Tag: politics

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 Auckland) that 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

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

 

Related articles

 

Oh Dear – Toys out of Cot – Again

·

Someone down in the South is not happy

 

Oh dear it seems someone (or rather some Association) has spilled their cup of tea and decided to have a moan in the media. Yes I am being rather unflattering towards the Karaka Residents and Ratepayers Association but, upon reading the following Courier article can someone explain on earth is really going on here please?

Lets take a look at the said article to get some context shall we?

From the Papakura Courier and the ever-so reliable Dubby Henry

Community groups aim to speak out 

DUBBY HENRY

 

Franklin residents could soon have a powerful new voice if community groups get their way.

 

Groups across the area want to form a united “de facto community board” to rival the Franklin Local Board as a voice for disenfranchised residents.

 

The group will speak on key overarching issues such as the Auckland Council‘s Unitary Plan, transport and infrastructure.

 

The Karaka Residents and Ratepayers Association is driving the move and is working on signing up the 20-plus groups stretching from Kawakawa Bay to Waiuku and Buckland in the south and Alfriston in the north.

Association chairman Steve Bird says many groups have already expressed interest.

 

He says the move has been in the works for some time but its necessity has been highlighted by the recent furore over the Karaka-Weymouth bridge.

 

That saw residents’ groups in Weymouth and Karaka arguing with each other when they could have united earlier against the development.

 

Many Franklin residents feel voiceless in the super city, he says.

 

Big turnouts at residents’ meetings suggest people are not getting information from the local board or from Auckland Council so “we are circumventing that system”, Mr Bird says.

 

He hopes a united group will have “strength in numbers” and will force the council to listen.

 

Smaller groups in outlying communities will especially benefit from a bigger group going in to bat for them, he says.

…

Right let me get this right? Weymouth and Karaka residents were arguing against one another over the now shelved Karaka-Weymouth Bridge?

Last I looked and I was there personally at the those meetings over THAT bridge I saw Weymouth and Karaka residents UNITED against the Karaka Collective and their supporters. Both over and AGAINST that bridge as well as the Karaka North and West Rural Urban Boundary issues.

It was also due to superb planning by Council Planners, some very fine work by the Franklin Local Board, and the united stand in Franklin, Karaka and Weymouth that is seeing the “Corridor” option of the Southern RUB being advanced through the Unitary Plan as the best option. The Karaka North and West options like THAT bridge have been shelved.

So apart from a Council Comm’s cock-up with the Deputy Mayor acknowledged (and most likely someone got roasted for it back in Council) I’d say for the most part in regards to the Southern Rural Urban Boundary and that bridge, Council did listen.

In saying that I realise there are issues with the Large Lot and details around the Rural Zones – that was apparent in today’s Committee meeting. I did hear today from the planners that those issues are still being worked through with the respective Local Boards at the moment.

 

As for force in numbers and “forcing” Council to listen. Good luck with that guys. If anything the Council will more likely go tell you to jump rather than listen to what will most certainly be an enlarged unresponsive NIMBY group.

And as a demonstration that Council listens to the small fellow, watch the Manukau developments.

 

Although elections are approaching, the move is not political.

 

“The idea is to act unofficially as a local board in terms of being a sounding board. So we’ll get the information that people are finding they’re not able to get through the council.

 

“The council treats us like mushrooms – we’re in the dark and they feed us garbage.”

 

The proposal is doing the rounds but there will be some delay for each group to vote on the move.

 

The combined group will be an incorporated society with its own constitution while those it represents will stay independent and continue their local work.

 

It will focus on key issues that affect big areas, such as the Unitary Plan, the Rural Urban Boundary lines, transport, infrastructure and education although “we’ve got to put our toe in the water to see where the strength lays for particular subjects”, he says.

—ends—

Now that I had to laugh over: “”The council treats us like mushrooms – we’re in the dark and they feed us garbage.”

I was called a mushroom once and I took a complement – why? Because to turn crap/garbage and turn it into a very valuable product that is worth quite a bit (think how much do mushrooms cost at the supermarket) to the wider community/people.

