Tag: politics

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:

THIS AND THAT

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:

 

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).

 

SO WHERE TO NEXT?

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

WHO WILL STAND AGAINST LEN (CTD)

· 2 Comments ·

More Spin than the Spin Cycle on my Washing Machine

 

After the SPINNING THE SPIN and WHO WILL STAND AGAINST LEN posts here at BR:AKL, the Herald picks up Kiwiblog‘s original post on our Mayor’s spin doctors and decided to write a story about it:

From the NZ Herald:

Mayor heavy on ‘spin doctors’

By Bernard Orsman BernardOrsman 5:30 AM Tuesday Feb 19, 2013

 

Len Brown‘s critics say the ‘gaggle’ of communications staff means ratepayers are funding his re-election bid.

Auckland Mayor Len Brown is facing criticism for hiring a sixth “spin doctor” six months out from the official start of the local body elections.

The six advisers at Mr Brown’s disposal include three full-time staff and three part-timers.

The full-time staff are Dan Lambert, the head of communications responsible for strategy and planning; chief press secretary Glyn Jones and senior communications adviser Melanya Burrows

…

In a post on his Kiwiblog site titled “Len’s gaggle of spin doctors“, Mr Farrar said Mr Brown’s hiring of Dan Lambert took his tally of spin doctors to six – more than the entire parliamentary Labour Party.

Labour has five parliamentary press secretaries and a part-time speech writer for 34 MPs. Prime Minister John Key has four press secretaries and one media assistant.

Mr Brown refused to answer questions about communications staffing under his leadership.

Mr Lambert blocked repeated requests by the Herald to speak to the mayor, saying: “I think it’s reasonable the mayor wouldn’t want to go on record on a matter like this.”

Orakei Local Board chairwoman Desley Simpson said Orakei ratepayers were funding the latest “propaganda manager” and the mayor’s election campaign.

In the same posting, Mr Farrar challenged the right-wing Communities & Residents to select a mayoral candidate, otherwise Mr Brown and his spin doctors would have an easy time of it.

No one from C&R or the right has come forward to challenge Mr Brown for the local body elections, including Orakei councillor and the mayor’s loudest opponent, Cameron Brewer.

Mr Brewer – a former “spin doctor” to Auckland City Mayor John Banks, Prime Minister Dame Jenny Shipley and Act leader Rodney Hide – said nobody would be able to match Mr Brown’s army of spin doctors, advisers and consultants.

 

Well DPF and myself picked up on the fact pointed out in the red bold text through our own blogs:

From my own recent post

WHO WILL STAND AGAINST LEN – No Alternative Candidate to Run Against Incumbent Mayor?

After DPF’s Kiwiblog ran a piece on “Len’s gaggle of spin doctors” he asked this question at the bottom: “Talking of the election, isn’t it time also for C&R and their friends in Auckland to get their shit together and select a Mayoral candidate. Otherwise Len and his six spin doctors will have too easy a time of it”

That opens the question:” WHO IS THAT ALTERNATIVE TO RUN AND STAND A REMOTE CHANCE OF WINNING AGAINST THE INCUMBENT MAYOR – LEN BROWN“

 

Orakei Local Board Chair Desley Simpson picked up on DPF’s blog post and had this to say on Facebook (it was made under the Public section):

…

The rest of the debate continued from there and you can see it at that respective post

 

However as the Mayor asks for over $4 million in this 2013/2014 Annual Plan to run his office including six spin doctors – we the ratepayers should be asking are we getting value for money here from the Mayor’s Office?

From Councillor Cameron Brewer:

The Mayor is asking for $4,994,000 to run his office in election year (see Page 40, Volume 1, Draft Annual Plan 13/14). Have your say by making a submission to the plan by 4pm, 25 February. As I’ve been saying for over two years, the place is completely out of control.

 

So again if you are submitting to the Annual Plan, consider whether just short of $5 million worth of “spin” is good value for money. I would think $1 million would be sufficient to run the mayor’s office and the rest going to our starving Local Boards who do need the cash – and are more productive with that cash in providing our local civic amenities (than the mayor’s spin doctors could ever be)

But hey what would I know about the Mayor’s Office? Time for a Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act request then?

