Trying to get two open Seem I am deemed media and have established a functioning media arm within TotaRim Consultancy Limited I might as well report on proceedings with … Continue reading Those Unitary Plan Workshops
Category: General
Everything else
A Cluster—-?
Someone Threw the Pipe Wrench into the Works
I saw Councillor Chris Fletcher’s comment that she was going to quit the Auckland Plan Committee workshops that are dealing with the Unitary Plan last night. I was going to look at that obstinate behaviour this morning however it seems to have caused a slight issue.
Then again with the barrow Orsman is pushing I am not particularly surprised this situation is floating around the Main Stream Media and social media realms this morning.
I will look at the consequences of Councillor Fletcher’s decision yesterday later on today. For the mean time apart from another issue that had me beavering away last I will take a look at Councillor Brewer’s piece on Campbell Live that should be giving Auckland Transport some necessary grief. Following that with some follow-up enquiries I have sent to Council on the workshops and what is going on there.
Honest reaction from me in regards to Councillor Fletcher committing the action she did yesterday? Okay sure I can understand the frustration she is venting. I did note last week that it was pointless to have the first workshop without the full information present (not due out until Friday) but, walking out? By definition if I give a presentation to the Auckland Plan Committee between now and formal notification in regards to the UP, if Councillor Fletcher asks me a question I would be inclined not to “recognise” her nor her question. This is owing to how can someone ask a question or give an answer if they have not being at the workshops to which I would be implying to on something (like Manukau).
So an interesting situation here folks, one that will be watched carefully.
Auckland Council Elections Begin to Spark
Incumbents and Candidates Square Off
[Note from Admin] stand by for an update in regards to the poll results. Awaiting word on whether they will be released or not.
With October the month we cast our ballot papers on the 2013 Local Elections where get to vote in (and out) mayors, councillors, Local Board members and District Health Board members.
In Auckland this will be our second election as a Super City and already we have people squaring off for Ward Council seats as well as for the mayoral chains. As I mentioned yesterday in the run up post: “Does the Right Wing offer any serious alternatives or is it photo opportunities with the Prime Minister and which ever Minister trundled along, and angry press releases dumped into Scoop that sounds like a pile of Shrilling.”
Lets take a look shall we in brief at a mayoral candidate and two would-bes vying for your councillor vote.
For at the snippet piece on centre-right mayoral candidate John Palino from the Herald on Sunday.
From the HoS
Helpful Key on side – Palino
5:30 AM Sunday Jun 23, 2013
EXPANDAuckland mayoral candidate John Palino with Prime Minister John Key at a breakfast held by MP Simon O’Connor.Super City mayoral candidate John Palino says he has the backing of Prime Minister John Key.
He has been photographed with Key at least three times this month, including twice this week. The centre-right candidate told the Herald on Sunday he believed the Nats had made “subconsciously, a tick for John Palino”.
“They don’t come out and say, ‘We support people’ … It’s how they help you out.” A Key spokeswoman said the party had not officially endorsed a candidate. “The decision on the mayoralty is one for the people of Auckland.”
Palino said he had also met people from the Labour Party, including Mangere MP Su’a William Sio, and was waiting to hear back from party leader David Shearer.
…
The article is also on page 12 of the hard copy if one wishes to look there.
Okay the poll numbers were not released and seems people are staying mum on them, despite the fact they should have been released to jolt the city and the MSM somewhat into paying attention.
If one is also wondering that yes I have met John Palino multiple times since he announced his tilt for mayoralty sussing out what John stands for and what he would bring to the table if he wins the mayoral chains off Len. But, I remind readers and the city that we do live in a liberal democracy and I can choose who I meet with at my leisure with those either vying for my vote or my business as a consultancy. Such as the nature of both free enterprise and democracy that we live in this city.
I am still asking for John to see if he would like to write a 1,200 word guest post for Talking Auckland in giving a summary of what he would bring to the city. The same invitation will also be sent to Len Brown as well.
As for my view on John; nice enough character and likeable in the times we have met thus far. Knowing his policy narratives that he is going to bring to the table for the city I would say that they are good policies that span both the left/right wing spectrum, AND the liberal/conservative spectrum as well.
