Category: Politics

The Politics behind the issue or of the day

Brewer and Transparency

·

Some Are – Some Are Not

 

Transparent…

 

One thing people like is transparency, especially if it is either their money or lives (livelihoods) being affected by the said corporation or civic institution. In my “What Do I Stand For and Believe In – For a Better Auckland” post I make mention of: “Open Governance: I believe in open governance where the public can sit in, listen and where possible discuss “matters-of-state” as much as possible with their representatives. None of this hiding behind closed doors (except for commercially sensitive material that does come up from time to time), and fessing up when you know you have stuffed up. You might find the public are more sympathetic you one acknowledges and apologies for a legitimate mistake”

By virtue of extension; Open Governance also applies to being transparent to the ratepayer as well – especially in regards to “costs” that come out of the ratepayers pocket.

 

Yet we have a case of a Council Controlled Organisations (CCO) (Watercare (Auckland Transport figures seems to be out but not released currently)) being transparent with the ratepayer and Councillors , but the Main Council Body not being transparent with the ratepayer and councillors (this especially from the Council Planning Department…).

 

From the NZ Herald:

Watercare opens up on legal costs

By Bernard Orsman BernardOrsman

5:30 AM Thursday Jan 17, 2013

CCO’s willingness to offer data lesson in transparency for council, says councillor.

Watercare Services is teaching its big brother Auckland Council a lesson in accountability and transparency by releasing details of how much it is spending with city law firms.

Auckland Council is refusing to release details of millions of dollars of spending with city law firms, saying it may prejudice future negotiations.

The only information the council’s general counsel, Wendy Brandon, is prepared to release is that the council uses a number of law firms and the five highest paid over the past two years were Brookfields, Buddle Findlay, Kensington Swan, Meredith Connell and Simpson Grierson – in alphabetical order.

Ms Brandon’s insistence to limit the details of legal costs from ratepayers is not shared by Watercare’s corporate affairs manager, David Hawkins, who has given a breakdown of 33 law firms used by the council body in the past two years and how much each was paid from total spending of $6.26 million.

The figures ranged from $522 to Rob Webber and Associates to $2,686,705 to Russell McVeagh.

The approaches are outlined in information collected by councillor Cameron Brewer into legal costs by the council and seven council-controlled organisations (CCOs).

The figures show that legal costs for Watercare and Auckland Transport increased by 34 per cent and 127 per cent respectively between 2011 and 2012, which both CCOs put down to costs for big construction projects.

Council acting chief executive and chief finance officer Andrew McKenzie said that overall the Auckland Council group had cut its legal costs by about $3.6 million, or just over 9 per cent.

Mr Brewer said Watercare’s 34 per cent rise in outside legal costs did not make good reading, but at least they did not hide behind the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act. “Watercare didn’t see the need to protect themselves or the legal firms they use, so I can’t see why the rest of the council can’t show the same transparency.”

…

You can read the rest over at the Herald.

 

So Watercare have stumped up but the Main Council will not (while waiting on AT).

 

Councillor Brewer had this further to say:

From NewsTalk ZB

Councillor calls for transparency over legal costs

By: Aroha Tahau | Latest Auckland News | Friday January 18 2013 10:17

One Auckland City councillor is appalled the council won’t publicly release details on how much its paying different legal firms.The council’s total legal bill this year was 21 million dollars, but when councillor Cameron Brewer asked about a break down of where the funds were going, the council refused.

Councillor for Orakei, Cameron Brewer says Mayor Len Brown promised transparency and now he needs to publicly say what money is going to different legal firms.

“Ratepayers deserve to know where in fact council is spending its legal budget. At this stage we know that they’re spending over $21 million per annum but they refuse to tell us what legal companies are indeed benefiting.

“I’m calling for the council to come clean, to be transparent, something that the mayor campaigned on and actually come out with how much we’re paying what legal firms around Auckland.”

 

And from Facebook:

The council has refused to release me information about how much they are paying each of the city’s big law firms. Today I call on them to show the same transparency Watercare has shown. Going to the Ombudsman may be my only option. The council group spends over $21m a year on legal bills. Should the public know where this is going?
Watercare opens up on legal costs – National – NZ Herald News
Watercare Services is teaching its big brother Auckland Council a lesson in accountability and transparency by releasing details of how much it is spending with city law firms.
  • Alice-Margaret Midgley Absolutely agree Cameron.
  • Ben Ross Okay – what are the officers hiding now?
  • Stephen Maire How can Brown refuse??? Still another valid reason to cease paying rates imo.
    • Ben Ross By law and definition he can not refuse. Watercare I take my hat off to, yeah their Legal Bills might of been ugly per se but least they released them immediately so that I cant get double angry on the actual bills AS WELL AS stalling. Sure I might be peeved with Watercare over their legal bills, but that peeved will last around 2 seconds and all is well.

      As for the Main Council, well stalling now keeps the anger sustained much longer and will have me peering through the eventual reports with an electron microscope.