 

More on this is bound to come as the elections at the end of the year draw nearer! And as I said: “The Mayor has more spin on this than the spin cycle of my washing machine – talk about how to make one’s head spin”

 

Who Will Stand Against Len

·

No Alternative Candidate to Run Against Incumbent Mayor?

 

[Note from Admin: More to this debate has been added since I wrote the original post this morning. As a result rather than writing a new post I will add to the bottom on the debate as of 14:45 this afternoon]

 

After DPF’s Kiwiblog ran a piece on “Len’s gaggle of spin doctors” he asked this question at the bottom: “Talking of the election, isn’t it time also for C&R and their friends in Auckland to get their shit together and select a Mayoral candidate. Otherwise Len and his six spin doctors will have too easy a time of it”

That opens the question:” WHO IS THAT ALTERNATIVE TO RUN AND STAND A REMOTE CHANCE OF WINNING AGAINST THE INCUMBENT MAYOR – LEN BROWN”

 

Orakei Local Board Chair Desley Simpson picked up on DPF’s blog post and had this to say on Facebook (it was made under the Public section):

Desley Simpson

6 hours ago near Parnell ·
I wonder if I told the ratepayers of Orakei that I used their rates money for ….
  • 1. A media and communications manager AND
  • 2. A propaganda manager AND
  • 3.A press Sectetary AND
  • 4. A Comms manager AND
  • 5 . A media consultant AND
  • 6. A speech writer 
ALL just for me
Whether they would approve and vote for me again ? I am of course not the mayor however –  Our mayor Len Brown has employed all 6 people  ( probably all funded by Orakei rates) 
And – if its true that the 6th ( propaganda manager ) has just been hired 6 months before official election starts one could say Orakei ratepayers are funding the Mayors election campaign ? 
Cameron Brewer are you happy about this? 
    • Aaron Bhatnagar Maybe we need a mayor who is confident enough in what they say that they don’t need a half dozen hangers-on to prevent them from not slapping their heads feverishly or breaking out into rap
    • Lani French Agree…. Aaron Bhatnagar one would have to wonder if someone cant do the job without that much “protection” then can they do the job at all?
    • Angie Cassidy Here’s hoping the ‘singer mayor’ will be singing for his supper soon enough…. what. a. joke.
    • Ben Ross “The Last Supper”
    • Ron Hamilton Is there no mechanism of conducting a “value for money” review in both the existing mayor’s office and the concept of an executive mayor? Can the Audit office be invited to undertake such a review, for example? Talk about profligacy!
    • Rosina Hauiti You forgot the Kia ora consultant Desley……
    • Desley Simpson Oh glory Rosina Hauiti 7 ??????
    • Christopher Fidoe With over 1000 employees earning over $100k no wonder there is a sense of entitlement to those on this ratepayer funded gravy train
    • Len Ward OK so just who is going to be an electable alternative for us to vote for to get rid of this incumbent? Cameron Brewer perhaps Aaron Bhatnagar maybe? Desley Simpson? – now there’s a candidate worth voting for

