A Blunt Instrument but a ‘Necessary Evil’ as Such
Andy Cawston of West Auckland published a first hand account or rather view on his thoughts of the new Interim Transport Levy/Package. It is a fair assessment and I would say an opposing argument to my Public Good argument I have made on the Transport Levy.
Andy has given permission to paste his material here in which Talking Auckland sends Andy a thank you.
From Andy on the response to the Transport Levy passed last week by Auckland Council:
I have now had opportunity to contemplate the various posts back-and-forth on the Budget in general and on the $114 Transit Levy in particular. For what it’s worth, these are my considered views.
First off, Penny Hulse and Linda Cooper are only two voices on Council, and we sent them there to represent us. Nobody, being fair, could possibly blame them for what goes on in that Circus. They’ve got two votes only, and the best they can do is put our case for the West, and try to make everything work as best they can.
We are not going to get our own way all the time. Out West, it is probably fair to conclude we will not get our own way often — that just seems to be the way Auckland City is wired. It has always been that way, and I do not see any reasonable prospect for that changing anytime soon — unless somebody Out West figures out a great way of generating massive amounts of Industry, Jobs, and Money…
(Unfortunately, it is still Industry, Jobs, and Money that call the shots. It has always been thus!)
Did we get ripped off with the $114 Transit Levy? Of course we did. Nobody with a calculator and a map could reasonably conclude otherwise. Are we going to get much-needed transit projects our West? Yeah, a few — they’re no Scream in Hell, but they’re alot better than nothing. Is rural West Auckland going to get anything for our Levy? No, of course not: we will get ripped off completely — and if we don’t like it we can suck rocks. Or, fetch out our pitchforks and torches and throw up some barricades, Les Miserables-style.
I don’t see any prospect of that happening anytime soon: Waiatarua ain’t Marsaille, and people simply don’t have the energy for any of that.
Hell, people don’t even have the energy to vote in Civic Elections: the last turn-out was PATHETIC. Yet to see all the steam venting over civic matters, you’d think EVERYONE voted.
But they didn’t! Almost NOBODY voted! And *that* is how we got from where were 100 years ago, to where we are today!
We can thank our lucky stars a few of our fellow Citizens are willing to stand for election, put their faces up on signs, get voted in, and then take the punching the rest of the Citizenry gives them for trying to make our representative Democracy work.
In our case, these two are Penny Hulse, and Linda Cooper. They done good with this Budget.
We do not have to be happy with the result — but then, that was never going to happen. We *do* have to be appreciative and grateful for their efforts, and for what they *were* able to achieve — because they did something most people didn’t do: they put their good names forward, to represent the rest of us.
It remains to wish Penny and Linda a Happy Mothers’ Day. Thankyou for your efforts on our behalf.
Thus spake The Chieftain. So let it be written. So let it be done.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O8gTIr4lys
………
Also in reflection to our democratic institution at Local Government level not firing on all eight cylinders (if any cylinders at all some days):
I guess the only other thing I’d observe is this: anyone who thinks it would be easy to be an Elected Member of Council ought to try following one around for a of couple days, see how they like it. Councillors’ alarm clocks go off between 5:30 and 6:00 AM. They are on the road by 6:30 and frequently arrive at their first appointments by 7:00 AM. Those are not always at the Offices: as often as not, it will be an early-morning event which they will be officiating at. If you have managed to finesse 30 minutes for your event with a Councillor, you are doing well indeed — because 30 minutes is an ETERNITY. They may have several of those in the morning, before their first meeting.
Meetings are usually back-to-back. They will start at about 10 AM. Councillors are expected (by law) to have read and understood everything to be considered at that meeting — it’s called The Agenda, and it is often an inch thick. They have 2 weeks from the receipt of the Agenda to the meeting. If they haven’t read it all, TOUGH LUCK. They are still legally on-the-hook with go-to-gaol consequences for whatever happens at that meeting and for the results of the vote. Meetings are NO FUN AT ALL. They are turgid. Most presenters drone on-and-on-and-on-and-on, reading from notes verbatim, putting their audiences to sleep. Meetings go on FOREVER, until the Agenda is covered [Note from admin: believe me I know this oh too well from my time covering Committees. The amount of droning gets to the point of absolute insufferable].
Then the next Meeting begins.