      The old saying goes: You get pulled over by a cop, you hand over your licence and answer his questions true-fully with no added lip and you walk away with a fine. Give him lip and hello he is going to do the full works including Rego, WoF, tyres, springs, rust, position of plates, lights and even maybe the horn. Not only is that time consuming for you but your risk of the dreaded pink sticker became that much higher – al because you gave lip

      Council is now in the same situation… which means – idiots
  • Gary Holmes So…. the council is more than happy to release details on the private lives of elected members via the annual declaration of interest (which i still refuse to complete) but won’t tell us how they are spending ratepayers money. The old Auckland City practice of officers thinking they control the place continues I see……..
    Mark Donnelly That’s incredible arrogance! Can’t see how they can justify not giving you the information. Can’t be private commercial, as anyone who contracts with Council knows it can become public knowledge – look at Tender information.
    Was this done at CEO level?
    btw – do senior managers maintai a “gift” register? ie corporate hosting etc etc
    • Ben Ross Umm with respect I think the idea might not be to bring attention to one’s self especially with the Annual Declaration of Interest List – the idea is not give someone an idea to go having a look through there especially with elections so close .

      However for the rest of the argument yes I agree with you there Gary 

      Hey now that Main Council is stalling while Watercare is playing ball – shall we now look at the rest of the CCOs?
    • Aaron Bhatnagar Actually, I found Auckland City officers pretty responsive to our directives to open up matters. Things under the Hubbard term was pretty bad, but the Banks Term part 2 was widely acknowledged as good for transparency and openness. A lot of stuff that was done in confidential committee work was put back into open. Stuff that was confidential was done for discussion, and then when the result was achieved, the results could be released into the open. Stopped the political leaking by both sides too.

      I do struggle to understand why the sum of council legal bills can’t be published. I can understand why the negotiations over billing levels wouldn’t be published, but that is a different thing.
    • Gary Holmes Good point Ben however its worth considering why do they council need to know who your partner or spouse works for, who you bank with, what groups you are a member of, what companies you have shares in and the list goes on. As Local Board Members, who have no decision making ability on contracts etc, it is not required, especially when the Council imposed that code of conduct on Local Boards without consultation. I have fought this one for the past two years and will continue to do so! Time for that coffee Ben
    • Ben Ross Time for that Coffee indeed – I shall reply to that in a moment (needing coffee at home right now – going to be a very long day here)
  • Stephen Maire Brown is the picture of arrogance unfortunately. He thinks its leadership style. But he is deluded and possibly mentally unfit for his position. Heart attack survivors often suffer such mental malady.
  • Gary Holmes i don’t necessarily think this is the mayor’s decision, more likely to be the CEO and his senior management.
  • Stephen Maire The buck stops with Brown. He must have full knowledge of this. If he does not, then we have a serious problem that needs immediate attention and action on behalf of the ratepayer.
  • Robyn Forryan Keep pushing Cameron you are already having an impact and the public have the right to know this information.
  • Stephen Maire And we shall also remember and be exceedingly grateful for your efforts on our collective behalf Mr. Brewer.
  • Jules Clark What’s required is some CPR … “Cease Paying Rates”!
  • David Cooper Keep pushing Cameron you will out of a job soon..
  • Wayne Davis You can bet the TOP guys are getting a GOOD shot at any fees,same as Council consultants. The Waitakere City Council had Kennsington Swann, hate to think what Auckland Council use!!

 

Open Governance which includes being transparent with costs and actions by your civic institutions.

 

My point was made above in regards to one aspect of being transparent – especially if some flak or anger might come your way:

“By law and definition he can not refuse. Watercare I take my hat off to, yeah their Legal Bills might have been ugly per se but least they released them immediately so that I can’t get double angry on the actual bills AS WELL AS stalling. Sure I might be peeved with Watercare over their legal bills, but that peeved will last around 2 seconds and all is well.

As for the Main Council, well stalling now keeps the anger sustained much longer and will have me peering through the eventual reports with an electron microscope.

The old saying goes: You get pulled over by a cop, you hand over your licence and answer his questions true-fully with no added lip and you walk away with a fine. Give him lip and hello he is going to do the full works including Rego, WoF, tyres, springs, rust, position of plates, lights and even maybe the horn. Not only is that time-consuming for you but your risk of the dreaded pink sticker became that much higher – al because you gave lip

Council is now in the same situation… which means – idiots”
This would stem from this part in the “What Do I Stand For and Believe In – For a Better Auckland:” None of this hiding behind closed doors (except for commercially sensitive material that does come up from time to time), and fessing up when you know you have stuffed up. You might find the public are more sympathetic you one acknowledges and apologies for a legitimate mistake.”

While Watercare have not stuffed up per se (still got questions on a big jump with the legal bills for last year however) at least they have made deliberate attempts to annoy Councillors or ratepayers – thank you Watercare.

