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

Evaluating John Palino’s Unitary Plan Policy

·

An interesting piece here from Louis. While I could say he is Centre-Left his analysis is quite sound and methodical (and respectable in language). Good contribution to the debate Louis and something I would incline to agree with you on against Palino

Unitary Plan Update

·

Green Buildings and Quarries

 

Not too much here – most likely because I did not cover these issues in my submission to the Unitary Plan. However, for your reading:

Green buildings and quarries discussed at Unitary Plan workshop

 

Draft Unitary Plan proposals for sustainable design, including green building rules for new residential and commercial developments, were topics covered at yesterday’s Unitary Plan workshop.

Discussions included the proposals for a Homestar six-star rating (or equivalent) for new developments with five or more dwellings, and a GreenStar five-star rating for new office and industrial buildings.

Councillors and local board chairs agreed to consider retaining the six-star rating for homes but reduce the rating for office and commercial buildings to four-star. Council staff were also asked to look at a different approach for certain industrial buildings.

Extensions to quarry zones and quarry transport routes were also covered. The draft Unitary Plan quarry zone provides for regionally significant mineral extraction such as aggregate products for infrastructure projects.

Six regionally significant quarries currently have over 2000 truck movements a day and the Unitary Plan process will consider if controls may be needed.

Ends

 

Related articles

Update on Manukau Interchange

· 4 Comments ·

Going to have to force a redesign

 

Council has just endorsed the Lot 59-Concept on the Manukau Interchange and future subsequent developments in the area. Having read the Auckland Transport Blog comments (and they are for the most part educated comments so I take them with a measure of seriousness), reviewed feedback I got back after I posted on the issue yesterday and today, and compare it to what is being looked in the Manukau Super Metropolitan Centre work that is slowly starting, I am rejecting the endorsement given.

Thus I will have a discussion with clients TotaRim has in the Manukau area and decide whether to lobby council to get the interchange redesigned better.

Because to be honest it is a poor standard design and will be both asking for trouble and not serve Manukau and wider South Auckland as it should! I am sorry but it is a design and reinforces 1970s planning that makes Manukau currently unloved and so needing much love.

We can do better and Council and AT need to be shown that.

I will seek advice on whether I can speak against the Concept at the next Auckland Plan Committee meeting…

 

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

Related articles

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…