However, I do serve a warning to our mayoral candidate(s); do not fall into the Unitary Plan and housing situation trap the central government has fallen into (especially around the Housing Accord). Our central government only sees the housing issue in Auckland in a one dimension prism (that is supply, supply, supply). There is more than just whacking some more houses in some out-of-the-way locations (as the Accord would do via the Special Housing Area provisions) to get housing affordability restored. You must see the problem in a three-dimensional prism and understand that the issue is at this point and time a three if not four prong issue. Those prongs being:
- Supply right across the city (Brownfield and Greenfield)
- Constructions costs
- Consenting process
- Planning process getting in the road and restricting freedoms
- Finance gearing
Okay so I added a fifth one but, two of those prongs can not be influences by council – only central government.
For a mayor to lead his or her Council in getting the housing situation under control, you MUST attack prongs; 1, 3 and 4 simultaneously at the same time. To just attack just prong number one which is all central government knows how to do (to show its lack of truth depth of understanding) is putting you on the fast track for either a comprehensive debunking in the (social) media and subsequent beating in the upcoming election or the next election if you do get in. This message also applies to any right-wing councillor candidate standing as well (to be commented on soon). So consider this a warning as not only are the blogs paying attention but, but the city is as well…
Oh and here is a hint here, the Unitary Plan (having read the document front to back) is an actual enabling document that goes some way in liberalising out our planning restrictions. It goes part of the way to the methodology I submitted on in the Auckland Plan but, not quite there yet (in handing over to the Local Board most planning oversight). For more check my submissions where the Semi-Liberal Plan District is outlined!
As for our right wing candidates who wish to become councillors
I have noticed two potential candidates of the right wishing to stand for Council. One is standing in the Waitakere area (so a challenge to the Deputy Mayor) and the other in retiring Councillor Richard Northey‘s area of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki.
Starting with Waitakere lets take a quick look at Facebook.
Cooper for Council – for the ward seat of Waitakere. Essentially a direct challenge to both Sandra Coney and more to the point our Deputy Mayor – Penny Hulse.
I have not seen policy narratives come from Ms Cooper yet but seriously, what is it with centre right oppositional candidates all vying for photos with the Prime Minister and at times a Minister. It makes the quote from the Prime Minister’s Office (“A Key spokeswoman said the party had not officially endorsed a candidate. “The decision on the mayoralty is one for the people of Auckland.”) somewhat hollow.
It also gives the strong inclination that National (and in part the government) from behind the scenes is trying to seek influence post October 12. Yep Labour and the Greens officially back candidates and at least they tell the city that. But, National never has and always prefers to lurk behind the scenes out of the public eye. To me that is indication the government wanting direct influence on and over the Council post October 12…
It is also something to watch more closely than those of Labour/Green backing. As I said at least you know the sway of those candidates or incumbents and what the central party machine is inclined to do. That allows the voter to make an informed vote on the grounds of ‘if I vote for this Labour backed candidate” I know both the central party machine is implied and will have “influence” over policy direction.’
Where as with National lurking (although these photo ops with the PM seem to be giving things away) in the background, you don’t know up front what the centre-right candidate is really standing for or how much influence is being held over them by the central party apparatus. No informed vote can be truly made if one does not have all the facts front right and centre.
So one will be keeping an eye on the centre-right candidates closely as we approach October 12. Also this lurking crap by National is a key reason of me being naturally suspicious of my own Party – to which I will do a post on later).
As for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki contest, this came to my attention because of a press release mentioned into Twitter:
-
Another ignorant NIMBY by the sounds of this, please don’t vote for her. Go Richard Northey! #unitaryplan http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1306/S00273/krum-promises-energy-and-a-contest-of-ideas.htm …
-
@LouisOutlook I thought Northey was retiring at the end of this term. As for Ms Krum I have seen that name somewhere before
-
@BenRoss_AKL @louisoutlook Well in that case we will have to see who else will stand.
-
@LouisOutlook that is where I have seen her name; The national party
As yes I believe I have met Ms Krum at a National Party conference either last year or the year before. Also probably why after reading the press release from Ms Krum I was a little bit surprised at the releases quality – POOR quality.
I have read the press release front and back just to make sure I was reading it correctly. For Ms Krum unfortunately Louis was right and (not shown here) ATB also being correct in that fact Ms Krum showed no alternatives to what is in the UP. So in essence a shrilling exercise from a centre-right candidate who in all honestly should have known much MUCH better.
Dropping shrilling or rather dog whistling press releases as a candidate for the council elections – especially as a centre right candidate with whatever links to National about the Unitary Plan is utterly dumb! Yes DUMB!