So the Association might want to think that quip again owing that the Southern RUB outputs are becoming quite valuable from a rather crap start.

As for the rest of it, running parallel to the Local Board must be the most daft thing to do in advancing the interests of the South. I recommend contacting Desley Simpson – Chair of the Orakei Local Board and ask how she works so well with her Associations she has in her area.

And so I wonder if it is the Karaka Collective stirring behind the scenes after their “proposal” with the RUB and bridge were shelved by the Council and are looking at RUB sentiment from the east Takanini and Alfriston area after Council said they were not moving the RUB further east.

I believe the Takanini/Alfriston RUB issues are owing from Veolia Water not wanting to put in the infrastructure in that area. Also the fact that the particular area concerned sits on a natural flood plain that floods usually after each decent rain dump…

Still I wonder what is really going on here with this mega association push. Seems some minorities are wanting to “circumnavigate” due process and the sound majority…

 

Roll the eyes material after concessions made in advancing the South… Typical

TALKING AUCKLAND

Talking Auckland: Blog of TotaRim Consultancy Limited

TotaRim Consultancy
Bringing Well Managed Progress to Auckland and The Unitary Plan

Auckland: 2013 – YOUR CITY, YOUR CALL

 

Pre-Election Reports from the Council

·

The State of Council before the Elections

 

Auckland Council as per the Local Government Act has released its very first Pre-Election report for your consumption.

From Council

First pre-election report released
 

Auckland Council has today issued its very first pre-election report.

A new requirement of all councils under the Local Government Act from this year, the pre-election report is prepared by the local authority’s chief executive and must be politically independent.

“The purpose of a pre-election report under the Act is for councils to provide information to promote public discussion about the issues a council faces ahead of the local body elections, so voters can make more informed choices,” says Doug McKay, Auckland Council Chief Executive.

The Auckland Council Pre-Election Report 2013, prepared to meet the requirements of the Act, includes financial results for the three financial years immediately preceding the date of the election and latest projections for the three years immediately after.

The report includes a forecasted result for 2012/2013 year; given the final audited financial results for this period will not be reported to council until September 2013.

The report is prepared on a group basis, including council-controlled organisations, and covers operating expenditure, major projects and capital expenditure, debt projections and rates projections for 2014-2017.

—-ends—-

 

You can read the Report HERE (opens in new tab)

 

Election coverage will continue here on Talking Auckland as it happens.

 

C&R Cluster?

·

Is it a split or just jockeying

 

I had heard Communities and Residents (C&R)(the Auckland Local Government Centre Right main ticket) were not very well but seeing Orsman’s piece this morning AND hearing what Councillor George Wood pulled (good on him) has me wondering.

How bad are things for the Centre Right in the coming Local Government elections with the formal campaign period (12 weeks before October 12) effectively under way.

From the NZ Herald and our favourite reporter Bernard Orsman

C&R splits as members eye election spots

Deputy leader quits centre-right ticket, leader in quarrel over ward running mate

 

George Wood has set up a new ticket on the North shore to contest October's local body elections. Photo / Natalie Slade

 Photo / Natalie Slade / NZ Herald
George Wood has set up a new ticket on the North shore to contest October’s local body elections. Photo / Natalie Slade

The deputy leader of Communities and Residents, George Wood, has abandoned the centre-right ticket and set up a new ticket on the North Shore to contest October’s local body elections.

 

And in the Albert-Eden-Roskill ward C&R leader and councillor Christine Fletcher has indicated she does not want C&R’s Mark Thomas as her running mate for two seats on council.

 

Mr Wood told the Herald he was still a C&R member but running for the two North Shore seats with Devonport-Takapuna Local Board member Joseph Bergin under the banner Fair Deal, For Shore.

 

Mr Wood, a 66-year-old former North Shore Mayor, said he and Mr Bergin, 21, who is not a member of C&R, wanted to focus on the high rates burden for North Shore residents.

 

In Albert-Eden-Roskill, a plan by Orakei Local Board member Mr Thomas to stand with Mrs Fletcher has not gone down well.