If they are lucky, Councillors get to go home sometime during Rush Hour, like the rest of us. But many don’t — they will have evening events to go to as well — just like the morning events. Or they might have Meetings that go well into the night — like Council meetings. Suffice to say, Councillors put in a full, 5-day week doing fairly turgid stuff. Just reading their Agendas used to bore me to tears — I used to get to proof-read the material sent to Councillors: it was awful. A great way to destroy a perfectly-good, hi-quality mind.
But wait! There’s more!
There’s weekends, too. Councillors use their weekends to get round-about their communities, to hear the gripes of those of us who are too lazy or busy to engage with Council through the existing consultative processes — which would be most of us, because almost NO Private Citizen (with the exception of Ben Ross) has the wit or capacity to fully understand how the consultative process works.
Many Private Citizens do try to use the consultative process, tho’ — but talking face-to-face is easier and more effective. Councillors know this. Therefore, Councillors will spend most of their weekends, most of the time, engaging with the public somehow. Even if they don’t want to. They can be minding their own business in a cafe, then suddenly WHAM! Button-holed over the Waikikamukau Sewage Treatment Plant, and why isn’t Council doing anything about it?
And then there’s Facebook. The whole constituency is on Facebook [note from admin: after the Transport Levy debate Facebook was a feral and septic place with a core rump from a small section of Auckland delivering pretty much abuse. I do wonder if any of them have seen the situation described like this and thought about. The answer is no because to them it is about them and no one else [I wont point out the primary ethnicity either but it should be easy to guess]. That said the support came about a little bit later but the haters and trolls are usually the first to bite.]…
Occasionally, much gets made of “why do Councillors get fed at Council Meetings? Why can’t they feed themselves, like the rest of us do?”
It’s an excellent question, and it’s got a non-obvious answer.
Councillors *do* need to eat. And if you’ve ever seen the inside of one of their diaries, you’ll see there isn’t alot of space in them. They literally do book meetings back-to-back. Often in ten minute slots. And chances are excellent if they are eating or drinking coffee they are also talking with a constituent at the same time.
If they weren’t fed a meal at their Council Meetings, they might not eat at all that day — yes, their diaries do get THAT full.
We do expect them to make good decisions on our behalf, and they cannot do that if their stomachs are grumbling. It’s axiomatic.
Occasionally, much is made about how much Councillors get paid. You might be surprised how little it actually is.
Most would make WAY more money working in private industry.
Quite a few of the Council Staff make double or more than the Mayor’s salary. And almost every Mid-Senior Manager at Council will make as much or more than any Councillor.
—ends—-
Again thank you Andy for your very valuable contribution.
Local Government is certainly not easy by any stretch of means. From the Herald being express with the truth to two Ministers effectively caught blowing smoke out of their backsides (Ministers’ figures off the mark), and Councillors picking agenda’s for their own causes we wonder why Auckland is detached. However, participation seems to be increasing with 9,300 submissions to the Unitary Plan and just recently 22,000 pieces of feedback to the Long Term Plan. Not great numbers for a City of 1.5 million people but sure as better than not even 10% of the Long Term Plan figures when we last did this exercise in 2012.
That said we still have a long way to go.
Talking Southern Auckland 
It’s merely a variation of The Golden Rule: “He who hath the Gold, maketh The Rules.” And that ain’t the West, Esther.
GOLD DON’T VOTE. The people do. So for the purposes of Transparency this conversation has been excellent for the people of the wider Auckland. Hopefully we can get further help from the fourth estate. Obviously the gold has some influence but if it as you suggest the gold is the pupeteer of the council then next elections it’s time to remind them who put them there.
> Obviously the gold has some influence but if it as you suggest the gold is the pupeteer of the council then next elections it’s time to remind them who put them there.
I’m not too sure what that would achieve.
The Elected Members don’t even call the shots. They (“The Council”) implements Legislation passed onto it by Central Government. On that basis, it doesn’t really matter who is Mayor, or who sits around the Council Chambers table — there is a finite, tightly-defined space where Elected Members can have any influence at all. The can establish strategy, and they can establish general direction, and they can approve the allocation of budget. That is — more-or-less — it.
There is a good reason why SuperCity is dysfunctional: it was designed to be that way.
Let’s see if this analogy works, because it illustrates the illusion versus the reality rather well:
In an ideal world, City Council would be like a hi-performance racing car: with a huge, fuel-efficient engine (so it could move fast!), a powerful transmission, and a hi-performance suspension. It would have brakes, a clutch, and a steering wheel (so it could be easily and accurately controlled), fantastic instrumentation, and the best tyres money could buy. And it would be driven by an expert, supported by a team of experts. And it would race to win.
