Tag: current-events

Courage to Ask for Help – Things I look for in a leader

Would you like me to help?


Would you like to have a sook to the media (well try)?


I was going through the Auckland Council Shape Auckland website (that holds the Unitary Plan and e-maps) to get to the e-maps for another post when I saw these two tweets:

Bob Dey’s commentary at his own blog hits the nail on the head in regard to Palino crying foul over the Unitary Plan. You can see Bob’s commentary here. 

As for the Parking/Sleeping Tweet if I was to have a guess looking at it, it seem that particular person is either a Palino Sympathiser or an Anti Unitary Plan  person (usually a NIMBY). So best ignore whoever that person is.

As for Palino going: “When can I see the Unitary Plan?” this is where the difference between asking for help or having a sook to the media applies.

You see I was always taught “there is no such thing as a dumb question – as your dumb question is usually the same one everyone else is thinking but to chicken to ask.” And in life (and still do) I have asked some dumb questions. The thing is though is someone is lost I will always be compassionate and lend assistance (if they choose to accept it).

Even leaders like Mayors will ask the odd dumb question from time to time. And to that I am willing to lend assistance if they accept it. We are all equal in this and it shows me to that the leader actually has humility in them. Because and I also admit it does take a bit of squashing the pride down and plucking up the courage to ask that dumb question – at the risk of humiliating yourself in front of your peers (who should be themselves ashamed for not having the courage to ask in the first place too).


So humility is what I look for in leaders (civic, political, sports, business and military). Having a sook in the media over that “dumb” question will put me off you straight away. And Palino (although already having done so earlier in the piece) has put me (even further) off him with that article (sook).

Look if Palino had asked me nicely I would have done one of the following options (and I’ll also do so in reasonable request to others as I have done already):
1) Emailed a copy of the Unitary Plan Amended Clean Version
2) Linked to my blog site of the voting records on changes to two of the most pressing issues of the Unitary Plan – Density and the Rural Urban Boundary
3) Linked or asked Auckland Council nicely to the rest of the voting records with the changesAuckland Plan Committee Agendas and Minutes (thanks to Auckland Transport Blog for reminding me there on that one)
4) Given him my Twitter handle where I have around 450 Tweets of “live” Unitary Plan happenings from the 5 days of APC proceedings


If I had the time available I could have even gone through the current version of the Unitary Plan with you. And I bet there will be something in there that will get me stumped resulting in me asking the planners what it means. Simple stuff folks.

I don’t want to delve into Palino’s sook too much more but Bob Dey did say this in his blog piece which is 110% correct:

The alternative to notifying the draft now for public submissions would have been to send it to a review by the second-term council, possibly resulting in different recommendations. Whatever the recommendations, post-notification the public has the formal opportunity to review the contents, and there will be many people, especially those with vested interests, who will do just that.

Meaning whatever new changes a new Council might throw in there might get equally rejected thus not show up in the operative Unitary Plan any how. Thus a waste of time and ratepayers money if Council tried to pull that (review) option. Oh and also the screaming hypocrisy to boot against the Conservatives who would try that stunt – after harping on about being financially prudent…

Formal submission time is YOUR time to submit YOUR requests on changes to the Unitary Plan. Not a second term Council going willy nilly on the false premise of a review – or Cup of Tea as Councillor Brewer said.

Oh and one other thing that I have to keep reminding people of and so put in this Tweet:

J. P. L. @yakmoose about 4 hours ago: next time you see a council candidate going on about the rushed unitary plan. remember, if they don’t get it through, government will decide

If that were to happen – pretty much all is lost for Auckland.


All in all though no one has been denied to the Unitary Plan. The version that will be used in the formal notification stage is still being compiled and assembled. It will be available (all going good) on September 30 for our consumption and reference point for our formal submissions. Those more keen on a bit of mouse clicking can read amendments that either did or did not go through here.