The Unitary Plan is a hot topic button issue at the moment and one being kept a very close eye on by myself, Auckland Transport Blog and the MSM (usually after both of the blogs have run a debunking exercise). Any shrilling by the centre right and particular journalists on the UP was heavily debunked very quickly. Just ask Orsman and Auckland 2040 in the levels of debunking from all sorts of media angles and publications. Auckland 2040 and myself are defrosting the relations between each other but, it shows what happens when shrilling and misinformation is pumped out and seized upon.
I especially do not take lightly to shrilling exercises against the Unitary Plan as Auckland is my city and my home and both which I take an extreme amount of pride in. Thus heavy debunking will be run if spotted!
The Conclusion?
Two fold:
First: National stop the lurking behind the scenes make crystal clear your intentions for Council and the City. Labour least have the balls to put it out there front right and centre with their candidates and policy influence for which the voter is aware of an makes their choices! How about manning up and throwing your official weight behind candidates and bring the playing field back into balance. The City DETESTS lurkers (and most likely a reason why C&R got thumped in the last election).
Second: Why I should tell this to the Centre-Right I be damned if I know, But, cut the shrilling and put something decent on the table. At least (although different) Auckland 2040 put up a credible alternative to the Unitary Plan for virtually everyone to consider. We as a city knew where they were playing, what they were against and what they wanted. We might have agreed or disagreed but we knew! Those who shrill and put no actual credible alternative forward do not deserve our attention nor vote (apart from debunking exercises).
You are all being watched (and by the comments starting to come through that point is ringing true)…
And This Mention from Metro
Mentions and A Piece on Cycling
Well I have my copy of the July issue of Metro Magazine and you should get your copy too. I see Metro misquoted mayoral candidate John Palino on Manukau – groan and even has full length piece on cycling in Auckland and the hurdles Skypath faces (when it should not and is a case with the opposition that should be told “oi the 1950s want their planning methodology back.”)
To the matter at hand though – the Unitary Plan I suppose all that social media spam I sent over 11 weeks was going to get picked up somewhere. And it has both on Media-3 and now Metro magazine.
Short but you get the point (plus some other replies including from our resident grumps):
Talking Auckland commentary will continue on the UP as it happens. In an interesting sense of irony though looking at numbers; if I were to break story on a leak on transport AND then one on the Unitary Plan at the same time, guess which one would get the most “views?” It would be the Unitary Plan leak. Just seems even though when complain heaps about transport in Auckland, it is just simply not as sexy to run commentary on as much as the UP (generates in interest). Go figure…
As a quick side note I have my first speaking engagement next week in Manukau on Manukau (as the Second CBD of Auckland). Seems the idea is gathering pace and steam here and should be one Council be actively considering.
The Next Steps for the Unitary Plan – All That Feedback and What Happens
A Series on this Round of the Unitary Plan before it goes to Formal Notification
Part Three: What happens to all that feedback?
The question actually is how do the planners, Local Board and Auckland Plan Committee members (the Councillors) wade through 22,700 pieces of Unitary Plan feedback.
I have not been to Level 22 of the Council building where the planners are busy trudging through all that feedback we sent in and either codifying our replies or sending the more “technical” stuff off for a further look. But, from what I have heard and been briefed on the task is a major undertaking and one I would not envy in a hurry.
As a recap from Part One of this series this is what essentially happens with your feedback:
WHAT HAPPENS TO THE FEEDBACK?
In short three things can happen depending on what you sent in.
If it was pro-forma (and there was 6,500 pieces from 35 groups that did this) it is essentially tallied up and totals assigned to set “topics.” Stuff done on an Excel sheet.
If you wrote an individual submission it can land in one of two places in the codifying exercise. All individual submissions are collated, summarised and codified according to “topic” and will be sent for political direction – usually the Auckland Plan Committee. If in your individual submission you decided to go highly technical (and some did) then your piece is worked over by senior planners and topic experts at a finer level. Your technical points will then be “addressed” accordingly.
To make the point clear; it can be taken that for individual submissions that are collated will be presented and reviewed at direction setting workshops via The Auckland Plan Committee. Collated information is divided by topic and will be worked over by experts who will flesh out the concepts from the submissions and again presented for direction setting at the Committee. I do wish them luck trying to codify and collate my 104 page monster with it covering I think 10 different issues.
…
Now Council have pointed out that not all submissions (especially those pro-forma’s) will be raising unique points (hence how the top 5 themes are deduced). Because of this the Council is able to effectively and efficiently build a summary analysis of that particular group of feedback (a theme) which is then fed back to the workshops and Committee.