Compare-and-contrast. City Council is actually more like a shopping cart that somebody has ripped off from CountDown and hauled to the top of West Coast Road. It has four hi-speed castor wheels (so it can go fast!) and a basket, and that’s about it. No brakes, no steering wheel — nothing. Every three years we elect a few Volunteer Candidates, tie them up, cram them into the shopping cart, and give it a mighty HEAVE down West Coast Road. And they go fast! Screaming all the way! The road is steep, twisty, narrow, and dangerous! With no way to control the vehicle, they’re entirely dependent on gravity, centrifugal force, all of Newton’s Laws of Physics, and Blind Luck! And people line the side of West Coast Road to cheer them on, or to encourage them to go faster, or the bitch and complain if it looks like they’re going to wipe out…
Electing different people to get tied up in the Shopping Cart isn’t going to make a blind bit of difference to the outcome. And that is the cold, hard truth.
Lol. Well I’d put it more like this. Elected Members job is to use there vote to make decisions about which aisles we take the trolley. The public is the family at home who discussed what was needed at the shops. The council is the internet with the list, health advise and the recipes and information to be utilised to make the best decisions. If the elected members have stolen mums chequebook are riding in the trolley with no control and not buying what was on the list and then hididng what they bought in the back of the pantry that’s a problem.
Esther observes:
> GOLD DON’T VOTE. The people do.
Not this last election, they didn’t. Not in 2013.
If you were to round up 100 eligible voters in West Auckland and ask them directly “did you vote last election?” most of them would probably swear up-and-down they did. It would be a monstrous lie, of course — but almost everybody would claim to vote.
However, if you could waterboard the truth out of them, 64 would eventually confess to being too dam’n lazy to vote in 2013. MORE THAN HALF! Almost two out of three!
Auckland’s civic voter turnout is a PATHETIC 36% — and that’s why GOLD VOTES: people simply can’t be bothered.
From Henderson May Minutes: Community environmental services
Ecofest · Organisation for the annual Ecofests in the North and West of the region is underway in conjunction with Kaipatiki Project and Ecomatters Trust. The Ecofests will run from mid-March to mid-April in 2014. $257,724 (across the three western local boards)
From Kaipatiki May Minutes. Kaipatiki (North Shore) did not pay for the ecofest happening on the north shore. Council deny we pay for the north shore but can’t explain the figures.. Costs for these have now been changed to $54k and then $9k . Delivered by Ecomatters multiple elected members, a secretary to the board and an issues assistant to a local mp. It’s just one of many.
How after accurately describing the budget for what it is – the West being ripped off and a turd burger, can you then conclude that our elected members did a stirling job. I don’t care what time they get up or how many meetings they attend. It’s a crap result again. It is at the detriment to Auckland the growing gap between rich and poor. If there are no jobs in West Auckland that is also part of their job description. Perhaps ask why economic budget line has been cut in Waitakere three years in a row from the board while spending the money on more walkways to nowhere and the worlds most expensive toilets. They’ve done a Crap Job with this budget. Crap Decision Making. Crap Results. Full stop. It is there job. There responsibility and they need to own it. Auckland’s worst results came from the West Elected Members. And with one of our Councillors as Deputy Mayor we should have had more leverage. But no. But as per Waitakere Council days were we were charged the most with the worst results highest debt and least assets we still believed we had the best Council? What we have is the best spin doctors.
Had a Central Community Facilities manager visit our West Auckland community centre last month. He was surprised at the run down state of the public buildings out West a It’s not right. The complete lack of transparency and conflicts of interest are the clue to why the money isn’t going where it shoulld. There is not one tangible measurable project in our budget. The biggest numbers relate to general environmental community lines without specific named projects or scoping which will go straight into trusts that Waitakere and Henderson Elected members and their political assistants are trustees of. Hope the new governance dude has the teeth to sort it out.
Esther writes:
> How after accurately describing the budget for what it is – the West being ripped off and a turd burger, can you then conclude that our elected members did a stirling job
That’s pretty easy to answer, Esther: of all the regions in Auckland, only Pukekohe has less leverage than Auckland. Industry, Jobs, and Money call the shots in the SuperCity. It has always been thus.
Going into any negotiation, West Auckland will begin by having nearly zero leverage. What does the West have to barter with? Think it thru carefully. The ranges are all protected by Statute, so there is a finite limit to how many people can live here, and what they can do with their land. There are fairly draconian laws in place to protect our environment, so there are fairly tight constraints as to what sort of Industries we can (and will) tolerate.