 

As for the Council Main Body – we hiding something that we ought to know about? It is our money you know…

 

A Letter from A Councillor

·

Councillor George Wood Writes to Manukau Courier

 

While checking my Facebook feed in the morning (as you do) I noticed a comment from former Manurewa Local Board Chair:

 

That got me looking and I discovered this:

 

Basically Councillor George Wood spelling it out as it is with public transport issues down here in South Auckland – especially with buses (an area admittedly I am not paying much issue to but should very well be).

I agree with the entire letter from the Councillor to the point I will be throwing more resources or rather effort here at BR:AKL on our bus issues and getting them sorted.

 

However Newman was “fuming” because the Southern Initiative got mentioned and the bad onus around that. Yes the Southern Initiative has had its rather ugly moments in either rough-shodding over the Local Boards or budget re-routing away from Local Boards to Southern Initiative projects that are overseen by the main governing body.

The focus from the letter should be on our transport here in South Auckland, not dragging the Southern Initiative into this as that is another debate along with the Sale and Supply of Alcohol Act.

Also I have seen no oppositional Councillor nor mayoral candidate state they would overthrow the Southern Initiative after the 2013 elections and put in place an alternative. I believe it is the case of we are lugged with it – let’s try and make this work best we can – as rough-shodding by Council Officers, CCOs, and the Governing Body happens right across the spectrum – not just the Southern Initiative.

My comment to Newman makes somewhat that point:

Ben Ross

Burnt from the Budget (which burnt the entire city any how) I still see.

That aside – well something must being going on as 2012 was a mixed year for success and failures in dealing with the Governing Body from personal experience (that is the Governing Body not the CCOs).

Failures: The Auckland Plan in part but more so the Long Term Plan. The new Rubbish Policy.

Successes: Irony would have it this has been down the transport division:- Manukau South Link, Pukekohe Electrification Extension, cant comment with the RPTP yet as the hearing is still coming up, slow progress with the bus situation down south – but least its moving.

Next Challenge: Again transport, however Alcohol Policies with the new Act in position

So “bringing them to the Governing Body” has had its moments of success and failures -( for a scrappy little ratepayer  ) – but that is to be expected. 2013 is going to bring?…

 

A case of win-some, you lose-some. But you continue to battle on in pushing or lobbying for what you want to see to make Auckland a better place – the purpose behind this blog from day one.

 

BEN ROSS : AUCKLAND

Shining The Light – To a Better Papakura (OUR home)
AND
To a Better Auckland – (OUR City)

Auckland 2013: YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL

 

 

 

2013 – #3

·

Who will Be the Next Mayor or Councillor

 

Another blog  ran a post on who will be mayor and who will be our councillors that make up the next Auckland Council after we post our ballots next year for the Local Government Elections.

 

I was searching through my posts from this year and found past commentary on my take of the Local Government Elections next year and found that; “yep – we are still heading down that path.”

 

So for a recap on 2013, I shall link my 2013 articles here as an easy reference for your holiday thinking:

  1. 2013

  2. 2013 – PART TWO

  3. 2013 – YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL! # INTRO #

  4. 2013 – YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL! #1

  5. 2013 – YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL! #2

  6. 2013 – YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL! #3

  7. 2013 – YOUR CITY – YOUR CALL! #4

 

Quite comprehensive isn’t it? And the coverage of 2013 – Your City – Your Call will start in earnest next month especially as I ramp up my campaign for Papakura Local Board next year.

 

And oh, Communities and Residents (C&R) must be have a strategy session over the break if they want to achieve that 6-seat swing in Council to regain control…

 

Fun times ahead for all – indeed 😮

 

More to Ponder Over

·

Needing Help?

 

While I have one “Thought” post on ice as I check that it won’t land me in the crap here is something else to think over while on holiday:

From NZ Herald:

Kerre Woodham: Nats run out of petrol

In what should have been a lovely, relaxing wind-down to the year, I found myself getting wound up instead.

Normally, talkback in the week before Christmas is full of callers ringing in with lovely stories of family get-togethers and their own personal Yuletide traditions, and we wish each other well for the holiday season. Nice, warm, fuzzy stuff.

This year, however, the news of a fuel tax hike on the same day the Remuneration Authority announced a pay rise for MPs – backdated to July 1, what’s more – had us incensed.

Bill English said he needed to impose an extra 3c a litre on petrol six months from now because he wanted to meet his target of a surplus by 2015. Growth has slowed right down, mainly because of rising unemployment, hence the tax.

I thought John Key said that by cutting income tax rates we would be able to stimulate the economy. Guess that didn’t work. I thought Key said that he would be able to stem the flow of New Zealanders to Australia by building a competitive economy and offering after-tax earnings on a par with those across the ditch. Well, that hasn’t worked, either.

There are now more people moving to Oz under National than there were under Labour. But instead of ‘fessing up and conceding nothing the Government has come up with has worked, the Prime Minister has produced a classic example of Orwellian double-speak.