This codifying and summary analysis (as well as working on the technical and unique material (Manukau as a Second CBD is deemed a unique point)) allows for staggering the discussions of the Unitary Plan with high priority issues going first (currently height and centres). At each workshop the Committee and Local Board (chairs at the moment) have access to the relevant summary analysis material which guides their decision-making and recommendations for direction setting by the Auckland Plan Committee.
Meaning? Lots and lots and LOTS of meetings around tables drinking filter coffee and eating a pile of scones. It also means in reporting the Auckland Plan Committee meetings as they happen I am going to get a numb backside for sitting on a chair for six hours and me hating the cursed air conditioning in Town Hall which plays havoc with my eyes.
So that is basically this is what is happening with your feedback at the moment. I am getting snippets from Local Board Chairs after the workshops some issues that are cropping up. While the debate is robust and Councillors are behaving themselves, the most common issue I am getting is that the summary analysis on the feedback is lacking. That is the codifying has not advanced enough to get anything meaningful from our feedback to the Local Board Chairs so they can work on our points raised with the committee. An issue that will need to be looked at.
A Brief Insight to the Inner Workings?
A thought had come to mind and I am going to email this to the Council tomorrow. Maybe the media could take a guided tour of the process from: those people codifying on Level 22 (some has seen it already but others not), to a snippet of a workshop (say 30 mins of the workshop in action and nothing confidential being discussed at that particular moment) then the Auckland Plan Committee (which is open any how) where the decisions are finalised up.
Why such a guided tour?
To get a snap shot on what goes behind out of the public sight (but not our minds) might go a small way in improving Council’s “comm’s” effort after its C rating by our Deputy Mayor this week. Also the snap shot would keep the city in the loop outside of media releases and help give a better understanding what is happening out of our sight and more to the point why.
Yes we know workshops should be full and frank discussions but for just a 30 minute glimmer the city might be able to just appreciate that little bit more the inner workings of an apparatus that consumes our money.
As I said I’ll email council and give it a crack. Can’t promise much though but one can try.
In Part Four of this series I shall take a look at the zoning changes (which is the number one theme in the Unitary Plan right now) as well as the Southern Rural Urban Boundary/
TALKING AUCKLAND
Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited
TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and The Unitary Plan
Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL
Looking at Mayoral Candidates
First Look at John Palino
As we approach October 12 – the Local Government Elections where we vote for Mayor, Councillors, Local Board members and the District Health Boards; Talking Auckland will be keeping an eye on the run up to the day and providing commentary of the hot button issues.
Today we take our first look at mayoral candidate competing again the incumbent Len Brown; John Palino.
First his new networking card that has come off the printers and is now doing the rounds:
You can see on the orange (not red folks) back some basic policy narratives coming into play. Now I did quip when someone asked about hard policy that you can not fit a 7,000 page Unitary Plan style manifesto onto a business card. But, you can start getting people to talk and the card has already done that – so success there.
Let’s take a look at that talking point:
-
Nick Kearney Completely the wrong colour!! That’s bloody Labour’s colour!! What is he thinking. And this “Sorting out traffic congestion” is just pointless. People have promised that for 30years and still look where we are.
-
Ben Ross Now now Nick – go read my blog posts on why Williamson got trumped. Old Labour vs National, C&R vs City Vision is disappearing if not gone from Super City elections. Playing the blue on one side and red on the other would illustrate bi-partisan and easy traversing between the divide – something I do and did with the UP with extreme ease
Plus hey – the “pointless” point worked if it has you talking. Effective Political Marketing (like advertising) 101
-
As we move into the formal campaign period starting July 12 followed by the six week “final” campaign “proper” the heavy policy stuff will come out for people to run over with their fine tooth combs. But right now it is the introductions, the how are you, creating talking points and then talking to the people – the voters. The people or as I like to say our 1.5 million “experts” all have something to say and that something to say on how the feel about their city, their home. And from that you get an insight into what they want to see for a Better Auckland – A Better Home.
I have asked John for a short sharp “introduction” piece of himself and what he wants to bring if he is elected as Mayor of Auckland. Mayor Len Brown will also be “asked” as for an introduction piece as well. In a way it will also be telling if I get both introductions as it will also tell who does care for the little people, the individuals and citizens of Auckland.