 

Before leaving for the United States last Friday, Mrs Fletcher said on Facebook that she hoped an Albert-Eden-Roskill team member would be her running mate, “hopefully an enthusiastic Nigel Turnbull campaigning beside me

…

You can read more over at the Herald

 

The last thing the Centre Right need with a very galvanised Mayor (after the massive transport announcement), the Centre Left incumbents at the moment pretty safe in their seats (this includes Penny Hulse and Richard Northey who will face stiff opposition from Centre Right candidates) and Len Brown on a odds of taking the Mayorship at around 85% currently.

Do I personally think there is going to be any massive change in the Governing Body make up post October 12 this year? Apart from maybe a couple of changes owing to retirements (and I stand corrected Councillor Fletcher is NOT retiring) the make up won’t change much. This means status quo from the last three years continuing for the next three years.

Is this a good thing? On the finances side no it is not. But, both sides can have equal blame laid at their feet for a less than desirable Long Term Plan followed by tacking on projects like money for a church and the White Water Rafting project.

With the Unitary Plan and Transport issues at hand, stability in the Mayoral and Governing Body make up would be a good thing as these two mega projects grind their way through the political processes.

With concessions being gained in the Unitary Plan for all moderate sides of the debate (if Councillor Northey, Auckland 2040 and myself (and there will be countless others) can pull off Unitary Plan concessions in benefit for the city while showing 😀 faces then something must be going right), the last thing the city needs is destabilisation of the Unitary Plan process. Something that candidate Ms Krum who is contesting Northey’s seat could very well do after her Shilling exercise at her launch. Heck even ATB picked up on it and was not flattering towards her at that point in time.

As the Deputy Mayor said last week, we don’t need re-litigation of the Unitary Plan which Councillor Brewer effectively did last week. That did seriously annoy a lot people and even had three media outlets effectively bagging him for it. Based on Ms Krum’s first campaign release (first impressions count and that one was the worst I have seen thus far in the campaign) all we would see is an increase in re-litigation on the Unitary Plan over the next three years that gets the city NO WHERE!

Also any increased destabilisation in the Unitary Plan while concessions are being gained (and powerful economists are in general support of the Unitary Plan ( Get real with city plan ) could be lost. That would annoy the wider city to no great amount due to petty politicking! Oh this is a challenge to Ms Krum to lay out her comprehensive alternative to the Unitary Plan rather quickly. A guest post can be set aside for her if need be. 

 

As the Mayor formally launches his campaign for re-election in Sunday the race will be on for the chains and the council ward seats. Effectively here come the theatrics folks – groan!

 

Related articles

 

Auckland Conversations – Urban Economics

Ben Ross - Talking Auckland's avatar

Good news

After the first 15 minutes and enough Twitter Spam to start a #trend we got into the nuts and bolts on the Urban Economics presentation by Harvard Professor Edward Glaeser.

Once his presentation is up I will retrieve it and link it back here. Needless to say it was a thought-provoking session although again the questions were patsy.

And tomorrow it is off to the Auckland Plan Committee to observe what will be a full day of Unitary Plan deliberations. I will be running the commentary live via the blog and Twitter on the proceedings as they happen. So stay tuned.

 

Status · ·

Mayoral Candidate on Transport Funding

· 1 Comment ·

Candidate for Auckland Mayor – John Palino Responds to Mayor Brown over Transport Funding

 

This has just come my way as in Hot Off The Press.

Auckland mayoral candidate John Palino has issued a stern response to Mayor Len Brown in Len’s “decision not to give Aucklanders the final say on what equates to a permanent 30 per cent increase in rates.”

This is in relation to the Mayor blocking Councillor George Wood’s Notice of Motion attempt  to get a referendum held on the City Rail Link.

From the NZH on Councillor Wood’s blocked attempt:

Mayor blocks councillor’s bid to put transport funding to public vote

By Mathew Dearnaley; 5:30 AM Tuesday Jun 25, 2013

 

Mayor Len Brown has blocked a councillor’s bid to put funding for the proposed $2.4 billion central city rail link and other transport projects to a public referendum.

North Shore council member George Wood is “astounded” Mr Brown has rejected a notice of motion he offered for a meeting of the council’s governing body this Thursday.