While the clean amended version before the amendments can be found here (warning there are adverts): http://www.filefactory.com/f/c610f210fe21fea0


So no one is being or should be denied access to the Unitary Plan. It is all there and the notified version will be with us at the end of the month. And no those trying to pull back the Unitary Plan for a “Cup of tea” are wasting effort and our money as we can put our changes through regardless in the notification stage. 

Final Meeting before the Super 3-Day Run

Elected members meet for final Unitary Plan workshop


From Council

The Auckland Plan Committee today met for the final draft Unitary Plan workshop before decisions are made later this week. 

A legal overview and the draft Section 32 analysis, which is an evaluation of the process undertaken during the development of the plan, were discussed by councillors and local board chairs. 

Auckland Plan Committee Chair Penny Hulse says “Today was important in order to give elected members confidence that the plan has been tested and evaluated from a legal perspective and in accordance with the RMA.” 

Elected members were also taken through the process that follows notification including the submissions phase, engagement with Aucklanders on the notified plan, and information that will be provided to the public to explain the changes and assist with submissions support. 

The Auckland Plan Committee will start making decisions on changes to the draft Unitary Plan on Wednesday this week.



Still waiting on those 7000 pages of Tracked Changes before Wednesday so I can at least follow line by line what the Councillors are going through when making decisions on the Unitary Plan.

Again; I will be there all three days reporting live from Town Hall as the Council grinds its way through the formal decisions that will set the draft Unitary Plan ready for September 5 – and arguably formal notification.



Unitary Plan – Towards Notification #2

A Warning to the City

Slowing Down the Unitary Plan Will Come at a Great Cost to Auckland


As a part of a two-part mini-series I will be going over the Unitary Plan briefing to the media outlets (including Talking Aucklandthat occurred yesterday .

In Part One (last post), Talking Auckland looked at: the Unitary Plan and where it has come thus far. Part One will also look at where next with the Unitary Plan – specifically August 28th to 30th and September 5th.

Part Two (this post) will look at one of the questions I asked in regards to the Unitary Plan: could it have been slowed down. Part Two will also serve a warning against those conservative Council candidates who think slowing the Unitary Plan down is a wise idea. Simply done in the name of a Better and Affordable Auckland, slowing down the Unitary Plan does nothing to achieve that. All it achieves is Central Government intervening – something the conservatives might be holding out for


Part Two: Could Have the Unitary Plan Been Slowed Down


The simple answer to that is NO! Now as this is meant to be running commentary I think I might need to give a bit more than the two letter simple answer.

I need not remind the City (as the Deputy Mayor has already done so countless times) that the Unitary Plan is different from the District Plans of old. With the District Plans the only time “we” – the City get a look and comment on a District Plan is when it was formally notified. Formal notification means formal submissions and a trip to a hearing – often the Environment Court. YUCK for 99% of the City that are not planners or RMA lawyers.

The Unitary Plan was different. We got given the “draft of the draft” where everyone could give feedback no matter who you were in Auckland. That means for the first time the City got to have a good look at the Unitary Plan and comment back on it. And comment back did Auckland do with 22,700 pieces of feedback, with independent commentary being led by this very blog!

As mentioned in Part One, the Council and Local Boards have since June 1 been going through our feedback and changing the Unitary Plan to reflect what we said. The changes that will be introduced to the Auckland Plan Committee and Local Boards will occur August 28th – although they and the media (including me) will have a copy of the tracked changes on Monday. And from there the formal decisions are set over three days (August 28-30th) with the Governing Body giving its final instructions on September 5.


This brings me to my warning to those conservatives who will try to slow down the Unitary Plan.

It was confirmed yesterday by the two Penny’s that there is nothing stopping a new Council after October 12 stalling or even withdrawing notification of the Unitary Plan, taking it apart and redoing it again.

