““13170 Annex A – Horizons 2013 Environmental
Committee”” lists Jon Roygard (Freshwater and Science Manager) and Grant
Cooper (Manager) as contributors to the document . It is also likely that
Logan Brown is familiar with the relevant document and has sighted the
documents.
Given this, I am now narrowing and formalising my request as follows:

Official Information Requested:
1.A copy of the “signed up” document or agreement that relates to DMPFarm
under the River Accord initiative, as referred to in the 2013 report. I
understand there may be more than one document involved.

2The date(s) of visits by Derek Ryan to DMPFarm in relation to the River
Accord or Environmental Planning. And copy of the meeting notes .

3 The names of property owners visited by Derek Ryan as part of the
sign-up process mentioned in the 2013 Environmental Committee report.
Additional Notes:
• Please acknowledge this request promptly as required under the Act.
please confirm a copy of this request has been sento
Chief Executive Officer Michael McCartney
Rachel Keedwell Chair Horizons
Bruce Gordon ex chair and member of the Audit committee
• I understand that HRC has 20 working days to respond, however, given the
specificity and public availability of much of the information referenced,
I believe this request can be fulfilled in a shorter timeframe. As a show
of good faith, I request that the “signed documents” be provided within 10
working days.
• If any part of this request requires clarification, or if any
information is to be withheld under a statutory reason, please advise
accordingly. you have my contact details

Ngā mihi,

Gerard Paver

-------------------------------------------------------------------

This is an Official Information request made via the FYI website.

Please use this email address for all replies to this request:
[FOI #31467 email]

Is [Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council request email] the wrong address for Official Information
requests to Manawatu-Wanganui Regional Council? If so, please contact us
using this form:
https://fyi.org.nz/change_request/new?bo...

Disclaimer: This message and any reply that you make will be published on
the internet. Our privacy and copyright policies:
https://fyi.org.nz/help/officers

If you find this service useful as an Official Information officer, please
ask your web manager to link to us from your organisation's OIA or LGOIMA
page.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

 

Dear Gerard,

 

local government Official information and meetings act 1987 (lgoima)
request

 

I refer to your LGOIMA request dated 2 July 2025. You requested the
following official information:

 

a)      A copy of the “signed-up” document or agreement that relates to
DMP Farm under the River Accord initiative, as referred to in the 2013
report.

 

b)      The date(s) of visits by Derek Ryan to DMP Farm in relation to the
River Accord or Environmental Planning, and copies of any meeting notes.

 

c)      The names of property owners visited by Derek Ryan as part of the
sign-up process mentioned in the 2013 Environmental Committee report.

 

Part of the information you have requested (the Environmental Farm Plan as
agreed) is enclosed. Please note that the funding stream used to develop
these Environmental Farm Plans was via the Fresh Start for Freshwater
Clean-up Fund, a Ministry for the Environment funding stream which
Horizons applied to (and were successful in receiving funding) on behalf
of the Manawatū River Leaders Forum.

 

However, for the remaining parts of your request, we are unable to provide
the requested information. The notes you refer to (both meeting notes and
notes of names) were collected prior to the 2013 committee report you have
referenced. These were subject to a 7-year retention period under our
Public Records Act 2007 retention and disposal policy. As these notes more
than seven years old, they are no longer required to be, and are not,
retained by Horizons. I am therefore refusing the remainder of your
request under section 17(e) of the LGOIMA, because Horizons does not hold
the official information requested.

 

You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of
this decision.

Information about how to make a complaint is available at
[1]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or freephone 0800 802 602.

 

 

Yours sincerely

On behalf of LGOIMA

[https://bit.ly/3k26P3T]

Dear HRC
thank you for your automated reply

for further clarity - and avoidance of doubt

When I am asking for the names of the property owners visited by Derek
Ryan as referred to in the HRC environmental report committee report 2013
I am asking for the recorded names of the parties who Derek Ryan Visited
ie:- property owners referenced in the report, these may not necessarily
be the legal property owners or legal farmer.
The names visited will be in Derek Ryans Diary notes , the project Diary
notes and records and of course in the signed documents.
hence the requests for copes of the documents

sincerely,

Gerard Paver

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Paver,

Apologies the response we sent was missing the annex to the letter. Please
find attached the complete letter with annex.
Yours sincerely
On behalf of LGOIMA
Requester: Gerard Paver

Request email: [FOI #31467 email]

Created: Jul 2, 2025 10:03 AM 

Due by: Sep 15, 2025 02:04 PM
Dear Mr Paver

 

local government Official information and meetings act 1987 (lgoima)
requests

 

I refer to your official information requests dated 30 July 2025 and 4
August 2025.