Akshally, says Key, moving to Australia is a GOOD thing for New Zealanders to do. They’ll see the world, gain experience – no, just like everything else, Key is comfortable with the numbers of Kiwis farewelling this country.

Well, I’m not. Why can’t he just concede that this politics lark is a darn sight more difficult than he thought it would be? National was voted in because they promised voters they had the answers. They’d be a breath of fresh air. They were business people who knew a thing or two about making money, not academics who’d spent most of their lives in ivory towers.

Well, they may know how to make money for themselves but they don’t seem to have any answers when it comes to making the country richer.

If, after four years of government, the best strategy they can come up with to produce a surplus is to raise the fuel tax, they are devoid of initiative and bereft of imagination.

Prices will rise because of the increased cost of transportation so the fuel tax will affect everyone in this country, not just motorists.

And don’t give me that nonsense about needing the money for roads of national significance – most roads of national significance are tolled. So we already pay a fuel tax. That will be increased. And then we pay a toll. Fabulous.

There are those who say it’s only going to be an extra $3 a week for motorists – not even the price of a cup of decent coffee. That just shows how wide the gap between the haves and the have-nots has become. Many people on low incomes haven’t been inside a snazzy cafe for years.

Why doesn’t the Finance Minister ask his parliamentary driver to use the fuel card to fill up the Beemer and take him for a drive to areas where people are really doing it tough? I’d like to see him tell those people that an extra $156 a year coming out of their pockets is neither here nor there.

I really hope 2013 is the year that National stops blaming the country’s poor performance on the recession and starts coming up with the innovative initiatives they promised us.

 

So some thoughts:

  1. Are we stuck for a lemon for a Government
  2. Is National on Empty and if so how long on empty
  3. Can anything be done by government to move this nation actually forward
  4. Are voters ready to make the hard choices including maybe weaning ourselves on big items like Working for Families?
  5. What are your ideas to move us forward.
  6. Are we ready to maybe swallow that dead rat and do something requiring  some sacrifice short-term for long-term gain – even if it goes against one’s ideology (The City Rail Link being the prime example)

 

I have a few ideas but will go into them sometime in the future. But for starters as I said above: “Are we ready to maybe swallow that dead rat and do something requiring  some sacrifice short-term for long-term gain – even if it goes against one’s ideology (The City Rail Link being the prime example)” – I am ready to commit to that sacrifice and go with moving the CRL forward. Call it the Gibbs gut feeling knowing the CRL is the most logical and pragmatic start in a range of options to be rolled out over the next thirty years to move Power Shift Auckland Forward.

 

But I shall leave you with those thoughts and maybe some ideas to help the government or more to the point getting this nation forward.

 

In the mean time, hopefully the ex-cyclone system otherwise was known as Evan doesn’t drown your Christmas out.

 

Have a Good Christmas Folks

And see you all next year! 😀

 

City Centre Future Access Study

·

City Centre Future Access Study – The Reports

 

And so Auckland Council has released the City Centre Future Access Study or CCFAS. Now you can find the files from the Auckland Council website or (and I know one of the files is pretty chunky in size) you can read the embeds below to save on your bandwidth:

 

CCFAS – Graphic Summary

 

CCFAS – Section 1 of 2

 

CCFAS – Section 2 of 2

 

As I said in an earlier post, it shall take some time to go through all this before I run commentary on it.

But for now – happy reading

 

 

 

 

Be Right Back

·

Coming Soon

 

Apologies for the lack of posts recently – things have been a bit more flat put than I like at the moment, diverting my attention away from BR:AKL commentary.

 

In saying that, things going on behind the scenes and across Social Media have still being happening with myself engaged in a constructive conversation with Ports of Auckland over the port review and future plans for our port. As of today I am also now reviewing the release of the City Centre Future Access Study which has just been released by Mayor Len Brown, and already spun for their own agendas by Councillor Brewer and the NZ National Party (which is currently in government). While Auckland Council has released the report (the pdf files are at the bottom of the webpage), my initial reaction until I have personally reviewed the files are the following:

Yes I am seeing the spin from all sides on the CRL debate after the CCFAS report was released by the Mayor. Conclusion, time to get someone else to bring the project through on a much better delivery plan that includes timetable and costs...

 

So not to worry folks, as soon as things calm down and normality is restored I shall be back running the commentary again – especially around Port of Auckland and the CCFAS Study.

 

Be seeing you soon – oh and love this hot summer weather here too 😀

 

And the current position I am taking on the CRL can be found currently HERE!

 

Leadership and the CRL

·

Stepping Up (Inadvertently) To Lead from the Front?

On A Mega-Project

 

 

It is becoming apparent that the Local Government Elections in Auckland are going to be fought over these three main topics:

  1. City Rail Link
  2. Rates and Local Service Provisions (funding local services)
  3. The Unitary Plan if The Council’s Draft Unitary Plan turns out to be a stinker

 

However at the moment the main focus seems to be on the City Rail Link after a leaked report from the Mayor’s Office and subsequent debate. This focus on the CRL seems to have factions drawing their line in the sand as they stand their ground on whether they are; for the CRL (in any form), against the CRL, or just plan fence-sitting (Councillor Cameron Brewer’s favourite position currently). However what is failing from our incumbent Councillors and the Mayor is actual leadership on the City Rail Link debate – which is not helping the ratepayer at all!