 

Mr Wood wanted the council to at least consider the idea of holding a referendum during October’s local body elections, to ask Aucklanders if they supported a proposal to raise an extra $400 million a year by increasing property taxes or imposing tolls on existing as well as new roads.

But he said the Mayor had refused to allow councillors to debate the prop

 

…

 

Although Mr Brown indicated last year that options for paying for what is expected to be a $12 billion transport funding gap between now and 2041 could go to a referendum, he is waiting for a final report from a “consensus building” advisory group on how to raise extra cash.

 

The 17-member group – on which business and union leaders have joined transport campaigners and the Automobile Association – expects to present a funding recommendation to Mr Brown next month.

…

You can read the rest in the Herald

 

In reply to the Mayor’s decision and transport funding situation this is what Auckland Mayoral Candidate John Palino’s full response was:

I’ll put the local back into local government

“Mayor Brown’s decision not to give Aucklanders the final say on what equates to a permanent 30 per cent increase in rates contradicts the very principle of local government and will further harm Auckland’s critical relationship with Wellington,” says Mayoral candidate John Palino.

“Auckland has massive transport challenges and none greater than finding the investment the city needs. The Consensus Building Group’s investigation into funding Auckland’s transport is a good start to the discussion, but the Mayor proposes that it’s also the end.

“That’s not local democracy, especially when the Consensus Building Group never had central government support and was not allowed to question the key projects driving the need for new taxation.

“The Mayor established the group to consider options for covering a projected $10-15 billion transport funding deficit over the next 30 years. That deficit is made up of the Mayor’s key projects – the $2.8 billion city rail link; the $5 billion additional harbour crossing; and the $2-3 billion AMETI and East-West link project.

“These three projects do not deliver good transport outcomes for Auckland and this shows up in the analysis which shows the transport benefits of these projects to be greatly outweighed by the costs. The return on the AMETI and East-West Link project is still unclear, but the CRL returns 40 cents for each dollar invested and the harbour crossing returns 30 cents.

“In establishing the Consensus group, the Mayor has tried to deflect ongoing and unresolved evidence that his transport programme is flawed, doesn’t return the benefits which would otherwise offset their cost, won’t improve congestion and will require a further $400 million per annum in taxes each and every year forever.

“As Mayor, I won’t be selecting projects as part of my campaign, but I’ll be holding those agencies to account for developing solutions that meet Auckland’s needs – something the Mayor’s programme doesn’t do.

“If we can get a transport programme which delivers the quality of life Aucklander’s demand, then I’ll look at funding options alongside and not independent of central government. We have to work together if we’re going to get positive outcomes.

“And most of all, I’ll give you the final say on whether you think such a significant proposal will help deliver the city you want to live in,” says Mr Palino.

…

 

Thoughts and comments folks? We are counting down to the 2013 Local Government elections and we will be seeing a lot more of this. Post your comments below but, remember play the ball NOT the person!

 

Auckland Council Elections Begin to Spark

· 7 Comments ·

Incumbents and Candidates Square Off

 

[Note from Admin] stand by for an update in regards to the poll results. Awaiting word on whether they will be released or not.

With October the month we cast our ballot papers on the 2013 Local Elections where get to vote in (and out) mayors, councillors, Local Board members and District Health Board members.

In Auckland this will be our second election as a Super City and already we have people squaring off for Ward Council seats as well as for the mayoral chains. As I mentioned yesterday in the run up post: “Does the Right Wing offer any serious alternatives or is it photo opportunities with the Prime Minister and which ever Minister trundled along, and angry press releases dumped into Scoop that sounds like a pile of Shrilling.”

Lets take a look shall we in brief at a mayoral candidate and two would-bes vying for your councillor vote.

For at the snippet piece on centre-right mayoral candidate John Palino from the Herald on Sunday.

From the HoS

Helpful Key on side – Palino

5:30 AM Sunday Jun 23, 2013
Auckland mayoral candidate John Palino with Prime Minister John Key at a breakfast held by MP Simon O'Connor.

EXPAND
Auckland mayoral candidate John Palino with Prime Minister John Key at a breakfast held by MP Simon O’Connor.