 

Given the number of individual requests, the decisions on these requests
are set out in the attached Appendix to this letter. These have been
collated and grouped by subject matter.

 

As identified in the Appendix, part of the information you have requested
is enclosed.

 

However, we have decided to refuse your requests for certain information
as explained below. In other cases, we are extending the time period for
our decision. We have provided further details below, and in the Appendix.
The request numbers respond to those used in the Appendix.

 

Request 1

 

We understand your request to be a summary of the content of all records
disposed of by Horizons since 2018. Unfortunately, it will not be possible
to advise you of Horizons decision within 20- working days of your
request, and we are notifying you of an extension of time for our
decision, to 15 September 2025.

 

This extension is necessary as the scope of your request is broad and will
necessitate a search through a large quantity of information to inform
Horizons decisions. Meeting the original timeframe would unreasonably
interfere with Horizons’ operations due to staff needing to be reassigned
to this task.

 

Request 2(d)

 

Horizons’ records do not identify the individual responsible for
authorising disposal of this information. These requests are therefore
refused under s 17(e) as the information requested no longer exists.

 

Request 3

 

Horizons does not hold records of each individual file in its archives.
Further detail is provided in the appendix below. These requests are
refused under s 17(e) as the information requested no longer exists.

 

Requests 8-9

As we have indicated, we are required to advise you of our decision on
your request no later than 20 working days after the day we received your
request. Unfortunately, it will not be possible to meet that time limit,
and an extension is necessary on our decision on these requests, to 15
September 2025.

 

Again, this request is for a large quantity of information, which requires
a search of a large quantity of information. Council officers will need to
be reassigned from existing tasks to do so within the existing timeframe,
and this would unreasonably interfere with Horizons’ operations.

 

In light of the above, we again ask whether you would please consider our
request to clarify dated 8 August 2025 and refine your requests 1, and
8-9. This would assist us in responding to your requests. We further note
that the amount of resource required to process your request means that
Horizons may consider charging for making any requested information
available.   

 

You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of
this decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
[1]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or

freephone 0800 802 602.
On behalf of LGOIMA
To: Michael McCartney, Chief Executive Officer, Horizons Regional Council
Cc: Rachel Keedwell, Chair, Horizons Regional Council
Cc: Bruce Gordon, Former Chair and Current Audit Committee Member
Attn: Sharon – Please ensure this message is forwarded in full to the
above recipients in line with Ombudsman guidance and previous
correspondence.
 
Subject: Re: LGOIMA Request ID ##232872## – Concerns Regarding Integrity
of Process and Historical Context
 
Dear Mr McCartney,
 
I am writing in response to your recent correspondence regarding my LGOIMA
submissions. While your request for clarification appears procedurally
reasonable on the surface, the wider context suggests otherwise. My view
is that this is yet another effort by Horizons Regional Council (HRC) to
delay or dilute scrutiny, rather than engage transparently with the
substance of the information requested.
 

 1. Pattern of Obstruction and Lack of Good Faith

You state that HRC responds to all information requests “made in good
faith.” Based on my experience over several years, I must respectfully
disagree. My LGOIMA requests have consistently been met with partial
disclosures, critical omissions, and—in some cases—complete refusals to
provide documentation without just cause. That pattern undermines any
assertion of good faith.
 
For example:
 

 1. In 2019, I lodged a serious complaint regarding suspected fraud
involving DMPFarm, which was raised directly with both yourself and
then-Chair Bruce Gordon. Despite the gravity of the concerns,
responses were dismissive and all  documentation is  now claimed to be
deleted.
 2. Requests that were short, clear, and specific at the time produced no
meaningful result, necessitating the inclusion of context in later
submissions to avoid misinterpretation and selective omission.

 2. Key Issues Supporting the Inclusion of Context

The following incidents underscore the necessity of including background
detail in my requests:
 

