Last April, the board changed the name and scope of its audit finance and risk committee, a move driven by Mr Butterfield.
Any discussion on this appears to have taken place in the closed session at the board's April meeting.
While the committee's March meeting was listed as an agenda item for the publicly excluded part of the April meeting, there was no indication in the board agenda that the terms of reference were to be discussed.
At the board meeting, it was decided the committee, which always meets behind closed doors, would become the audit and risk management committee.
Its role in ensuring financial matters including funding, operating expenditure, financial and strategic planning were appropriately managed was removed.
While the financial report has always been part of the public agenda and board members could raise any matters there, detailed attention to financial matters was previously given by the earlier audit finance and risk committee.
Mr Butterfield, who became the board chairman at the end of last year, said he had proposed the change because he considered all of the financial matters should be discussed by the whole board.
"I believe that all board members have got to have, or have got to gain enough financial acumen to talk intelligently about finances of the entity."
This applied regardless of what board members' occupations were.
Mr Butterfield, who is an accountant from Timaru, agreed that some members might find that more difficult than others. Extra training for board members would be addressed in the next year.
"Some people never change. No criticism of any board members, but I did have another life before I came ... and I speak from bitter experience."
Mr Butterfield could not recall that terms of reference had been discussed in the April closed session, suggesting that the board had discussed it "casually" and openly before that happened.
He agreed, if the situation were as the Otago Daily Times understood it, the terms of reference should have been considered in open session.
Asked if the matter could be perceived as part of a trend towards a "closed shop" at the board, he said this would be unfortunate when now the finances of the board were discussed in open meeting, apart from those matters which had to be considered in private.
He accepted there had not been much discussion in public of the finances in recent months, but suggested that was because the board's deficit was lower than budgeted.
"When you're doing that, why would people spend a lot of time on chewing the fat?"
There does not appear to have been any increase in the amount of financial detail available to board members in the public section of meetings since the change in the audit and risk management committee's duties.
The board reviews the terms of reference for the committee annually. The review in July last year was listed for discussion in the board's open session.
Changes
Responsibilities removed in the change from the audit finance and risk management committee to the new audit and risk management committee are. -
• Reviewing development of board's long- and short-term financial and operational strategies.
• Reviewing district annual plans, statements of intent and district strategic plans for financial impact.
• Monitoring financial performance and position of DHB against budget and forecast in addition to the normal monthly board financial reporting.
• Developing a work plan identifying the key times for accountability and other legislative requirements relevant to the committee.