Conservative Councillors and candidates, particularly those running in the Albert-Eden and the Tamaki-Maungakiekie Wards at the moment will try to hold out and see if they can get the numbers after October 12 to stall or withdraw the notification on the Unitary Plan (if the September 5 Governing Body meeting decided that the UP was to be notified – it still might not and order the new Auckland Plan Committee to review aspects again before notification).

If I had no confidence in the Unitary Plan as it is I would rally with the conservatives. However, as I do have confidence in the Deputy Mayor and the Unitary Plan I will be rallying against the conservatives who would stall the Unitary Plan out of interests of a small minority.

Yes, a very small minority in two ward areas that are trying to run conservative candidates in those areas. The other wards that could earn my ire have been more constructive. These Wards not attracting my ire include Orakei and most of the North Shore where Auckland 2040 is doing quite a bit of leg work with the Mixed Housing Zone split (to the benefit of the wider City).

If these conservatives get their way and stall the Unitary Plan this is what will happen. For every day the Unitary Plan is stalled is another day pushed back in the three-year notification process. For every day the notification is delayed is another day that fighting the Housing Affordability and Choice crisis is lost. And another day lost in fighting the Housing Affordability and Choice issues is another day of uncertainty in having the city progressed and us losing our best and brightest who want to stay but can not. I also need not remind the City that the Housing Accord’s Special Housing Areas do not come “online” until the Unitary Plan is notified. So stall the notification and you stall getting more houses and apartments being supplied to a growing city. Oh, and if the Unitary Plan is stalled for too long then the Minister for the Environment will intervene and the City really loses out to Wellington.

That is the risk the city runs if the conservatives get their way and stall the Unitary Plan. So, please, I ask you to be careful in the upcoming elections. If the Unitary Plan is stalled by these conservatives serving a small interest, it will come at a great cost to the city – especially the two areas that can ill afford it the most: The South and the West.

Also those who claim that they were shut out of the Unitary Plan process by being denied speaking rights on the UP over the last two months are dead wrong. As the Deputy Mayor confirmed yesterday and as I also know from experience, speaking rights were denied to those wishing to speaking on the UP during the last couple of months. The reason was uniform and straight forward from the Deputy Mayor on why. If one of us (the city) spoke after the feedback session then all 22,700 others could speak. Now 22,700 time five minutes of speaking plus five minutes of questions if the Councillors keep it brief equals – a three month delay. The Deputy Mayor did further say that speaking would be a duplication of what we said in our feedback. In any case I know two of us that did ask for speaking rights and were refused had a good chat or meeting with the Deputy Mayor (and planners) and both of us came away happy. Also  Auckland 2040 and myself have been busy advance both our causes on the side to positive results thus far – and a Better Auckland.


So we wait for the August 28-30th Auckland Plan Committee meetings as they set the decisions for the Unitary Plan, ready for September 5.



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


Local Government poster png mode


Mood of the Boardroom on Len

Businesses Quite Warm to Len

People still also don’t see a viable alternative candidate


The prominent Mood of the Boardroom exercise was conducted this week in Auckland. What had me interested the most was the fact that most businesses were quite warm to our current Mayor Len Brown and won’t mind him pulling a second term with the mayoral chains.

From the NZ Herald

CEOs cautiously back Brown bid

By Bill Bennett


Although a clear majority of business leaders say Len Brown deserves a second term as Auckland mayor, that doesn’t mean he has unqualified support.


Sixty per cent of CEO respondents to the Herald survey said Brown should return to the Auckland mayoral chambers. Only 16 per cent are against Brown getting a second term.


Brown had a landslide victory in the first Auckland-wide mayoral election in 2010 beating John Banks and Colin Craig. Within minutes of being elected, Brown spoke of his ambition to make Auckland the world’s “most liveable city”.


His platform was dominated by a promise to improve public transport in three main areas: build an inner city rail loop, extend the railway to the airport and, eventually, to the North Shore. He also promised to defend public ownership of assets and create a more compact city.


Earlier this month Brown made the airport rail link a focus of his re-election campaign.