Let me show a long Facebook thread from Councillor George Wood on the CRL – and also to the fact I have been mentioned for the umpteenth time on this matter in the past 10 days:

  • Auckland CRL rail tunnel project funding in the spotlight. Excellent interview by Larry Williams of David Thornton No MoreRates.
    No Title (click on link for interview)

    content.radionetwork.co.nz

    • George Wood I hope that you have read this Treasury report Ben Ross. It goes along with what Dick Quax,Cameron Brewer and I have been saying about the lack of clarity around the current Auckland Council infrastructure budgets.
    • Simon Prast George, do you accept that the population of Auckland is going to rapidly expand?
    • Bob Murphy Not if the rates keep increasing Simon.
    • Natalie Bray-Gunn would think Bob population of Auck will increase if rates go up, peeps won,t go out at night, and to cut down on power go to bed early, leave this one up to your imagination.
      Ian Wood so the population of those too poor to leave will go up…
      • Bob Murphy If they go to bed early there could quite possibly be a rapid increase in population.
    • Bob Murphy What are you on about Natalie? Don’t understand your point.
    • Natalie Bray-Gunn why do we want to leave, we just have to get it right here, remember those on low incomes, and elderly, This is our homes our Country,
    • Bob Murphy I remember them alright Natalie, I am one of them.
      Natalie Bray-Gunn Simon said did u accept population for auck going to rapidly expand, and u said not if rates keep increasing, if people broke they stay home don,t go out, and cut down power etc, and go to bed, so then population increases so they can pay bills.
      • Natalie Bray-Gunn so am I, underpaid and overworked, and 6l, so keep on with my job, and watch people hired in my firm and paid under counter,at times, maybe they need to check out peeps from other countries and the students they hire, and up the coffers.
      • Bob Murphy You look good for 61.
    • Bob Murphy I think that the point is if the rates keep in increasing nobody will come and live in Auckland and people will move out to places where the rates and house prices are cheaper.
    • Natalie Bray-Gunn isn.t that our retirement dream, think even owning a house a full on dream for most young ones these days.
    • Natalie Bray-Gunn there are always peeps from othr countries rich enough to buy business,s and houses in Auck…
    • Bob Murphy Hence the point that Auckland is going to price itself off the market if it keeps going on like it is.
    • Natalie Bray-Gunn not Auckland , just for our kids…
    • Bob Murphy My kids have gone to Aussie.
    • Bob Murphy They are doing OK, and the weather is better when we visit them.
    • Ben Ross I would not bother paying attention to a report out of Treasury. If those Boffins can not even get commentary on the Economy correct for the last oh I don’t know 25 years then their report from their infrastructure will be just as incorrect.

      I also suspect being from Treasury it is partisan and highly political knowing Treasury’s often actual far-right tendencies. Heck Bi-Partisan does not even in their dictionary but at least it is in the USA and the Republicans know and how to act Bi-partisan.

      So political, doing as their master the Minister of Finance says or wants to hear (and dont give me that independence rot either…), can not even get the economy commentary correct, partisan, stale and unoriginal in thinking since 1987. That makes it not even worth the pdf it was saved to as a file and certainly not worth my time reading currently or in the future (I would trust a report from the IMF on our infrastructure over Treasury).

      Clutching at straws from the Centre-Right and possibly embarrassing if Council either remains Centre-Left or lurches to the Centre at next years elections.

      Least some of us don’t wait for door stops produced out of Wellington (nor from the Mayor’s Office from that matter either) and actually are conducting private unpaid research into getting the CRL going using thinking outside of the square and knowing full well getting it wrong will bankrupt the city. Private and unpaid research that will be taken into the elections next year for voters to decide…

      Bring on 2013

      And for those looking for my stance on the CRL here it is https://voakl.net/2012/11/27/me-and-the-city-rail-link/

      With this bit on funding:
      Funding wise I believe we as a city can achieve a three-way split between the Council, Central Government and the private sector. Those new stations will attract urban development and investment around them so I am pondering on leasing out air and sky rights, as well as resident and commercial development within and on-top of the stations to help generate returns for the CRL. I am aware in Tokyo such a thing happens with large malls, office and/or residential towers built above the stations by the Rail Company, thus “operated” by the rail company, leased out to the private sector by the rail company, thus generate returns on investment for the rail company! So what we need to do is be rather savvy with the planning, discussion and funding of this critical mega project – something which this current council is not (savvy that is (the word stale being operative here).

      voakl.net

      Where I Stand on the City Rail Link   A couple of days ago I posted my stance on…See More
    • Dick Quax Auckland’s population growth is not that rapid nor is its economic growth particularly stellar. Those cities that are doing well have low taxes (rates) and plently of land available for development.
      Like · Reply ·