Those two constraints alone would be enough to make sure the West comes out toward the very bottom of the Industry, Jobs and Money equation, every single time. Yet we have plenty of other constraints in place, as well,
So it isn’t as if our Elected Members enter into these negotiations with a particularly strong hand to begin with: they don’t. They can only play the cards they’re given. And the West has traditionally always had weak cards.
This is the price we pay for the lifestyle we enjoy at the price we can afford to pay.
Having entered this negotiation with very little to bargain with, they managed to come away from the table with a few concessions that we didn’t have when they entered into the discussion. It could have been alot worse — they could have ended up with NOTHING. But they ended up with a few very nice concessions. On that basis they did a Stirling job.
> If there are no jobs in West Auckland that is also part of their job description.
I disagree. It is not and never has been a legitimate role of government to create jobs. That is what private industry is for. All government can (and should) do is create a climate that’s conducive to industry being able to operate effectively.
When government (on all levels, including the hangers-on) becomes the largest employer in an economy, you *know* that economy is in serious trouble. At a macro scale, that is what is wrong with New Zealand’s economy. At a micro scale, that is what is wrong with Wellington’s and Auckland City’s economy.
West Auckland can do without that, thanks.
> They’ve done a Crap Job with this budget. Crap Decision Making. Crap Results. Full stop. It is there job. There responsibility and they need to own it.
Perhaps you should run for office this time around, and show them how it’s done properly. It sounds to me like you’ve already got all the answers figured out, and a ready-made platform to run with.
If you do decide to run for office, remember the piece I wrote on what your typical day is going to look like: because that will be Life for the next 3 years, day-in-day-out, without a pause for breath. There is a really hi price to be paid if you want to be a Councilor, and it takes a really heavy toll on those who do it.
I know this only because (for my sins) I worked in the Executive Office of one of the legacy Councils. It was the worst job of my entire career.
> And with one of our Councillors as Deputy Mayor we should have had more leverage. But no.
Why do you believe we should have more leverage, Esther? How many votes do you think Penny Hulse gets, for the dubious privilege of being Deputy Mayor?
She gets exactly one. The same as Linda Cooper.
> What we have is the best spin doctors.
> How after accurately describing the budget for what it is – the West being ripped off and a turd burger, can you then conclude that our elected members did a stirling job
That’s pretty easy to answer, Esther: of all the regions in Auckland, only Pukekohe has less leverage than Auckland. Industry, Jobs, and Money call the shots in the SuperCity. It has always been thus.
Going into any negotiation, West Auckland will begin by having nearly zero leverage. What does the West have to barter with? Think it thru carefully. The ranges are all protected by Statute, so there is a finite limit to how many people can live here, and what they can do with their land. There are fairly draconian laws in place to protect our environment, so there are fairly tight constraints as to what sort of Industries we can (and will) tolerate.
**** Hmmmm and I thought the elected members were calling the shots. The people we voted to represent us. I thought the point of the Super City was so we could create efficiencies and see the big picture. So yes we don’t need the same industry as Pukekohe, but Glen Eden (urban) was promised an upgrade in the last 10 year plan after public consultation. It was scrapped and the money went into “Trusts” that the elected members are trustees of that didn’t result in measurable outcomes and council has denied answering what those programmes were. That sucks and it’s not democracy and is having a detrimental impact on our community. It’s ongoing and every year. In fact there opening new trusts to match the new projects.
Those two constraints alone would be enough to make sure the West comes out toward the very bottom of the Industry, Jobs and Money equation, every single time. Yet we have plenty of other constraints in place, as well,
So it isn’t as if our Elected Members enter into these negotiations with a particularly strong hand to begin with: they don’t. They can only play the cards they’re given. And the West has traditionally always had weak cards.
This is the price we pay for the lifestyle we enjoy at the price we can afford to pay.
***** We get about $18 million combined capex and opex a year give or take. We aren’t seeing the money spent in our areas. Our urban villages and rural are untidy and unkempt and there are no small improvement projects except for those in the New Lynn Electorate. You can go anywhere in the country and wonder why towns much poorer and smaller than west auckland still manage tidy public places and artworks and planted crossings at the schools and well manicured suburbs. Ours looks like Orange is the new black where the sewerages flowing out of the plugholes because the infrastructures not looked after because the money was well…..
Having entered this negotiation with very little to bargain with, they managed to come away from the table with a few concessions that we didn’t have when they entered into the discussion. It could have been alot worse — they could have ended up with NOTHING. But they ended up with a few very nice concessions. On that basis they did a Stirling job.