 1. Derek Ryan’s Role: HRC knowingly or recklessly accepted Blair Drysdale
as a representative of DMPFarm without informing or involving the
actual elderly owners. When questioned, HRC  yet still imposed charges
(over $2,100) to release remaining documents and now claim relevant
records were deleted,  —while HRC has previously provided resources to
the Drysdales at no cost to produce a “technical report” used to
mislead a tribunal.
 2. Misleading Tribunal Submission: In 2018, a “Technical Assessment” by
HRC’s Mair Owen was submitted by the Drysdales to the Palmerston North
District Court. The document can now be proven to be factually
inaccurate, raising questions about possible collusion or, at best,
lack of oversight by HRC.
 3. Repeated Non-Disclosure: Grant Cooper supported Mair owens paper
knowing it was used in court by Drysdale to refute  a legal claim, he
subsequently withheld background material relevant to the 2018
Tribunal undermining the rule of law,  having knowledge that the
Drysdales had signed falsely as property owners.
 4. Meeting in 2019: During a meeting with yourself and Bruce Gordon,
accompanied by Alan Wallbank, I was assured that no legal documents or
evidence of fraud existed. That statement is now demonstrably
incorrect.
 5. Subsequent Reviews in 2023–2024: Only after HRC’s 16 August 2024
response did I realise the full extent of the misinformation provided
earlier. I reviewed documentation and confirmed serious
inconsistencies in statements by Dr Jon Roygard and Logan Brown. These
errors, omissions, and misrepresentations have never been corrected, I
am requesting details of ALL grants you have clear context.

 3. Additional Considerations

 1. I have no control over what others submit via FYI.org , though I found
the input useful and the  submission prompted further valid inquiries.
 2. I have consulted with professional advisers and auditors who have
confirmed that public release of these matters is now appropriate and
necessary to ensure transparency.
 3. I now name key officials because I no longer believe the issue lies
with staff being misled—it appears clear that senior officials have
contributed to the lack of disclosure and accountability.

 4. Requested Immediate Actions

To avoid further delay or unnecessary escalation, I respectfully request
the following:
 

 1. Confirmation that no further deletion of relevant public records has
occurred, and that all backups and related material have been
preserved and those documents recovered.
 2. Immediate release of the HRC disposal schedule and decision authority
(DA) records, as previously requested.
 3. Provision of all outstanding documents related to my LGOIMA requests,
without cost or further obstruction.
 4. Publication of a full list of grant recipients, as a matter of
transparency and public interest—this may help identify whether other
vulnerable individuals have been similarly affected.

 5. Final Remarks

The inclusion of context in my LGOIMA submissions is not incidental—it is
essential. Without it, previous HRC responses have mischaracterised or
selectively responded to requests. I remain committed to a fair and
factual process, but that must be matched by transparency and integrity
from your side.
 
Any duplication of response can be cut and paste taking  less than 5 mins.
There is no material overhead. Had HRC responded in a timely manner the
need for minor clarification points as per FYI guidelines would not be
required.
 
I appreciate your attention to these matters and look forward to a full
and timely response.
 
I am available for constructive resolution and if there is material you
wish to send via email  that results in resolution I am willing to close
the FYI as complete by agreed wording
 
Yours sincerely
 
Gerad Paver
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

show quoted sections

Dear Mr Paver.

 

Further to our correspondence dated 15 September 2025, please see attached
the grant funding information requested.

 

As indicated in our correspondence, redactions have been made to personal
details of individuals pursuant to s 7(2)(a) of the LGOIMA.

 

If there are any queries, please let us know.

​
On behalf of LGOIMA

Requester: Gerard Paver

Request email: [FOI #31467 email]

Created: Jul 2, 2025 10:03 AM 

Due by: Sep 29, 2025 02:04 PM
Dear Mr Paver

 

local government Official information and meetings act 1987 (lgoima)
requests

 

I write further to our letter of 27 August 2025 in which we extended the
time period for our decision on certain official information requests
dated 30 July 2025 and 4 August 2025.

 

Please see below our decision on these requests.

 

Confirm in writing what documentation (if any) has been actually deleted
since my initial request to Grant Cooper 2018 and our subsequent meeting
in 2019.

 

As we noted in our previous correspondence, we understand your request is
for a summary of the content of all records disposed of by Horizons since
2018. Despite our requests, we did not receive any further clarification
from you as to the scope of this request. 

 

In any case, Horizons does not hold records of each individual file that
has been disposed of – records are categorised into folders relating to
their subject matter. When a folder is assessed eligible for disposal, it
is recorded that the folder has been disposed of. Details of the
individual files within the folder are not recorded.

 

As such, this request is refused under section 17(e) as the information
requested does not exist.

 

Details of all grants, gifts, donations, or public financial contributions
issued under the Manawatu River Leaders Accord – including riparian
fencing and planting grants, from inception to date:

·         Date awarded

·         Name or location of farm

·         Name of recipient or recipient organisation

·         Amount awarded or contributed (regardless of whether classified
as a grant, gift, donation, or ratepayer-funded support)

·         Purpose of the award (eg: fencing, planting, or both – as
described in the original application)

·         Total funding pool available by year

·         Names of the awarding committee members for each year

 

We have decided to grant your request in part. It will take us some time
to prepare the information for release, however, we anticipate providing
the documents to you by Monday 29 September 2025.