    • William McGrath Actually, it is growing, and looking down Queen Street at the amount of traffic from people getting to/from work and leisure on all modes of transport shows this. You can’t ignore the growing problem in our Central City forever, George and Dick. We need the CRL. We need Central Government assistance from it, and we need solid strategies for funding it. All you two do is whinge and don’t suggest anything to solve the problem at hand. If you want to get votes next year, start considering solutions. At least Len’s thinking!
      • Millie Liang Hi William. I work all around the cbd every day and from what I see and hear from property owners and retailers they are finding it tougher and tougher to survive. More and more retailers are on monthly rentals and heading to the suburbs where rents and parking is much easier. Evey city in the world has congestion problems never mind how many zillions are thrown at the problem. Look at any major city in China where they have thrown billions at it or just across to Sydney. As for more people in the city, I would suggest the 1,000 -1,600 people that walk past some of my clients retail shops is made up of international students who have no intention of buying except fast food. You just have to sit outside some Queen St shops (besides fast food outlets) and do the numbers as to whether retailers are making ends meet and wonder how long they can hold on or their leases are up for renewal. As for Council pr spin that say this area or that area after street scape/road paving upgrades has 30-40 increase in patronage, I would strongly suggest it is simply dragging customers from other areas, like High St, Aotea Sq etc prescients. Wait to the seismic upgrade of buildings in the cbd kicks in and you might find the Council offers free parking in the cbd to get people into the area to justify the millions being spent.. From just 2 yrs ago the cbd retail/office market has completely changed… There will always be people wanting cbd retail space believing they have a better product/marketing plan etc. If in fact their are more people coming into in the cbd why aren’t they spending and why are retail shops down the bottom of town vacant and retailers climbing over each other to get into Princess wharf,Wynyard Quarter. To get Britomart going the majority of retailers were/are being enticed out of High St etc leaving a vacuum.
    • Dick Quax Most of the growth is occuring in the outer suburbs not on the CBD, 87% of the employment is outside the CBD. So the solution is a more flexible PT system fit for 21st century use not 19th century technology. Just because other solutions don’t match yours don’t dismiss them out of hand.
      George Wood This latest Treasury report will be an interesting discussion tomorrow Dick.
      • Millie Liang The amount of clients I have in the cbd who want to sell their biz/assign leases before they loose everything is a worrying trend. It simply isn’t commercially viable for a large number of them.
      • Ben Ross I’ll be brief, the car is also 19th century technology as well so like to come again with that argument Councillor?
    • William McGrath Dick, so far, neither you or George have come up with those 21st century solutions? You have not shown the Auckland people a viable alternative to the City Rail Link. Until then, you’re argument is invalid.
    • George Wood Get real William. In our democratic system of justice he who asserts or affirm must prove. It is about time the mayor and has team of CRL tunnel promoters came up with the evidence. It seems they are basing their case on a wild hunch right now.
    • Millie Liang Hopefully the Mayor has read how tough Aus is doing it and the $AUS 32 billion budget blowout and the article today in the Sydney Morning Herald on what Gerry Norman has to say where their retail sector is heading.. and hopefully the mayor is having a …See More

      www.smh.com.au

      HARVEY Norman executive chairman Gerry Harvey says industry conditions remain di…See More
    • Ben Ross Harvey got caught out from an obselete business model. However point is taken from the SMH article. We need our leaders to talk up otherwise we get a self fulfilling prophersey
    • Ben Ross And Councillor Quax, I can tell you dont read submissions much otherwise you would of noticed me pushing for the Eastern Highway in the Auckland Plan…
    • Dick Quax Eastern Highway is that in NZ?
    • Ben Ross The very highway connecting your Ward with Councillors Brewer and Lee while defeating Banks in 2004 (sadly)
    • Dick Quax oh the eastern corridor now known as ameti. It was never intended to be a “highway” but a multi modal transport corridor to accommodate buses, trains, walking, cycling and private cars. And I was staunch supporter of that project
    • Ben Ross I know you were Councillor. I was annoyed greatly that the Eastern Corridor never went ahead back then as it could of all been completed by now relieving the pressure on the Eastern Suburbs. Although do you still support the corridor today including what is now known as the Botany (rail) Line
    • Mark Donnelly George/Dick – is the CRL actually a project? If it is give Len Brown a map and ask him where the trains go / circulate etc. What max timetable is, and actual capacity before and after CRL. Govt/AT papers only show a rise from 29,000 to 36,000 or so into CBD.
      Western line suffers major disruption under CRL with 40% not going through to Grafton/Newmarket.
      Until someone actually lays out what the project actually is, it’s just a nonsense. It’s like the political interference which saw Parnell station, which slowed Britomart turnaround from 4min to 6 min!
    • Ben Ross By the way George, out of pure interest any reason I got mentioned/flagged? Just interested that’s all – as it is not like I am running for mayor here (folks)
    • George Wood Just responding to an earlier comment that you made on in another FB article Ben Ross.
    • Ben Ross All good