      • Ron Hamilton All good people but candidates need to be known outside their immediate patch. I admit to bias but we would hate to lose any of the three people from their Eastern Bays focus!
      • Len Ward Good point Ron – but have you any better suggestions? Alex Swney perhaps?
      • Ron Hamilton Worth considering – candidates need to have a wide public image by now and he does have one.
      • Ben Ross Wait didn’t Swney who did have a high profile image get beaten by Brewer or Lee (which ever Ward Swney stood in) in the last elections?
      • Len Ward So does Rodney Hide – but is he electable versus Mr Mayor Brown?
      • Ron Hamilton Personally like Rodney but isn’t he responsible for the nonsens of an executive mayor? But I bet he is still disliked by the wider electorate?
      • Len Ward So, the answer to my question seems to be – there is NO suitable and electable candidiate for whom we can vote to unseat the incumbent (is he Lord yet?) Mayor should we wish to do so?
      • Ben Ross Correct
      • Len Ward So the debate about replacing Len Brown seems to be somewhat academic !
      • Ben Ross Yep. Time to focus on Councillor replacements and Local Boards
      • Millie Liang Agree Ben….Put the broom through the whole place and take the mayor out that way…and whatever happens with the new lot make sure the mayor doesn’t divide and rule them by offering them positions of grandeur to stroke their egos
    • Aaron Bhatnagar Not available.
    • Millie Liang someone ring Sir Bob Jones and tell him to check his rate bills on his Auckland properties and work out how more his tenants can absorb before they leave the buildings… might just get him motivated enough
    • Wayne Davis Communications people there to make everyone rosey, and happy. Should be working with Santa ,on some of the snow jobs they create through dis-content of Ratepayers
      • Stan Blanch Wayne of course you will remember Taylor?…Makes Rasputin look like a boy scout.
    • Rosina Hauiti I’d vote for you Desley….and I’d work on your campaign.
    • Rosina Hauiti I think all the media type roles could and should be deal with by one person who is multi skilled, ie proficient across a number of disciplines within media and politics.
    • Cameron Brewer No. Not happy. I have been amassing the Mayoral Office’s full second year costs and assessing his proposed budget for this coming financial year… and it’s not looking for the poor old ratepayer, but will be a big boost to his re-election. Watch this space!
      • Ron Hamilton Nothing in there that could be referred to the AO re public monies potentially being used for electoral purposes?
      • Millie Liang Hi Ron, I would have thought this section that the mayor signed up to would be good enough to lay a complaint and the resulting world wide publicity into the investigation would keep the mayors pr dept gainfully employed  ….. Also what is the total number of paid council spin doctors/secretaries for all the other Councillors compared to what the mayor has on hand.
        Article 9
        Mayors shall be open to public scrutiny of their official actions and those of their staff, including their relationships, contractual and otherwise, with vendors, consultants, and business associates. Mayors shall report any improper actions they witness, such as bribes, kickbacks, and gift offers.
        http://www.worldmayor.com/contest_2010/code-of-ethics.html

        www.worldmayor.com

        World Mayor Code of Ethics
    • Millie Liang Good on you Cameron. The growing number of concerned ratepayers I’m sure like me, are counting on you to show what is really going on and ratepayers have had enough and aren’t the smiling compliant Muppets he treats us all as with his pr spin and smoke and mirrors.. Just my thoughts
    • Ron Hamilton It will require someone to take ownership of the issue. Seek the information officially (OIA) and then put together a formal complaint. I suggest that it should not be an elected person – presentationally could look bad.
      • Ben Ross Right what are we LGOIMA-ing here please?
      • Millie Liang You just won yourself another job Ben… Pay non existent… all for the cause Ben) but think of all the national and international media attention and the mayor and his evangelists running to the nearest tv screen where ever they maybe to catch the 6pm news and ohhh the nation glued to Campbell Live not believing what you are exposing…. You can’t buy that sort of publicity as the big league boys know.
    • Rosina Hauiti Yeah ka pai, except you guys sound like a bunch of right wing fundies…which is better fundie right or fundie left. I want fair and centre centre, and I think Desley and Cameron are a good fit.
    • Ron Hamilton What I want is cost-effective Council management and funds used for infrastracture purposes. Touchie-feelie stuff is fine for organisations which have unlimited funds. It is certainly not appropriate for self aggrandisement for any elected official. Or for management’s hobby-horses. Such as white water rafting.
    • Millie Liang Ron can I add…equestrian centre at Dury or the bike/walk way strapped onto the bridge which the council will get to own in 20yrs time when the bridge life span is only 15-20yrs.. Mind you the walkway has a fifty yr life span so could possibly be dismantled at ratepayers expense and rebuilt at Motat (once again at rate payers cost for future generations to view..Surely that beats (at ratepayers expense) chopping it up and shipping it off to china as scrap metal.
    • Ron Hamilton I wish there is some way of copying and pasting this exchange, The new Residents Association is to meet with the Council early next month and this is grist!

