Category: Politics

The Politics behind the issue or of the day

Some Updates and Coming Ups

· 2 Comments ·

Elections and Unitary Plan Briefings

The Elections 2013

 

And so campaigns get under way with the nominations for Local Government Elections 2013 closed as of Friday 16th August. You can see the full PDF version of who is running for what HERE. The guys over at Generation Zero and Auckland Transport Blog I believe are converting that PDF over into an Excel format chart – why? I have an idea but will let them tell you 😉

I had noted a bit of attention in the last 72 hours in the form of prodding me to run for either Local Board or a Council Ward seat. Some were also asking why I was not running for either position.

I had made a decision during the Unitary Plan feedback process (March 16-May 31) not to run for a Council position but rather focus on TotaRim. TotaRim being my consultancy business that advances #BetterAuckland projects amongst other things.

Council is like a tent and that tent includes the elected representatives, the bureaucracy and the Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs). One decides whether they can make their contribution to Auckland either inside or outside the tent.

I decided for the 2013 elections to stay outside the tent and continue to advance a #BetterAuckland (including #movingauckland and #SuperManukau) . That means I will be around for another three years in continuing the push to achieve this via TotaRim.

This means TotaRim and myself working with willing and cooperative elective representatives of the Centre Left and Centre Right factions of Council. Yes, that can be “interesting” some days, but I must say it has been a good three years. Let’s hope the next three years will be as good too in pushing for a #BetterAuckland. Although TotaRim and myself are bi-partisan in our work, it seems some are still quite partisan in their thinking/politics:

Interesting you say this Ben because there is a rumour I hear that you were helping Palino with Unitary Plan policy in the early stages of his campaign before he had to remove you? What is Hulse and the rest of your friends at Council going to think when they hear this?

The person who said that links back to here http://www.palinoformayor.co.nz/ while the comment came from here http://louisoutlook.wordpress.com/2013/08/15/evaluating-john-palinos-unitary-plan-policy/

Rather interesting comment given that I believe in Free Enterprise and was approached first by Palino. As for being ‘removed’, I did earlier mention willing and cooperative ‘representatives’. I was approached to scope out the task at hand at the request of Palino but no contract was entered upon completion of scoping. It was his choice not to continue business for whatever reason he chooses. I respect his decision to do so – this is the nature of free enterprise.

The following has been stressed by Council more than once with the Unitary Plan and its processes:

From my Facebook update in regards to Slowing Down the Unitary Plan

Only one problem with Centre Right people when they say that – it can not be slowed down any more than what it is. I think they have forgotten three things:
1: Section 32 analysis still needs to happen on the Unitary Plan and the Governmentwill be watching this closely to make sure it is robust. We should get more details on this tomorrow
2: The Central Government actually has a limited time frame on the Unitary Plan before notification actually must occur – a three year process in itself. If we – The Council and Auckland blow that time frame via slowing down the Unitary Plan process then Government will take over and that does no one ANY good
3: “I’ll work to slow down the Unitary Plan and make sure we get it right for Maungakiekie-Tamaki and our future.” A Patch candidate using that language with no focus on the region. As a Ward Councillor you not only have your ward but all other wards as well. You make decisions for the region, the Local Boards look after the local. So be wary of those who are patch focused (usually the Centre Right) as they will re-cause the fragmentation the old Auckland City Council area saw for countless decades. This will come at great expense to the other Wards…

 

Unitary Plan Briefing

Monday there is a briefing on the Unitary Plan thus far and where to next with it. The briefing will: “cover key issues identified in the informal feedback, interim directions and an update on the next steps in the process.”

I will be in attendance at that briefing and will deliver full commentary on Tuesday for your consumption.

As readers would know, August 28-30th is where the Auckland Plan Committee will make final decisions on the Unitary Plan before setting a date when the plan goes for formal notification.

I assume this briefing (to the media) will be an extensive one. Yes, I will be asking questions as well.

 

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

Election Candidates Now Out

·

So Who is Running In Your Area?

 

The nominations have closed for: mayor, council wards and local boards. The list is now out on those who are standing for each position:

 

My congratulations to: Cameron Brewer, Sharon Stewart and Dick Quax for being reelected unopposed back to Council. No matter our politics it will be good to see some familiar faces for another three years as I continue to advance some #BetterAuckland projects.