 

Here is another thread from Councillor Brewer in regards to the Minister of Transport and the CRL:

Labour’s Phil Twyford got bounced in Question Time today by the Minister of Transport Gerry Brownlee on the City Rail Link who made it absolutely clear that he stands by his earlier comments that he takes big issue to the suggestion that the project is either useful or popular.
The senior minister went on to say for “around $1 million per metre” (where have I heard that phrase?) the tunneling project “will do so little”, and he slammed the latest Horizon Poll which claimed 64% of Aucklanders support the CRL.
Meanwhile, on another planet (Auckland Council) at exactly the same time, $73m was transferred into its 2013/14 CAPEX budget for the CRL, taking next year’s spend ALONE on the project to $1/4 billion!!

  • Michael Myles Murphy Yes I watched a little of the house today, it amazes me that anyone would vote for these clowns and that is both sides of the house. The downfall of democracy as I have often said this country is an asylum with the lunatics running the place, the only one who shows any decorum is Lockwood Smith.
  • Michael Myles Murphy By the way you people south of the bridge Keep your Crap.
  • Ben Ross A bugger that C&R and the Centre Right Independents on Council are fractured and can not give a unified position on the CRL (I can provide links if one wishes quite happily) leaving their flank exposed. And especially leaving their flank exposed relying on an obsolete Minister of Transport from an obsolete time, running an obsolete agenda from an obsolete ideology 60 years ago thus having obsolete thoughts, and unoriginal ideas, and thinking.

    Don’t under-estimate the City’s desires either as it looks for true vision and leadership. Something the Minister can not offer for pies, and something the Centre-Right lost in 2010 and seems to have still lost and something this current Council is losing fast…

    Time for that Broom stick

 

What I am pointing at is that the old guard currently in power (and having baggage to boot) are pretty entrenched in their ways and narrow thinking and mindset about the CRL (whether advancing it or abandoning it) and are not really looking at new creative ways to either advance the project, or propose a viable alternative if against the project. Thus folks Auckland is in serious trouble indeed.

 

Now as a promise to a fellow ratepayer in Papakura, I am trying not to sensationalise the issue there – as the old guard does that pretty well indeed.

 

So while the old guard gets stuck the mud, you often find others will rise to the challenge and begin to show a new leadership to advance a project forward. Creative, outside-the-square thinking, or just a fresh set of eyes and mind is often needed and I believe in the case of the City Rail Link that is the case.

 

Look I’ll be straight and frank, I am going to rise to that challenge and try to lead a new path in advancing the CRL. As I have stated in my “Me and The City Rail Link” post (as part of my fundamental in transport: An Integrated Approach to Transport: None of this “all for one but not the other approach” we get from both roading and Green lobbyists. Road and Mass Transit both have their places here in Auckland – albeit more balanced like the Generation Zero 50:50 campaign):

I support the City Rail Link being built but under a different time frame and development process than what the Mayor proposes.

Funding wise I believe we as a city can achieve a three-way split between the Council, Central Government and the private sector. Those new stations will attract urban development and investment around them so I am pondering on leasing out air and sky rights, as well as resident and commercial development within and on-top of the stations to help generate returns for the CRL. I am aware in Tokyo such a thing happens with large malls, office and/or residential towers built above the stations by the Rail Company, thus “operated” by the rail company, leased out to the private sector by the rail company, thus generate returns on investment for the rail company! So what we need to do is be rather savvy with the planning, discussion and funding of this critical mega project – something which this current council is not (savvy that is (the word stale being operative here).

 

And when you see other bloggers out there blog material like this: “300 Queen St: The Perfect Future Transit Station – By Patrick Reynolds, on November 29th, 2012″ on the potential of the City Rail Link, subsequent urban development, and the actual potential to expand the rail transit system to more Aucklanders  you know you can feel confident there are others out there wanting to advance a very critical mega project and often have similar thinking as yourself.

Patrick’s post is a post one would use (with his permission and full referencing of course) as “supporting material” to help show others the true benefits of the CRL – something the old guard just can not grasp.

 

 

Passion, determination and patience is needed to bring this mega-project to fruition. And by the looks of it, new blood and thinking is also going to be injected into Council to see this “killer app” (as someone said elsewhere) through to the end – For a Better Auckland.

All material and commentary on the City Rail Link Debate written by me at BR:AKL can be found from the City Rail Link Debate category.

THE ACHILLES HEEL OF C&R – CTD

·

Open Schism in C&R Exposed

 

And so I go trundling through Facebook and Twitter this morning (as I usually do) and I notice this crop up which links to an article from Bernard Orsman and the NZ Herald:

Council duo attack rail link spend

By Bernard Orsman

 

C&R ticket divided on Mayor Brown‘s $2.86 billion policy, with some comparing it to a ‘black hole of Calcutta‘.