> If there are no jobs in West Auckland that is also part of their job description.
I disagree. It is not and never has been a legitimate role of government to create jobs. That is what private industry is for. All government can (and should) do is create a climate that’s conducive to industry being able to operate effectively.
When government (on all levels, including the hangers-on) becomes the largest employer in an economy, you *know* that economy is in serious trouble. At a macro scale, that is what is wrong with New Zealand’s economy. At a micro scale, that is what is wrong with Wellington’s and Auckland City’s economy.
West Auckland can do without that, thanks.
*** Auckland Council has one of the biggest budgets in our local economy. I didn’t chose the size of the goverment but we received about $15-18 million of expenditure in our area. But they don’t employ Westies. They employ political colleagues from Mt Eden, North Shore, and Rodney. We have a right to see ou tax money back in our area. Check Auckland Council’s procurement policy for what it’s worth.
> They’ve done a Crap Job with this budget. Crap Decision Making. Crap Results. Full stop. It is there job. There responsibility and they need to own it.
Perhaps you should run for office this time around, and show them how it’s done properly. It sounds to me like you’ve already got all the answers figured out, and a ready-made platform to run with.
If you do decide to run for office, remember the piece I wrote on what your typical day is going to look like: because that will be Life for the next 3 years, day-in-day-out, without a pause for breath. There is a really hi price to be paid if you want to be a Councilor, and it takes a really heavy toll on those who do it.
** That’s a weak argument. Perhaps you should apply for a job at Council as your clearly well versed in excusing poor performance and massaging the egos of our politicians despite any evidence of positive outcomes. We received the worst result. There are no infrastructure projects named in our area from capex that we’ve been consulted on. Unacceptable. And a bad result. And it’s bizarre to think you should only have capex if you already have industrial lobby groups? We represent a large section of Auckland. I don’t have to run for office to expect transparency about what is in our budget. It is required under LGA. Nor to advocate for the same standard of living and public amenities that others in the rest of Auckland enjoy. And to feel dubious about the unaccounted for funds through trusts in the West. I think we deserve some answers. We do have a large budget each year through opex – why are our results not stacking up.
I know this only because (for my sins) I worked in the Executive Office of one of the legacy Councils. It was the worst job of my entire career.
> And with one of our Councillors as Deputy Mayor we should have had more leverage. But no.
Why do you believe we should have more leverage, Esther? How many votes do you think Penny Hulse gets, for the dubious privilege of being Deputy Mayor?
She gets exactly one. The same as Linda Cooper.
** Well fair enough I agree on one point.
> What we have is the best spin doctors.
** No we agree on two points.
Apparently my last comment wasn’t posted, so i will make a brief response. Our elected representatives are supposed to advocate on our behalf . There decision making certainly influences local economies and wellbeing and jobs. There doesn’t appear to be any factual basis on which you applaud their performance except some imagined vision of long hours. West Auckland’s budget is the lowest and the same suburbs are seeing funding well the same suburbs miss out . And so it’s quite reasonable to address that. It’s a weak argument and rude to say I should therefore run for Council. Perhaps you should apply for a job as a Councillor executive assistant.
Sorry Esther I am not sure what happened there.
You have been “approved” again for comment.
Esther writes:
> **** Hmmmm and I thought the elected members were calling the shots. The people we voted to represent us.
Elected Members don’t “call the shots” — not by any stretch of the imagination. That isn’t how our Democracy works in New Zealand. It works that way in Chicago, but not here.
> I thought the point of the Super City was so we could create efficiencies and see the big picture.
The SuperCity was certainly sold to us on that basis. We have never seen any significant economies of scale or efficiencies as a result of amalgamation — which is counter-intuitive, because usually in the private sector when there is a merger there are economies and efficiencies achieved.
If you are looking to me to defend the SuperCity as a concept or as a Governance model, or Mayor Brown, or the Long Term Plan, or even the Targeted Rate for Transit (the “Transit Levy”), you are barking up the wrong tree because I am not going to do that.
If you are looking for me to say the West didn’t get ripped off, I’m not going to do that, either. Of course the West got ripped off. We always get ripped off.
If you are looking for me to say that our Elected Members represented us poorly, I’m not going to say that because they didn’t. Penny and Linda negotiated as good a deal as we were ever going to get, without stipulating the West’s terms at gunpoint — which would be illegal.
> We get about $18 million combined capex and opex a year give or take. We aren’t seeing the money spent in our areas. Our urban villages and rural are untidy and unkempt and there are no small improvement projects except for those in the New Lynn Electorate.