As we also approach October 12 I will shine the light onto those seeking the Ward Council vote. As it is our Councillors that have the power either supporting or opposing the Mayor’s policy direction.
In the meantime Talking Auckland wants to know what you would like to see for a Better Auckland. Whether it be general or specific share your thoughts in the comment box below. If you are not quite sure on a talking point then check John’s talking points above and take it from there. We have 1.5 million people living in Auckland thus 1.5 million experts.
Just remember for comments to be tactful and respectful. Sometimes agreeing to disagree is the best choice and shows a greater level of maturity between the two participants.
Rethink the Housing Accord says Auckland 2040
Rethink or NIMBY‘s Striking Again?
Auckland 2040 released a press statement on Monday about the Housing Accord. This will be due to that Auckland Council is giving their submission to the Accord today after deliberations yesterday at the Auckland Plan Committee that I sat in and observed.
This is the press release from Auckland 2040
Rethink the Housing Accord says Auckland 2040
Monday, 10 June, 2013 – 11:41
Auckland 2040 says linking the Auckland Housing Accord to the notification of the draft Unitary Plan (DUP) will put pressure on the Council to ‘fast track’ the plan ignoring around 14,000 submissions.
The coalition has written to Housing Minister Nick Smith requesting that he reconsider tying the Accord to the DUP notification and providing an alternative solution. It’s concerned that Aucklanders have just had their first look at the DUP, invested considerable time in preparing submissions and that the planners won’t have the time to read, consider or adopt the suggestions.
Auckland 2040 spokesperson and planner Richard Burton says there are serious shortcomings in the DUP and it’s important that the Council is not forced to notify the Plan before it is ready.
“We do not believe that Auckland Council has the time or the resources to consider the large number of submissions received, to rethink the Unitary Plan and rectify the problems by the target notification date of 1 September. Much more time is needed to prepare a quality Plan.
“There’s also an easy solution that will take the pressure off the planners and make sure Aucklanders have not wasted their time making submissions. We suggest Council identify Special Housing Areas (SHAs) and then prepare Structure Plans. These will also ensure better quality housing,” said Richard.
The current Auckland Housing Accord makes no mention of requiring Structure Plans for SHAs which Auckland 2040 argues is a serious omission. It says that structure plans will avoid haphazard unplanned development by matching the level of development intensity to infrastructure capacity, including roads, waste water and other services. It would also integrate residential development with reserves, community facilities and schools. Community consultation is another component of a Structure Plan and would allow greater consideration of the interface between SHA’s and adjoining communities. Qualifying SHA Developments would then have to comply with the Structure Plan.
“Requiring Structure Plans in the Accord legislation doesn’t need to be overly time-consuming. Auckland Council could quickly identify a number of SHAs and then commence planning. The other advantage of this approach is that neighbours and affected parties will have a say in the process. Without meaningful consultation and a right of appeal, the potential for abuse is high,” says Richard.
Auckland 2040 is a coalition of local non-political groups passionately concerned about the long- term implications of the draft Unitary Plan (DUP). It wants Auckland Council to ‘ReThink’ the Plan in order to balance intensification with infrastructure capability and urban character values. The group opposes random high density multi-story apartments haphazardly scattered throughout Auckland, poor planning and provision for infrastructure, and inadequate community involvement in the Plan. For more information go to http://auckland2040.org.nz/.
—–
All seems good doesn’t it? On paper it does look good what Auckland 2040 is suggesting with Special Housing Areas and these Structure Plans. These Structure Plans could end up similar to my proposed Semi-Liberal Planned Districts for greenfield areas and Centralised Master Community Plans for brownfield areas.
However, there is a catch. My SLPD and CMCP’s take effect when the Unitary Plan is in operation. Meaning it has been thrashed out and the Rural Urban Boundary options firmed up after research and further consultation.
Auckland 2040’s idea would take effect once the Accord was in operation which would not bother me per say. But, in knowing Auckland 2040 they would clam up in any Brownfield Special Housing Areas being put forward (especially on the Isthmus and North Shore) and dump the entire lot in the Greenfield areas out in the south.
In Auckland 2040 would like to suggest a Brownfield area on the Isthmus and North Shore that would have significant development then let me know in the comments box your location choice below. Otherwise your subsequent silence would imply pro-sprawl behaviour down here in the south. Of which I believe the NIMBY term applies.