As for my Ward? Calum Penrose should be a shoe-in again for Papakura while Arthur Anae should get one of the two seats of the Manukau Ward. I mention Manukau as that is where the #SuperManukau work is happening from TotaRim, so I like to keep an eye on “things in that area.

All the best to all the candidates running

 

Related articles

 

Does Auckland Really Suck the Life Out of NZ?

· 2 Comments ·

I Would Say Wellington Does – Hands Down

(Parliament that is)

 

Two notes before I start this post in reply to The Vote NZ’s supposed debate that occurred on Wednesday night:

  1. This is just me musing and posting my thoughts on this debate about the regions hurting while Auckland continues to “surge” ahead. I might later write a paper on the matter backed by primary research and my own findings
  2. Australia is just a consequence of actions or inactions here in NZ. People are free to come and go between Australia and NZ although I see more Kiwis are coming back to NZ at the moment.

 

On Wednesday night The Vote NZ decided to hold a debate on whether Auckland was sucking the life out of the regions (everywhere else) and what should basically be done about it.

I did not bother to watch as it turned out as I predicted: a Duncan Garner (the host) led JAFA bashing session of New Zealand’s largest and most powerful city. Then again I can’t expect much else out of Garner and his ineptness most days of the given week.

Look, I’ll keep this post brief; Auckland is not sucking the life out of the regions, Wellington is. That is the current Neo Conservative John Key led Government is with Steven Joyce as the Minister of Everything (Business, Innovation and Employment) and Gerry Brownlee as the Minister of Transport.

Our Neo Con Government basically does three things:

Economics

“Pick winners.” $30m subsidy for Rio Tinto’s Aluminium Smelter yet nothing for Solid Energy and Huntly. Interfere with the free market through getting in the road and picking winners through subsidies – most times the winner being sold overseas soon after or failing and needing prop up. If a company fails in the free market it usually (if there was demand) will rise again from the ashes and continue on. Let the private individual decide not Government. Our Neo Con Government also does not really have a regional development strategy in place to help the regions grow. Now it can do that in two ways: infrastructure upgrades, or either a Crown Research Institute or tertiary education facility somewhere near by. Businesses naturally flock to these areas including large and often heavy industry through complementing each other.

Infrastructure

Our Neo Con Government can not build our transport infrastructure to save both itself and NZ. While our State Highways do need to be maintained do we need to binge on the gold-plated Roads of National Significance? Of all of the RoNS that are there (7) I can only think of two that were needed at all – the Western Ring Route (under construction) and the Victoria Park Tunnel. Both in Auckland and both needed to assist Auckland move. For the rest, like the Holiday Highway, better and less expensive safety upgrades and bypasses can be built (like the Maramarua State Highway 2 bypass) rather than 4-lane motorways. Ironically I just saw this as I was writing this post: Motorway benefits debated. A virtual drain on both Auckland and the rest of the nation’s regions. As for other forms of transport, we need major investment in road and coastal shipping as well.

Taxes and Investment

We do hear the regions wail that they do not get their taxes they send to Wellington in the form of investment and blame Auckland for getting the “lion’s share.” News to the regions, Auckland does not even get all the tax it sends down back to the city into the form of investment. For every dollar we send down especially in transport and fuel levies, anywhere between 65-75cents comes back to Auckland in transport investment. That hurts us as much as it hurts the regions.

What to do?

First of all Auckland does not suck the life out of the regions. Auckland like Fonterra is a powerhouse. However, Auckland is also massive and of critical mass in size and population. Realise though, especially those who are quick to bash Auckland – which can contribute up to 40% of New Zealand’s GDP  (great if Fonterra takes any more whacks), Auckland and the regions are interdependent on each other. Not one over the other and independent of the other – interdependent! If one fails the other also fails.

Wikipedia: The sub-national GDP of the Auckland region was estimated at US$47.6 billion in 2003, 36% of New Zealand’s national GDP, 15% greater than the entire South Island.[54]

In my honest opinion the Government should be doing this:

Economics

Stop picking winners and sending money to places like Rio Tinto. It does nothing for the regions nor Auckland. It only helps a few and most likely an elite few at that. Allow the free market to work, create, burn, destroy, and recreate out of the ashes. Private individuals are responsive to the needs of others and often the economy, not the cumbersome Government.