His rivals for the election, due in October, include American-born businessman and former TV host John Palino who plans to shift the epicentre of the city south to Manukau and activist John Minto who will stand for the Mana Party.


The lack of a credible alternative mayor is noted

With the “lack of credible alternative mayor” piece; meh I give up going on about that now. Seems the elections are forgone in the mayoral department this time around.

As for everything else it seems our businesses are warm (but not flash hot) towards Len. While you can read individual comments in the said article from where I sit, it should mean then further stability for the next three years in and with Auckland Council. Sure there is still heaps to do – the Unitary Plan being a major one but, it is not like businesses are frothing at the mouthing wanting to burn someone at the stake. On the flip side though Council does need to improve things with business if we (Auckland) wish to continue to be an attractive city for residents and businesses alike.


In regards to the Unitary Plan and our businesses

Still from the same article

Len’s Unitary Plan a work in progress

Brown’s Unitary Plan aims to shape the city as it adds a million extra residents over the next 30 years. An important part of this will be to intensify housing – a move proving controversial with residents in many suburbs.


There’s uncertainty in the boardroom about the plan, with more than a third saying they are unsure whether it will deliver growth. A small majority, 52 per cent think the plan will enable economic growth, with only 10 per cent saying it will not. While 59 per cent of CEOs think the plan makes the right provisions for future population growth, close to a half worry it will not decrease business compliance costs.


Forty per cent of respondents think the plan will enable investment, but a little under a half are uncertain about this.


Okay a tepid response towards the Unitary Plan from business which would be the same as the rest of the city – most likely. Better though than an openly hostile reaction against the Unitary Plan which would not do for stability within the city. So on this alone there is still plenty of work to do before the Unitary Plan goes out to final notification (decided in August).


One final note from the Herald article

A sizable majority, 63 per cent, support the idea of limiting Auckland’s growth with projects such as a rapid rail link to Hamilton.

Ah no! This is a liberal democracy not Mao’s China or Stalin’s Soviet Union so no population cap measures. As I have mentioned before Auckland has critical mass and will perpetually grow from within itself owing to that mass. People have been flocking away from the provinces to the big city since the Industrial Revolution in England. Cities are just power magnets of economic opportunities that will always attract people. It is just something we need to adapt to best we can.

And so the final summary figures on the Mood of the Boardroom with the Mayor

How they rate Len

• 60 per cent of CEO respondents say Brown should return to the Auckland mayoral chambers.

• 3.2 out of five report card mark on his first term; 52 per cent of respondents think the unitary plan will enable economic growth, and

59 per cent think the plan makes the right provisions for future population growth


Not too bad for our first mayor of the Super City and its first three years



Coming up on Talking Auckland

The Local Government Elections Step Up


In the next 2013 – Local Elections post here at Talking Auckland, we take a look at the Right Wing (not Centre Right but, Right Wing) finally getting their A into G in the contesting of the Council Ward seats (so the race to become one of our 20 Councillors).

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.

Also tomorrow in Talking Auckland; a special eye is being kept on the Herald on Sunday. Polling has been done (as alluded to on Facebook) and the numbers are apparently meant to be released (into the HoS) in regards to Brown vs Palino. Who fares what and how so? The Herald on Sunday should be telling us tomorrow with Talking Commentary to follow right behind it.

And finally why am I (naturally) more suspicious of the Right Wing than that of the Left Wing in our politics? I will reveal a bit more into my ideology and why despite being a Nat and a “Young Tory” (according to Russell Brown) I am often at wills against my own party. It will also reveal our political paradigm we actually have and how it is something else than rather Left vs Right.

All coming up as Talking Auckland continues commentary on the 2013 – Local Elections.


