Part of this article accurately summaries some of my views as follows:

Among the criticisms before a recent council meeting were that much responsibility lay with Ms Barker and deputy mayor Cherry Lucas, especially chairing meetings. Other Councillors were “sidelined” or under-used.

Ms Barker said it was usual for the mayor and deputy mayor to have a high workload.

Cr Andrew Simms had been assigned deputy lead of the economic development portfolio and the top-polling councillor at the election was minded to turn this down.

A deal before the meeting elevated him to joint leadership with Ms Barker. Credit for the compromise belonged with the mayor, he said.

Experienced councillor Lee Vandervis was far from content with the overhaul and turned down deputy roles — resulting in a pay cut. In the past, competition for committee chairing posts had been an issue and now portfolio leads were being added, potentially making things worse, he argued.

An “all-encompassing muzzling clause” was how Cr Vandervis described a section of the proposed portfolio terms of reference.

Cr Russell Lund had taken issue with the same section — external communication protocol. He wanted it withdrawn and Ms Barker declined.

Then, as Cr Vandervis went through section 10 bit by bit, the mayor began to have doubts herself. Ms Barker said she had no intention of bringing in a muzzling clause for Councillors and so the section was dropped — it is to be rewritten next month.