People in a free market situation also move naturally to areas best suited to them and their requirements. For some that is Auckland and its offerings, others the regions and its offerings. When the Government does not interfere the movement of people and capital moves naturally, balancing itself between the interdependent regions and Auckland. Our Government has upset this natural balance.

Sure, the Government can help with education and mentoring people along BUT, no hand outs.

Infrastructure

Realise this for moving goods efficiently and economically:

  • Road and truck: small volumes and most efficient for short distance
  • Rail: medium volumes (can take the volumes of 100+ trucks) over medium and long distance
  • Coastal Shipping: large and bulk volumes over large distances (Auckland to Timaru for example)

Plan and build for this. This means upgrading the North Auckland Rail Line and building the Marsden Line to serve the North Port in Northland which is growing. Reopen the Napier-Gisborne Line as it can move logs much better and in higher volumes than trucks can. Make sure our coastal shipping facilities and inter-modal transfer (boat to train or truck) are in tip top shape. These water haulers move vast amounts of cargo in the most cost effective and efficient manner possible over a long distance.

Building the infrastructure also has a bonus effect: people wanting to set up a business to utilise that infrastructure and its benefits. This means that if the regions are well served by good roads (not gold plated ones), good rail connections and/or good coastal shipping connections then people, business and industry will naturally come and invest in that particular region (providing the government is not “picking” winners).

In building the infrastructure and as a flow on effect, neighbouring Local, City and Regional Councils start working together and plan growth and cooperation with each other – benefiting all. This working together between each other seems to be happening between Auckland and Waikato (although the Government is NOT building the complete infrastructure suite of road and rail).

It got mentioned to me that Auckland Council and Environment Waikato are talking and planning ways to set about achieving cooperation in planning as both areas continue to grow. Effectively what is being looked at is population load sharing – people move naturally out of Auckland and live in northern Waikato and work in Auckland. However, they might do their shopping in the regional town centre or even Hamilton city. This kind of movement is normal and seen internationally. It seems wise as Auckland grows to have the Waikato help us out in return for population load sharing. Both Waikato and Auckland win on all fronts: economic, social and physical.

In fact I might do some commentary on that this weekend – the Auckland-Waikato partnership and population load sharing. It does have effects on Manukau as well as an interesting issue,

Dollar for Dollar

This is easy; for every dollar we send down to Wellington in transport levies we get the same dollar back for transport investment – for regions and Auckland. Not for Holiday Highways but for actual transportation infrastructure suited to moving whatever we need to move to wherever most efficiently.

While not the full spiel and hot air of The Vote NZ, this is a quick look into what I think is happening and should actually be happening.

For Auckland is not sucking the life out of the regions, Steven Joyce and Gerry Brownlee are (sucking the life both out of the regions and Auckland combined).

More on the Waikato-Auckland partnership this weekend

Really – With The Surveys?

· 2 Comments ·

Seems the Centre Right are Lacking Again?

 

This keeps cropping up today thanks to Councillor Cameron Brewer:

Polls cost millions

Len Brown‘s Auckland Council has spent more than $5.1 million on pollsters and surveys in the past three years.

A council spokesman said about 60 per cent of the spending was required under law, mainly for annual planning and reporting.

 

But councillor Cameron Brewer said spending on pollsters was “out of control”.

 

Brewer said: “Think of the improvements a local park or playground could’ve enjoyed with this money. Instead it’s all gone into lining the pockets of private pollsters.”

The figures were released to Brewer under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.

 

“It’s time to stop the spinning and get back to delivering core council services for ratepayers,” he said. He suspected the polling was being done for “purely political reasons”.

 

A further $212,237 has been spent on around 15,827 panellists that the council use to “have their say on a wide range of council issues, activities and plans”.

…

You can read the rest over at the Herald site.

 

Seriously though is this all Cameron and candidate for mayorship Palino really think about at the moment?

While conducting polls is a vexed issue (and rightfully so), the People’s Panel to which I participate in is a straight forward exercise.

You sign up and periodically you get to fill out an electronic survey that comes into your email box. Where ever you can access the emails you can do the survey. And that means some days I might be filling one out at a lunch break in Town Hall. Most are short (although I did get a long one on parks and recreation) and relate to CORE service issues Council provide and the Right Wing blather on about.