The MSM Struggling with the Auckland Elections

What the MSM and I see as credible candidates for Auckland Mayor must be two different things


In my “To the Local Elections 2013” post on June 1, I mentioned this about our Main Stream Media:

“Seems the Main Stream Media have been caught stumbling and hedging their “contracts” wrong with Williamson out of the race and them now scrambling to find out who John Palino is – #twits”

After watching The Nation on TV3 and Q&A on TV1 over the weekend, my quoted comment was only reinforced. Although putting a bit of a disclaimer here first; I have never watched either program despite the “hype” by junkies on Twitter. After watching both over Queen’s Birthday weekend though, I am not going to be watching them again any time soon. The interviewers for both shows were wooden, unimaginative and basically don’t know how to conduct an interview; while the Mayor just trotted out his PR lines twice in two days. At that rate I be better reading his PR fluff on the council website.

Wooden interviews and PR spin aside, what has me interested is the MSM still stumbling over themselves with Williamson no longer running for mayor.

The Nation made no mention of the mayoral race while Q&A’s panel might need to be a bit more clued up. A bit disturbing that a former lecturer of mine – Dr Raymond Miller made a comment that no one was challenging Len. For a very well-known NZ politics guru you might think Dr Miller was keeping an eye on the mayoral elections in Auckland.

Brian Rudman from the NZ Herald seems to be stepping up though. Before he went on his two-week holiday he did write a piece looking at money being an influence on running for Auckland mayor.

From Rudman and the NZH:

Money talks in race for mayoralty

Second term likely for Brown as cost of campaign makes removing the incumbent a rich person’s sport


Millionaire John Palino plans to run for mayor. Photo / APN

Millionaire John Palino plans to run for mayor. Photo / APN

Maurice Williamson‘s brief flirtation with fame is officially over. Dithering cost him his chance to become an international gay icon and common sense has persuaded him, and more to the point his financial backers, to abandon any bid for the Auckland mayoralty.

On Friday, the Minister for Statistics, Building and Construction issued a statement saying “after much thought and in-depth analysis, including looking at personal, political, funding and other circumstances, I have decided not to contest the mayoralty.” He wanted to “remain focused on serving his Pakuranga constituents and fulfilling ministerial responsibilities.”

It was a wise decision, though I’m surprised it took him much thought or analysis at all. Particularly if he’d caught up with the polling conducted by UMR Research on May 13.

Using its experimental online panel, which is carefully balanced to reflect the demographics of the Auckland electorate, potential voters were asked, “While it is still early days, would you be more likely to vote for Len Brown or Maurice Williamson in an Auckland Mayoral election?”

Incumbent Mayor Brown stormed in with 43 per cent of the vote. Mr Williamson scored just 17 per cent, while 13 per cent said “neither” and another 26 per cent were “unsure”.


Fair enough analysis from Rudman there – especially when one sees those kind of poll numbers. However, Rudman does fall down in the latter half of his piece:

Again from the NZH

Having seen off Mr Williamson without as much as a boo, Mr Brown seems set for an untroubled stroll into a second term as the Super City mayor. If the last election is any guide, already declared leftish gadflies like John Minto and Penny Bright will be struggling to stay afloat in a 22-strong field.

TV restaurateur and millionaire New York emigre John Palino is threatening to spend up to $1 million on a campaign centred on turning Manukau City into Auckland’s new, modern city centre. It’s a cheeky plunge into Mayor Brown’s home turf, but like rapid rail, canals across the isthmus and similar brainstorms from past mayoral hopefuls, seems a plan doomed to the footnotes of history.

On the fringes, the right wing collective of councillors, “Communities and Residents” – formerly known as Citrats – is warming up to fight against Mayor Brown’s Unitary Plan. After their poor showing in 2010, leader Christine Fletcher admitted her team had failed to connect with Aucklanders. She pledged “to address this”. But, without a mayoral candidate to coalesce behind, getting their message across, whatever that might be, will be tough.

Even if the polling for Mr Williamson had offered more hope, funding a campaign would have been a major hurdle. Mr Palino’s talk of needing a campaign fund of between $500,000 to $1 million is the reality of a Super City mayoral campaign.