 

We have withheld some information captured by your requests which relates
to personal details  of individuals, which have been withheld under
section 7(2)(a) of the LGOIMA, to protect their privacy. I do not consider
that those persons’ privacy interests are outweighed by the public
interest in the information’s release. Information withheld pursuant to
this section will be redacted in the relevant documents and marked as
such.

 

We have refused your requests for the ‘total funding pool available by
year’ under section 17(d) as this information is publicly available. The
total funding pool available by year is what is set out in Horizons’
Annual Plan. These are available at
[1]www.horizons.govt.nz/publications-feedback/publications/annual-plans.

 

 

 

Names of awarding committee members for each year

 

A panel has only recently been established approximately 12 months ago to
review and determine grant applications. The current members of the panel
are Logan Brown, Anna Regtien, Mair Owen and Lucy Ferguson.

 

Previously, grant applications were reviewed and determined by the
appropriate Horizons officer – either a Manager or Team Leader. Where a
grant amount exceeds $20,000, the application will also be reviewed by the
large grant committee. This currently comprises Lucy Ferguson, William
McKay, Malcolm Todd, Grant Cooper and Szabolcs Kosik.

 

If there are other granting bodies (such as in Pahiatua, Dannevirke,
Norsewood, or Wairarapa), please advise the details and provide the list
for those areas.

 

The grant funding information that will be provided to you captures the
various programmes under which funding has been allocated by the Manawatū
River Leaders Accord (and Horizons). It is noted that the Wairarapa does
not fall within the Horizons region, and therefore this information has
not been provided.

 

 

You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of
this decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
[2]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or

freephone 0800 802 602.

 

On behalf of LGOIMA
Dear Mr Paver

 

local government Official information and meetings act 1987 (lgoima)
requests

 

I refer to your official information requests dated 30 July 2025 and 4
August 2025.

 

Given the number of individual requests, the decisions on these requests
are set out in the attached Appendix to this letter. These have been
collated and grouped by subject matter.

 

As identified in the Appendix, part of the information you have requested
is enclosed.

 

However, we have decided to refuse your requests for certain information
as explained below. In other cases, we are extending the time period for
our decision. We have provided further details below, and in the Appendix.
The request numbers respond to those used in the Appendix.

 

Request 1

 

We understand your request to be a summary of the content of all records
disposed of by Horizons since 2018. Unfortunately, it will not be possible
to advise you of Horizons decision within 20- working days of your
request, and we are notifying you of an extension of time for our
decision, to 15 September 2025.

 

This extension is necessary as the scope of your request is broad and will
necessitate a search through a large quantity of information to inform
Horizons decisions. Meeting the original timeframe would unreasonably
interfere with Horizons’ operations due to staff needing to be reassigned
to this task.

 

Request 2(d)

 

Horizons’ records do not identify the individual responsible for
authorising disposal of this information. These requests are therefore
refused under s 17(e) as the information requested no longer exists.

 

Request 3

 

Horizons does not hold records of each individual file in its archives.
Further detail is provided in the appendix below. These requests are
refused under s 17(e) as the information requested no longer exists.

 

Requests 8-9

As we have indicated, we are required to advise you of our decision on
your request no later than 20 working days after the day we received your
request. Unfortunately, it will not be possible to meet that time limit,
and an extension is necessary on our decision on these requests, to 15
September 2025.

 

Again, this request is for a large quantity of information, which requires
a search of a large quantity of information. Council officers will need to
be reassigned from existing tasks to do so within the existing timeframe,
and this would unreasonably interfere with Horizons’ operations.

 

In light of the above, we again ask whether you would please consider our
request to clarify dated 8 August 2025 and refine your requests 1, and
8-9. This would assist us in responding to your requests. We further note
that the amount of resource required to process your request means that
Horizons may consider charging for making any requested information
available.   

 

You have the right to seek an investigation and review by the Ombudsman of
this decision. Information about how to make a complaint is available at
[3]www.ombudsman.parliament.nz or

freephone 0800 802 602.
On behalf of LGOIMA
To: Michael McCartney, Chief Executive Officer, Horizons Regional Council
Cc: Rachel Keedwell, Chair, Horizons Regional Council
Cc: Bruce Gordon, Former Chair and Current Audit Committee Member
Attn: Sharon – Please ensure this message is forwarded in full to the
above recipients in line with Ombudsman guidance and previous
correspondence.
 