Super City mayoral candidate John Palino says he has the backing of Prime Minister John Key.

He has been photographed with Key at least three times this month, including twice this week. The centre-right candidate told the Herald on Sunday he believed the Nats had made “subconsciously, a tick for John Palino”.

“They don’t come out and say, ‘We support people’ … It’s how they help you out.” A Key spokeswoman said the party had not officially endorsed a candidate. “The decision on the mayoralty is one for the people of Auckland.”

Palino said he had also met people from the Labour Party, including Mangere MP Su’a William Sio, and was waiting to hear back from party leader David Shearer.

…

The article is also on page 12 of the hard copy if one wishes to look there.

Okay the poll numbers were not released and seems people are staying mum on them, despite the fact they should have been released to jolt the city and the MSM somewhat into paying attention.

If one is also wondering that yes I have met John Palino multiple times since he announced his tilt for mayoralty sussing out what John stands for and what he would bring to the table if he wins the mayoral chains off Len. But, I remind readers and the city that we do live in a liberal democracy and I can choose who I meet with at my leisure with those either vying for my vote or my business as a consultancy. Such as the nature of both free enterprise and democracy that we live in this city.

I am still asking for John to see if he would like to write a 1,200 word guest post for Talking Auckland in giving a summary of what he would bring to the city. The same invitation will also be sent to Len Brown as well.

As for my view on John; nice enough character and likeable in the times we have met thus far. Knowing his policy narratives that he is going to bring to the table for the city I would say that they are good policies that span both the left/right wing spectrum, AND the liberal/conservative spectrum as well.

However, I do serve a warning to our mayoral candidate(s); do not fall into the Unitary Plan and housing situation trap the central government has fallen into (especially around the Housing Accord). Our central government only sees the housing issue in Auckland in a one dimension prism (that is supply, supply, supply). There is more than just whacking some more houses in some out-of-the-way locations (as the Accord would do via the Special Housing Area provisions) to get housing affordability restored. You must see the problem in a three-dimensional prism and understand that the issue is at this point and time a three if not four prong issue. Those prongs being:

  1. Supply right across the city (Brownfield and Greenfield)
  2. Constructions costs
  3. Consenting process
  4. Planning process getting in the road and restricting freedoms
  5. Finance gearing

Okay so I added a fifth one but, two of those prongs can not be influences by council – only central government.

For a mayor to lead his or her Council in getting the housing situation under control, you MUST attack prongs; 1, 3 and 4 simultaneously at the same time. To just attack just prong number one which is all central government knows how to do (to show its lack of truth depth of understanding) is putting you on the fast track for either a comprehensive debunking in the (social) media and subsequent beating in the upcoming election or the next election if you do get in. This message also applies to any right-wing councillor candidate standing as well (to be commented on soon). So consider this a warning as not only are the blogs paying attention but, but the city is as well…

Oh and here is a hint here, the Unitary Plan (having read the document front to back) is an actual enabling document that goes some way in liberalising out our planning restrictions. It goes part of the way to the methodology I submitted on in the Auckland Plan but, not quite there yet (in handing over to the Local Board most planning oversight). For more check my submissions where the Semi-Liberal Plan District is outlined!

 

As for our right wing candidates who wish to become councillors

I have noticed two potential candidates of the right wishing to stand for Council. One is standing in the Waitakere area (so a challenge to the Deputy Mayor) and the other in retiring Councillor Richard Northey‘s area of Maungakiekie-Tāmaki.

Starting with Waitakere lets take a quick look at Facebook.

Cooper for Council – for the ward seat of Waitakere. Essentially a direct challenge to both Sandra Coney and more to the point our Deputy Mayor – Penny Hulse.

I have not seen policy narratives come from Ms Cooper yet but seriously, what is it with centre right oppositional candidates all vying for photos with the Prime Minister and at times a Minister. It makes the quote from the Prime Minister’s Office (“A Key spokeswoman said the party had not officially endorsed a candidate. “The decision on the mayoralty is one for the people of Auckland.”) somewhat hollow.