 

Spending on rail in Auckland has been compared to a “black hole of Calcutta” as right-leaning councillors take an increasingly strident line against Mayor Len Brown’s $2.86 billion city rail link.

Communities & Residents councillors George Wood and Dick Quax are openly contradicting their ticket’s policy of support for the rail link by saying it does not stack up and calling for a halt.

C&R leader and rail supporter Christine Fletcher is playing down the divisions in the caucus, saying Mr Wood and Mr Quax have always had “extreme” views and the ticket is a broad church.

Mrs Fletcher insisted the C&R policy of supporting the rail link and land purchases, but not approving a start on construction until funding is in place, “was the policy” and had the backing of candidates chosen for next year’s local body elections.

The views of Mr Wood and Mr Quax – half the C&R caucus of four councillors – have hardened in the past week with the release of a Horizon Research poll showing 64 per cent of Aucklanders support the rail link and a leaked report saying rush-hour traffic in central Auckland will slow to walking pace in 10 years without the rail project.

Mr Quax said the rail project made little sense because it would gobble up 80 per cent of the public transport capital budget over the next 10 years when much-needed bus lanes and ferry terminals received a “paltry” 20 per cent.

“The Government has made it quite clear that it does not see the central rail link as a transport priority project. The numbers don’t stack up. For every dollar it returns just 40c and will only remove 1400 cars per day from the road.”

Mr Wood said he supported the project “sometime in the future”, which Auckland Transport said could be 2025 and the Government 2030, subject to it being financiallyviable.

“Rail is a ‘black hole of Calcutta’ and is soaking up 80 per cent of the public transport budget and costing ratepayers around $461 million over the next three years,” he said.

“There is a lot to be done in other areas before we get into sucking all the lifeblood out of Auckland into this one project.”

Centre-right and independent councillor Cameron Brewer is also becoming increasingly concerned about the cost of the rail link after initially supporting the project and work to secure the designation and buy properties along the 3.5km underground route.

Mr Brewer said he had yet to be convinced about the cost and benefits of the project, including the benefits to nearly 90 per cent of Aucklanders who do not work or live in the CBD who may have to pay for it through tolls or a regional petrol tax.

Mr Brown did not want to comment about C&R’s internal wranglings on the rail link, but said he could not see how councillors could ignore the latest poll.

“The poll showed overwhelming support for the city rail link and integrated bus and rail improvements to public transport across Auckland.”

Rail wrangle

•C&R councillors George Wood and Dick Quax blast the $2.86 billion rail link
•C&R leader Christine Fletcher says the ticket supports the link
•Mayor Len Brown points to a poll showing 64 per cent support

 

Did I not ask the last week to Communities and Residents (C&R) for a UNIFIED Policy Statement on the City Rail Link? I think I did in this particular post: THE ACHILLES HEEL OF C&R. With the question being in that post: “Is Communities and Residents (C&R) Actually Unified?”

Well if you read the article above, I think the answer is a firm ‘NO!’ Especially after the language exchange from Councillors’ Wood, Quax and C&R Council Leader Chris Fletcher…

 

And so where am I going with this?

Well if we want to avoid this parody below I think it might be seriously time to take the broom out, brush out the cobwebs and inject some new blood into Council. And by new blood I mean electing no-one that has served on a legacy Council prior to the current Auckland Council.

Yes that picture still gets the laughs every time someone goes at posts it.

 

But in any case, can Auckland really afford a fractured Council in the most pivotal period of our future (2013-2016). Pivotal meaning that what ever Council does in 2013-2016 will affect Auckland quite easily for the next 50 years. So no pressure there folks 😛

 

A schism has been exposed in the primary (heck that is loose when they only hold 19% of the voting power in the current Council) centre-right party “ticket” which can result in being the catalyst to a fractured Council after the elections next year. It is something I clearly do no want, and nor does Auckland!

I have warned aspirant Councillor Cameron Brewer about the City Rail Link on Facebook:

Cameron Brewer, I had noticed this after C&R developed a schism that the ratepayer has noticed: “Mr Brewer said he had yet to be convinced about the cost and benefits of the project, including the benefits to nearly 90 per cent of Aucklanders who do not work or live in the CBD who may have to pay for it through tolls or a regional petrol tax”

That argument about the CBD can be shot to pieces by anyone from the Centre like myself OR the Centre-Left with a simple and slick marketing campaign that would have Auckland Transport envious on the City Rail Link. This resulting in the Centre-Right’s flank being awfully exposed in the campaign next year.

I might go an expose that flank now in a post of mine and see where we go over the next 10 months

 

So as ratepayers and voters next year we have a collective decision to make; do we bring in a unified and progressive Council that will take us forward for the next 50 years, or a fractured Council that will cause us to backslide in the mud for the next 50 years.

 

Again as candidate to the Papakura Local Board in next year’s Local Elections you can check my baseline policies and stance on the City Rail Link

 

2013 – Your City, Your Call