Subject: Re: LGOIMA Request ID ##232872## – Concerns Regarding Integrity
of Process and Historical Context
 
Dear Mr McCartney,
 
I am writing in response to your recent correspondence regarding my LGOIMA
submissions. While your request for clarification appears procedurally
reasonable on the surface, the wider context suggests otherwise. My view
is that this is yet another effort by Horizons Regional Council (HRC) to
delay or dilute scrutiny, rather than engage transparently with the
substance of the information requested.
 

 1. Pattern of Obstruction and Lack of Good Faith

You state that HRC responds to all information requests “made in good
faith.” Based on my experience over several years, I must respectfully
disagree. My LGOIMA requests have consistently been met with partial
disclosures, critical omissions, and—in some cases—complete refusals to
provide documentation without just cause. That pattern undermines any
assertion of good faith.
 
For example:
 

 1. In 2019, I lodged a serious complaint regarding suspected fraud
involving DMPFarm, which was raised directly with both yourself and
then-Chair Bruce Gordon. Despite the gravity of the concerns,
responses were dismissive and all  documentation is  now claimed to be
deleted.
 2. Requests that were short, clear, and specific at the time produced no
meaningful result, necessitating the inclusion of context in later
submissions to avoid misinterpretation and selective omission.

 2. Key Issues Supporting the Inclusion of Context

The following incidents underscore the necessity of including background
detail in my requests:
 

 1. Derek Ryan’s Role: HRC knowingly or recklessly accepted Blair Drysdale
as a representative of DMPFarm without informing or involving the
actual elderly owners. When questioned, HRC  yet still imposed charges
(over $2,100) to release remaining documents and now claim relevant
records were deleted,  —while HRC has previously provided resources to
the Drysdales at no cost to produce a “technical report” used to
mislead a tribunal.
 2. Misleading Tribunal Submission: In 2018, a “Technical Assessment” by
HRC’s Mair Owen was submitted by the Drysdales to the Palmerston North
District Court. The document can now be proven to be factually
inaccurate, raising questions about possible collusion or, at best,
lack of oversight by HRC.
 3. Repeated Non-Disclosure: Grant Cooper supported Mair owens paper
knowing it was used in court by Drysdale to refute  a legal claim, he
subsequently withheld background material relevant to the 2018
Tribunal undermining the rule of law,  having knowledge that the
Drysdales had signed falsely as property owners.
 4. Meeting in 2019: During a meeting with yourself and Bruce Gordon,
accompanied by Alan Wallbank, I was assured that no legal documents or
evidence of fraud existed. That statement is now demonstrably
incorrect.
 5. Subsequent Reviews in 2023–2024: Only after HRC’s 16 August 2024
response did I realise the full extent of the misinformation provided
earlier. I reviewed documentation and confirmed serious
inconsistencies in statements by Dr Jon Roygard and Logan Brown. These
errors, omissions, and misrepresentations have never been corrected, I
am requesting details of ALL grants you have clear context.

 3. Additional Considerations

 1. I have no control over what others submit via FYI.org , though I found
the input useful and the  submission prompted further valid inquiries.
 2. I have consulted with professional advisers and auditors who have
confirmed that public release of these matters is now appropriate and
necessary to ensure transparency.
 3. I now name key officials because I no longer believe the issue lies
with staff being misled—it appears clear that senior officials have
contributed to the lack of disclosure and accountability.

 4. Requested Immediate Actions

To avoid further delay or unnecessary escalation, I respectfully request
the following:
 

 1. Confirmation that no further deletion of relevant public records has
occurred, and that all backups and related material have been
preserved and those documents recovered.
 2. Immediate release of the HRC disposal schedule and decision authority
(DA) records, as previously requested.
 3. Provision of all outstanding documents related to my LGOIMA requests,
without cost or further obstruction.
 4. Publication of a full list of grant recipients, as a matter of
transparency and public interest—this may help identify whether other
vulnerable individuals have been similarly affected.

 5. Final Remarks

The inclusion of context in my LGOIMA submissions is not incidental—it is
essential. Without it, previous HRC responses have mischaracterised or
selectively responded to requests. I remain committed to a fair and
factual process, but that must be matched by transparency and integrity
from your side.
 
Any duplication of response can be cut and paste taking  less than 5 mins.
There is no material overhead. Had HRC responded in a timely manner the
need for minor clarification points as per FYI guidelines would not be
required.
 
I appreciate your attention to these matters and look forward to a full
and timely response.
 
I am available for constructive resolution and if there is material you
wish to send via email  that results in resolution I am willing to close
the FYI as complete by agreed wording
 
Yours sincerely
 
Gerad Paver
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

show quoted sections