The surveys I have done from the People’s Panel have included:

  • The Proposed Takanini Library (survey commissioned by the Local Board)
  • Parks and Recreation
  • Unitary Plan (had a few of those and a reason I was invited to the Civic Forums on the Unitary Plan)
  • Public Transport
  • The CBD

I seriously don’t see what the problem is with the People’s Panel (which do release summaries after the said survey). The surveys are designed to be quick, efficient and “portable” for when Council, the Local Boards, or even Auckland Transport are scoping out opinions.

Yes Desley (of Orakei) we can go to the Local Boards and the Local Boards can come to us. But, that can be slow and cumbersome when one needs a quick fire quantitative survey done on something. Heck even the Papakura Local Board engaged in a People’s Panel survey on the proposed Library.

I would assume my Local Board would then hold face to face or submission sessions on the Library if the survey results were in favour of the proposal.

 

So the People’s Panel has its use and I don’t mind giving my opinions to the Council in that format when they want to answer something particular. It can sure beat writing 105 page submissions and long blog posts to boot.

But, in their drive for “savings” and “core services” it would seem Brewer and Palino would cut off an actual “core service” – by denying an easy medium for Council to (you know Cameron seeming you go on about it) engage with the local or wider community.

Oh and if you wonder about the gauge of opinions, well I know the Panel would be diverse if my comments and Facebook friend Scott’s are anything to go by. Some days we would agree other days the Centre Left and Centre Right arguments (me being the “young Tory) will come out. And by looking at the Civic Forums the mix was reasonably balanced except on the geographic front where South Auckland was lacking in numbers BADLY!

 

Come on guys find better ways in getting our rates bill down – while not hobbling an engagement arm Council and running distractions on lack of hard policy…

Heavy Auckland Plan Committee Agenda

·

Going to be a long and contentious day

 

August 13 is going to be a very long and contentious day in Town Hall starting at 10am sharp.

While the agenda is not as long as the Transport Committee agenda’s (and that is only due to the Auckland Transport monthly report from its respective Board being added) it does stand at 200 odd pages long and has five heavy items in there. They being:

  1. Unitary Plan Update
  2. Port Zone decision
  3. Lot 59 (The Manukau Bus Interchange opposite the MIT being built in Manukau)
  4. Mill Road/Redoubt Road Corridor
  5. Iwi Management Plan

 

You can see the main agenda and the addendum agenda below

 

The Main Agenda

 

The Addendum Agenda including the Unitary Plan and Port of Auckland

 

Of course I will be in attendance at that Committee meeting and Tweeting live as the updates and moves occur. Also an update on the Congestion Free Network should also arrive on Tuesday (the 13th as well).

 

As I said in the beginning, it will be a long and contentious day as the heavy stuff progresses through.

 

 

Here We Go Again with Port of Auckland

· 1 Comment ·

Round Two

With Port Expansions

 

This is a case of here we go again with Port of Auckland and its more modest expansion plans at its Waterfront site.

Seems Bernard Orsman has a new (well old) topic to go latch onto until August 13 – when the Auckland Plan Committee meets again.

The Herald is planning to run a “series” on the latest plans for expansion at the Waitemata site. Talking Auckland though will not be running any commentary on the latest rounds from POAL and its expansion proposals.

The reason being that I have originally covered matters relating to the Port expansion plans earlier (check the Waterfront Auckland Waterfront Index at the top of the page) as well as that there is no new material to comment on until Part Two of the review is conducted (if it ever will be). Orsman did handily outline the two parts to the review for easy reference:

From the NZ Herald

Port push into harbour set to be part of Auckland plan

By Bernard Orsman @BernardOrsman

5:30 AM Monday Aug 5, 2013

Expansion plan reviews – what’s involved

Stage 1
* A technical study by PricewaterhouseCoopers on the current and future freight demand and supply for the three upper North Island ports, Auckland, Tauranga and Northland.

It found:
* The upper North Island needs all its ports to meet strong growth, and the best way to meet future demand is to grow the ports.
* Ports of Auckland is likely to face capacity constraints before Tauranga and Northland.
* Losing the 3ha of land at Captain Cook and Marsden wharves would make matters worse.
* Further reclamation needed over the next 30 years, but less than previously thought.

Stage 2
* To inform the long-term strategic planning choices for the Auckland waterfront.

To consider:
* Different configurations and alternative locations for Ports of Auckland.
* Economic costs and benefits of various options.
* Alignment with current transport strategies, plans and programmes.
* Legal and other barriers to various options.
* Auckland Council engaging with communities with an interest in port development about the results of the work.