What is wrong with lugging significant developments in the greenfield areas now? We of the south are still going through the Rural Urban Boundary processes at the moment. Currently in the Unitary Plan feedback process that closed last month we got to choose one of three options we would think best for Greenfield development under the UP. Council is now considering this and hopefully are doing capacity and infrastructure studies on the options. Once done it is meant to be reported back and a more informed selection can be made by us in the formal notification stage at the end of the year.
What Auckland 2040 are doing is effectively short circuiting the RUB process away from Southern Auckland. It can also be implied through some of the NIMBY aspects of Auckland 2040 that they would want the bulk of the SHA’s in the greenfield zones.
I’d rather have the RUB processes done fully and properly first. As I have mentioned before if the wrong section of land is opened up down here in the South the unintended consequences are large. That being the Karaka-Weymouth Bridge which has upset a lot of people here.
So what do we do now?
Sit and wait for the council to finish the southern RUB work. Lets see how many houses we can get, what infrastructure is needed and at what cost, and what employment centre bases will also be needed as well. Suggesting SHA’s down here now would be beyond pointless when we and the area are simply not ready.
The RUB Addendum 1/2
The RUB Addendum 2/2
The Block, The Unitary Plan And What?
Okay I think Jan O’Conner needs to get out some more or just move on… I might as well enjoy the 5-week free subscription I get to the Herald … Continue reading The Block, The Unitary Plan And What?
Council Submission on the Housing Accord
What Council thought on the Housing Accord
I am no fan of the Much-Ado-About-Nothing (aka the Housing) Accord as it short cuts the Rural Urban Boundary processes we are going through right now, and it also impinges on Council Sovereignty. I have made mention of this last month while the Unitary Plan was open for the first round of discussion.
Auckland Council, some Local Boards and the Independent Maori Statutory Board have written draft submissions on the Accord which is due to go before Select Committee in Wellington.
I am still reading the submission Council has written myself and will comment on it on Monday. In the mean time some light reading for you and if you are inclined leave your thoughts in the comments below.
The Submission (Starting page 7) to the Housing Accord
Message to Governor General
For the Integrity of the Parliament and the Citizens of NZ
To the Governor General of New Zealand
Representing our Sovereign and Head of State – Queen Elizabeth the Second.
For the integrity of the New Zealand House of Representatives, the citizens of New Zealand, and to allowed continued confidence of the Queen to our Parliament where there can be possibly none right now, I ask that you dissolve the current Parliament and order fresh elections in six weeks.
While leaks do happen from and within our Parliament and the State apparatus, leaks that come from the Government Communication Security Bureau that was had concerns to 88 New Zealand citizens being spied upon without their knowledge by the GCSB is a very serious situation.
For a Minister of the Crown (that operates in the name of the Queen) to leak such serious information where our citizens are affected is beyond reprehension. Beyond reprehension as it damages the very integrity of being a Minister of the Crown (operating in the name of the Queen) who we trust with our confidence in such sensitive matters like the GCSB affair. The breach by now former Minister Peter Dunne damages the confidence of the citizens towards the state apparatus and the Executive Wing of our Parliament – the highest authority in our land (as it can effectively over rule our courts). For Peter Dunne to remain as an MP in this parliament after such a reprehensible breach in my opinion brings the House now into disrepute.
Thus I would call on the Governor General to dissolve this Parliament and seek a fresh election. This fresh election would allow a new mandate and Parliament to occur. This would also allow the nation to put behind a very sorry mess that has occurred. To not call for a fresh mandate belittles our faith in the Parliament and would cause loss of confidence from the Sovereign against the Parliament as well.
——
Of note in that message above I have noticed a small number of National Party members through social media effectively lashing out and acting like near sycophants in this matter. The questions are quite simple:
- How did Peters claim a scalp but you can not claim his
- Can you blame for 5.4% of the population for voting NZ First. This is a democracy not an autocracy or plutocracy just because someone voted the way you did not want them too
- Does that artillery piece with the phrase “aim to the far left John” do the Party any favours or does your behaviour also bring the party into disrepute with no only members but the wider public. There is a difference between Satire and disturbed behaviour, that photo being the latter of the two especially on a serious day like this
- And what would you have done to Dunne with him so implicated in the report on leaking security information that had concerns in regards to 88 citizens being spied on unknowingly. Probably nothing so long as you get to stay in power…
——
This message was written as a concerned citizen seeing Parliament being effectively brought into disrepute and upsetting the governance of this country. Honesty and Transparency should be held at the utmost. Lets start afresh and get on with the job as the people want.
Talking Southern Auckland 