Last September, Mayor Brown, who won the 2010 race with a $390,000 campaign chest, cheekily declared the $580,000 spending cap, set by law for Auckland mayoral candidates, was too high. He said it “could mean the election is … bought by a wealthy candidate”.

What he conveniently omitted was the enormous ratepayer-funded advantage he has as incumbent, with a staff of 23 and an annual budget of $3.2 million with which to promote his every word and deed.

Thanks to the presidential-style mayoralty imposed on Auckland by central government, removing the incumbent seems destined to be a rich person’s sport. A game for millionaires, or someone with millionaire backers. With the postage on a standard letter, 70 cents, a single letter alone to each potential voter will devour much of the permitted war chest.

The worry is that voter turn-out would plunge with a one-horse mayoral race.

In 2010, the novelty of the new city structure plus a keenly contested mayoralty had 51 per cent of eligible Aucklanders voting. Poor as that turn-out is, it was a great result compared with the 38 per cent average turn-out of the 2007 Auckland local government poll


Is Rudman being dismissive of the mayoral race already. If he is then he would be with the bulk of the MSM and some of the right-wing blogs (Whale Oil being one). This dismissive attitude is going to lead to a self-fulfilling prophesy of “The worry is that voter turn-out would plunge with a one-horse mayoral race.” We could very well see less than 37% of Auckland voting for mayor – and that does not give whoever becomes mayor for the 2014-2016 term much of a “mandate” per-se.

And IF what is highlighted in bold does happen in this year’s elections I would put the blame squarely back onto the MSM for failing in its 4th Estate duties. We have two quality candidates running – both credible (although that could be subjective depending which way one leans). On the left is Mayor Len Brown and on the “right” is John Palino.

Both have their respective visions, both have policy narratives to take to the people, both seem to have political will (for better or for worse), and both have a chance of the mayorship come post-elections.

In saying all this though I have been altered after my initial Elections 2013 post, the NBR have decided to do a Q&A with candidate John Palino I think tomorrow if not then next week. Whether that is because Chris Keall was paying attention to my Twitter account and decided to pull finger or they were going to do it anyhow and the rest is coincidence I will never know. But, after their initial fumbling around it seems some aspects of the MSM are starting to do some investigative journalism and find out what the mayoral race will actually shape up to be.


I have noted the cost of running a mayoral race in Auckland. A sad thing but to be expected in this professional day and age. For me personally providing we get good candidates I am not particularly fussed. Although if I was to run for Auckland Mayor it would be a 6-year campaign and fundraising drive before having a crack…

So are the MSM still fumbling around? Yep. Will they ever get round to proper coverage? Probably in September which is then too late…

The Fourth Estate failing again – nothing new here folks 😦

This and That – AGAIN

Not Again…


Where is Progressive and REASON with The Clunker Debate



You know when something gets flagged on Facebook more than three times it is worth considering rather urgently. I had commented on the polarisation and slack Main Stream Media report on The Unitary Plan in my “This and That” post:


From One Extreme To The Other


With The Clunker?


While most commentary and interaction with The Unitary Plan (The Clunker) continues as May 31 approaches at a more civilised level, unfortunately extremes can crop up that skewer the debate. This can either be extreme commentary from a particular group or individual (which I will comment on below), the media being particularly lazy as they are and only covering one side of the debate which they are doing with The Clunker for the most part (that will be bringing me to my second part).


After thinking that kind of situation was to be buried and we all move on with the Unitary Plan feedback and all keep our heads and maturity. Guess I spoke too soon when this was flagged to me:

Councillor backs ‘village idiots’ blog

A blog calling residents “delusional village idiots” for opposing apartment plans in Milford, Browns Bay and Orewa is backed by Albany councillor Michael Goudie. The councillor posted a Facebook link to the anonymous “I hate NIMBYS” blog that labels unitary plan opponents “soulless geriatric time bombs”. Mr Goudie, who prides himself as being the voice of youth on council, says the blog is “brilliant” and encourages people to share it. “I am glad people power is finally taking a stand against the loud minority.”