—ends—

 

August 13 folks – it is open to the public and I will be there running the commentary live as it happens.

Updates, Holiday, and C&R Playing Same Old Again

· 2 Comments ·

Will Be Away Next Week

 

I will be away next week from August 6 to the 10th in Tauranga on a nice mid year winter break. Looking at Council and Auckland Transport business next week there is nothing particularly heavy happening apart from the Transport Committee on the Wednesday. You can see my commentary on the upcoming meeting in the Transport Committee to Discuss Rail Patronage post.

In saying that and thanks (or a curse) to the Digital Age I will still be keeping an eye on things in Auckland if anything does crop up.

 

Act Honestly

Speaking of things cropping up it seems the Centre Right, more to the point C&R are back to their old politicking tricks again as the campaign draws on towards October.

I was aware there was the second and final Unitary Plan Mapping Workshop yesterday with the Councillors and the Local Boards. Looking at social media feeds at the timetable it was running from 9am until 1:45 with lunch about 12:10pm. And from the final remarks it seemed the workshop went well although I did pick up a comment on the planners being a tad hesitant on some proposed changes – it happens.

What caught my attention though was on Facebook was three Communities and Resident (C&R) incumbents (one councillor and two Local Board members) having a photo op and stating it was for preparation for the campaign. Out of curiosity I questioned Nigel Turnball the incumbent C&R Local Board member who planning to run alongside incumbent C&R Councillor Chris Fletcher for the Albert-Eden Ward seat (effectively trying to tip out Councillor Dr Cathy Casey) why they were not at the Unitary Plan Mapping Workshop.

I was told by Nigel that this was early morning session and that they did show up to the workshop yesterday. That was fine and I would have left it at that. However, literally by coincidence at the same time on Twitter I had Nigel’s Local Board counterpart’s mention that “they” (our photo op people) did not show up until lunch time (if that) and that the maps went away either then or not long after.

So I questioned Nigel again for clarification and I was told their photo op session was the day previous. A photo of a Unitary Plan map with pencil drawings was soon posted later. Now I would have left the whole affair at that and gone on to the next subject matter at hand at the time. But, when one gets alerted that your comments were deleted the suspicion alarms go up automatically. Sure enough the comment thread with my line of questions was removed. I would also suspect that the map photo would have come from the first Unitary Plan Mapping workshop rather than the second one if the maps were put away yesterday at the time they said they were.

Where am I going with this? C&R up to their old tricks again rather than being accountable as they keep harping to the Centre Left about.

What will get me at maximum suspicion automatically and very quickly is not the fact the comment line with the question line was deleted – although that does get suspicions up but, the fact that person strong in the “faith” and makes it publicly known either deleted or allowed someone to delete the questions rather than allowing the thread to stay put and others being the judge themselves.

Unfortunately I did not get a screenshot of the thread (although there were witnesses that saw my line of questioning) as I believed I would have no reason to do so – if the said person was acting with integrity. Obviously someone there was not and now the thread is gone.

My suspicions now? That these people who are critics of the Unitary Plan and rather vocal on it decided that a photo op was more important than working with their Local Board counterparts, their other Councillor, and the Planners in trying to get the maps more reflective of community feedback.

I have blasted Councillors Brewer and Coney for grandstanding at Auckland Plan Committee meetings on the Unitary Plan, and I let rip into Councillor Walker after his performance at the last committee while not at workshops.

I should be letting rip into these three Centre Right representatives for not being at a very critical mapping workshop. The last workshop where they can make changes to the maps before they come back out to the public in the formal notification process starting later this year.

Unacceptable from all three of them indeed and will not earn favourable light from this end any time soon.

There is a moral of the story here. Tell the truth for starters when questioned and don’t go deleting the comment thread on Facebook while one is paying attention as one was. Now one believes someone did have something to hide and was being dishonest about it. Otherwise the thread would have remained and most likely the person being a tad more truthful than what there were being in the first place.

It also does them no good when I am already naturally suspicious of the Centre Right and Right Wing and they go and decide to pull that stunt off. And it does not do anything better when I am also naturally suspicious of those who are more “conservative” in the Christian or Catholic faith and such person commits a rather shady act in the political realm.

 

I suppose those who are running for an elected position in Council can take the above as a warning. Act dishonestly and no favours will be earned in a hurry from here.

 

The voters are watching