It also gives the strong inclination that National (and in part the government) from behind the scenes is trying to seek influence post October 12. Yep Labour and the Greens officially back candidates and at least they tell the city that. But, National never has and always prefers to lurk behind the scenes out of the public eye. To me that is indication the government wanting direct influence on and over the Council post October 12…

It is also something to watch more closely than those of Labour/Green backing. As I said at least you know the sway of those candidates or incumbents and what the central party machine is inclined to do. That allows the voter to make an informed vote on the grounds of ‘if I vote for this Labour backed candidate” I know both the central party machine is implied and will have “influence” over policy direction.’

Where as with National lurking (although these photo ops with the PM seem to be giving things away) in the background, you don’t know up front what the centre-right candidate is really standing for or how much influence is being held over them by the central party apparatus. No informed vote can be truly made if one does not have all the facts front right and centre.

So one will be keeping an eye on the centre-right candidates closely as we approach October 12. Also this lurking crap by National is a key reason of me being naturally suspicious of my own Party – to which I will do a post on later).

As for the Maungakiekie-Tāmaki contest, this came to my attention because of a press release mentioned into Twitter:

  1. 43Louis Mackenzie Mayo ‏@LouisOutlook21 Jun

    Another ignorant NIMBY by the sounds of this, please don’t vote for her. Go Richard Northey! #unitaryplan http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1306/S00273/krum-promises-energy-and-a-contest-of-ideas.htm …

    Ben Ross46Ben Ross ‏@BenRoss_AKL21 Jun

  2. @LouisOutlook I thought Northey was retiring at the end of this term. As for Ms Krum I have seen that name somewhere before

    Louis Mackenzie Mayo43Louis Mackenzie Mayo ‏@LouisOutlook21 Jun

  3. @BenRoss_AKL @louisoutlook Well in that case we will have to see who else will stand.

    Ben Ross46Ben Ross ‏@BenRoss_AKL21 Jun

  4. @LouisOutlook that is where I have seen her name; The national party

As yes I believe I have met Ms Krum at a National Party conference either last year or the year before. Also probably why after reading the press release from Ms Krum I was a little bit surprised at the releases quality – POOR quality.

I have read the press release front and back just to make sure I was reading it correctly. For Ms Krum unfortunately Louis was right and (not shown here) ATB also being correct in that fact Ms Krum showed no alternatives to what is in the UP. So in essence a shrilling exercise from a centre-right candidate who in all honestly should have known much MUCH better.

Dropping shrilling or rather dog whistling press releases as a candidate for the council elections – especially as a centre right candidate with whatever links to National about the Unitary Plan is utterly dumb! Yes DUMB!

The Unitary Plan is a hot topic button issue at the moment and one being kept a very close eye on by myself, Auckland Transport Blog and the MSM (usually after both of the blogs have run a debunking exercise). Any shrilling by the centre right and particular journalists on the UP was heavily debunked very quickly. Just ask Orsman and Auckland 2040 in the levels of debunking from all sorts of media angles and publications. Auckland 2040 and myself are defrosting the relations between each other but, it shows what happens when shrilling and misinformation is pumped out and seized upon.

I especially do not take lightly to shrilling exercises against the Unitary Plan as Auckland is my city and my home and both which I take an extreme amount of pride in. Thus heavy debunking will be run if spotted!

 

The Conclusion?

Two fold:

First: National stop the lurking behind the scenes make crystal clear your intentions for Council and the City. Labour least have the balls to put it out there front right and centre with their candidates and policy influence for which the voter is aware of an makes their choices! How about manning up and throwing your official weight behind candidates and bring the playing field back into balance. The City DETESTS lurkers (and most likely a reason why C&R got thumped in the last election).

Second: Why I should tell this to the Centre-Right I be damned if I know, But, cut the shrilling and put something decent on the table. At least (although different) Auckland 2040 put up a credible alternative to the Unitary Plan for virtually everyone to consider. We as a city knew where they were playing, what they were against and what they wanted. We might have agreed or disagreed but we knew! Those who shrill and put no actual credible alternative forward do not deserve our attention nor vote (apart from debunking exercises).

 

You are all being watched (and by the comments starting to come through that point is ringing true)…