Hibiscus Bays Local Board member Gary Holmes says Mr Goudie holds passionate views but should step back from debate while the council is consulting on its draft unitary plan. Mr Holmes says it’s “unfair” to pit old versus young generations during discussions on Auckland‘s intensification. “It’s not generational. People have been through battles and understand what is at stake.” Browns Bay and Orewa residents have already fought hard to restrict heights, he says. “In 30 years they will thank us,” Mr Holmes says. If Auckland had listened to members of the older generation such as former mayor Sir Dove Myer Robinson the region would have a widespread rail network. Mr Holmes says there is support for some apartments, particularly around transport routes, but some of today’s character needs protection. “You can’t look at every area in the same way.”

Mr Goudie says on Facebook that the issue was about attitude not age.


It is about attitude and not age as I can attest to through my work on the Unitary Plan thus far. It is the reason why (and for my views of THAT blog see my “This and That” post) I can be scalding of St Heliers but in the same breath reach out to RIGHT ACROSS THE SPECTRUM age and demographic wise (except the NIMBY’s) with everything thus far with the Unitary Plan. And heck you need to reach out across that spectrum as the old adage states: united we stand for divided we fall (or more simply put divide and conquer).

While an age polarisation debate might have kicked off on The Shore and the Isthmus, down here in Southern Auckland I see: people young and old, workers and entrepreneurs, urban and rural folk alike somewhat if not united in concerns, voices, and ideas with the Unitary Plan. I could go a far as saying Southern Auckland knows growth is going to happen but, it needs to be done right with all negative consequences mitigated against. Then again we always want things done properly. This is what we are fighting for down here in the South with The Unitary Plan – making sure as Dene Andre said “Liveability from international best practice is executed.”


So again my conclusion:




All this brings me to the conclusion which seems inevitable in this Clunker debate. The two extremes facing off and firing broadsides against each other which will polarise the debate and entrench views. This action goes and buggers up the middle ground from both sides (those pro-sprawl, and those pro-intensification) who are actively working together and working a compromise in bringing this city forward for the next thirty years. The extremes are trying to force either change or no change, while the middle favours more progression. Progression and change are two very different things and have very different consequences to people and the city.


I just ran these words through a thesaurus to get the synonyms that we can more relate too:

  • Change: transformation, revolution (which then implies upheaval), conversion
  • Progress and Progression: development, evolution, growth, advancement, improvement


Now look at those words and think to yourself which basically scare the living daylights out of you. Those that are NIBMY-ists don’t bother answering as I am rather not interested in hermits or fossils (one which is a relic of a by-gone era) as nothing is static in this universe. For me I am more inclined towards Progress and Progression over “Change” even though I am a social liberal and can tolerate some “change” as defined above.

But look at the language of the Unitary Plan (and Auckland Plan) and you see the language I classed under the ‘Change’ department (especially transformational). I admittedly have parroted that same language although that has been scaled back in more recent submissions as I swing more to progression rather than transformational. Then again you often have to speak the language of the council (so transformational) to get them paying attention (oops there goes a secret of mine). The language Council is using in the Unitary and Auckland Plans through “change” is pretty much enough to go make most people (even those progressive) rather hesitant in what is being pushed forward. Probably won’t help matters is when Council goes and bollocks up the communications process and people really do start running around clueless through no fault of their own (although communications with the Unitary Plan has been “basic” but not flash).



Well I expect nothing from the MSM in reporting both sides of the coin in a more balanced manner so blogging continues and my main outlet. But moving the language from change to progression will be more the theme as I continue and sell my alternative to The Clunker. A story is being told, this is my story on our city


BR:AKL:  Bring Well Managed Progress

The Unitary Plan: Bringing Change 

Auckland: 2013 – OUR CITY, OUR CALL