You’ll get no arguments from me on that score, either. Even New Lynn is a dump — Glen Eden is worse, and Henderson worse still. It was not like that pre-Amalgamation: the West has been screwed, and that is why just about every other store-front in Henderson is For Lease.
A while back I counted 9 (nine) $2 Shops in the 2 square blocks surrounding Westfield Henderson, and 9 (nine) in the 2 square blocks surrounding Glen Mall. Hardly key performance indicators for a vibrant retail economy.
> That’s a weak argument. Perhaps you should apply for a job at Council…
Been there, done that. It was the worst job of my entire career. It did, however, give me some excellent insight into how the system actually works — which is considerably different to the way most people seem to believe it works.
> There are no infrastructure projects named in our area from capex that we’ve been consulted on.
If you will check carefully you’ll note my comments are directed specifically to the Targeted Rate for Transit (the “Transit Levy”). I have made no remarks concerning the LTP or its lack of CapEx projects for the West. For the record, tho’, I think we got ripped off with those, too — as usual.
>And it’s bizarre to think you should only have capex if you already have industrial lobby groups?
It’s naïve for you to think the world works any differently to this in reality. Industry, Jobs and Money: they always call the shots, worldwide as well as in Auckland. Merit, Altruism and Need are weak sisters by way of contrast.
It’s merely a variation of The Golden Rule: “He who hath the Gold, maketh The Rules.” And that ain’t the West, Esther.
Esther asks:
> Can Andy please detail why he thinks this is a good budget for West/ Waitakere?
Sadly no, I cannot, because I think this is a miserable budget for the West in general and for Waitakere in specific. Indeed, nobody with a calculator and a map could reasonably conclude otherwise.
You can marinade it in the finest cognac, grill it over hot coals, garnish it with the freshest of garden herbs, season it with all manner of rare spices from the Orient and serve it with lashings of hot sauce and garlic butter: no matter how you serve it up, a turd-burger is going to be a turd-burger.
This budget is a turd-burger for the West: pure, and simple. Buon appetito!
Beyond any reasonable doubt, the West got ripped off YET AGAIN. We really ought to be accustomed to this, because it was happening even before amalgamation. The reasons why this keeps happening are, I believe, systemic. It has always been the case that Industry, Jobs and Money call the shots in Auckland — and it is still the case today.
Who “won” the budget? Look to the regions in Auckland where the Industry, Jobs, and Money reside. You need look no further. Is this good, and right, and Just? Quite a few people in Auckland would argue “yes, it is.”
Is this the fault of our Elected Members? No, it isn’t. Our Elected Members represented us skilfully and well — they did a superb job — and had they not done so the West would have gotten even less than we did.
Can we get some facts? I’ve sent multiple unanswered emails to my Local Board rep to ask will we be paying Transport Levy? No answer. Oratia /Waiatarua have had all public transport/ buses cut . Rang council to find out if my old rates (farm/lifestlye) included public transport and would I be paying the new levy. Council said the reduced Farm Lifestyle rate would go (another rates increase), and then back pedalled saying neither the general or transport levy has been confirmed. So we may pay full rates in our area and transport levy for our No library, no transport, no museum, no footpath, no community facilities (paid for and run by volunteers) , no parks (paid for by playgroup), neglible funding of community events, no useable domain space area?! And the west still has stinky deisel trains. What if any central budget or project is there for the west from Auckland and our councillors? None that i’m aware of. A bit of sustainable neighbourhoods which is a project with conflict of interest and largely benefits the North Shore/Rodney. In the Local budget the main capex project was parks (laingholm walkway ) hasn’t seen public consultation , a greenway plan or a price and aligns with a new trusts (again Conflict of Interest 2 x boards). The only link on council website for a West waitakere project is Lopdell and the link has been taken down/broken (Lopdell Trust – C.O.I board members). We are the only board without a named asset/infrastructure project on the Auckland Council website. . Swanson Park and Ride (development contributions) and Swanson foothills is a go. The Swanson park and ride never saw consultation, in fact the long term plan was for a Glen Eden Park n Ride. I am deeply concerned by the new format of Trusts delivering projects with conflict of interest and without clear scoping. We have a new budget but no clarity as to what projects are happening in our area or what the costs are. Documentation from Council is laughable as we’ve all submitted but without any clarity to what we’ll be getting from this budget. Can Andy please detail why he thinks this is a good budget for West/ Waitakere?