 

 

-Ends as of 14:45 hours-

 

I really honestly thought that kind of question would have been asked and answered last year with the alternative candidate now in full swing to building their profile before the elections at the end of the year. Obviously not which means Len is in for a second term…

 

So who do you think should run AND be mayor – and why?

Spinning The Spin

·

Mayor’s Office has Six Spin Doctors?

 

I kid you not in the fact that the Mayor’s Office with an annual budget of over $3.2 million (of our ratepayers’ dollars) just hired a sixth spin doctor according to Kiwiblog:

From DPF’s Kiwiblog:

Len’s gaggle of spin doctors

February 16th, 2013 at 3:00 pm by David Farrar

Len Brown has just hired his sixth spin doctor. That’s six spin doctors, all funded by the ratepayer, working in Len’s private office. That isn’t six spin doctors for the entire Auckland Council. That is six spin doctors just for Len.

Started this month is Dan Lambert as Len’s propaganda manager. He comes from the United Kingdom.

Dan joins Glyn Jones who was the chief spin doctor, and who is now called Media Communications Manager.

Len also has a senior press secretary, a communications advisor, former Clark spin doctor David Lewis as a media consultant and a speech writer on top of that.

Len has more spin doctors than the entire Parliamentary Labour Party (they have five). The previous Mayor of Auckland had just one – Cameron Brewer.

Should Auckland ratepayers be funding Len’s reelection campaign?

Talking of the election, isn’t it time also for C&R and their friends in Auckland to get their shit together and select a Mayoral candidate. Otherwise Len and his six spin doctors will have too easy a time of it

 

Well the question in red-bold is a prudent point as the “opposition” has either been slow or quiet (not going to say inept) in getting their alternative forward.

 

However while Len spins the spin with his six spin doctors at least Blogs can counter the spin and attempt to hold the Mayor’s Office to account – with this blog doing its part in countering the spin.

 

Also the last look on Facebook on this Hot Button topic showed that this issue of Len’s Spinners have stirred up the ratepayers quite a bit on two fronts:

  1. The amount of money being spent on Spin Doctors (where former Mayor John Banks just has one spin doctor – Cameron Brewer) 
  2. No alternative candidate has come forward – leaving it extremely late!

 

Meanwhile it’s back to transit and urban planning issues with South and Counties Auckland to be the hotbed on those issues (seeming we are bearing the brunt of it)…

 

An Auckland Housing Redux

·

Battle on Housing Goes On

 

BR:AKL Has Viable Alternative Urban Land Use “Policy” Already

 

 

And I bet we are all sick of the Housing Affordability Debate swinging from one extreme to the other and back again; both at central and local government levels, both by the centre-left (social authoritarian section) and centre-right (neo-conservatism). The conservatives from both sides of the political spectrum are basically bashing each over the heads trying to score “up-man” points on one another with housing, yet really don’t offer what WE really want in housing (it is what THEY want in housing and telling US how and where to live). Interestingly Social Liberals (from the left), Neo Liberals (centre right) and even the libertarians (down the bottom of the political compass) have gone extremely quiet on housing and urban land use policy.

 

This is rather a shame as the liberals could very well offer some viable alternatives that we (the residents and businesses) could be very well-looking for. You know “US” making our own choices and working in a collaborative  manner and shape OUR CITY, OUR WAY (not the Government (Local and Central’s) way). Now before I post the “redux” on a social liberal‘s view for “housing” just a quick differentiation between how a social liberal and neo liberal would achieve similar goals.

 

What Social and Neo Libs share the same in housing:

  • Planning: Liberalising the planning rules and requirements (like ditching minimum parking requirements, setbacks, landscaping, etc. – basically getting planners out of the road)
  • No monopolies on construction goods (Fletchers would be “broken”)
  • Zoning: basically zone and let the people and developers do the rest (apart from Master Plans)

 

What Social and Neo Libs do not share the same in housing:

  • Provision of social housing provided by The State (not councils). Social Libs would allow it, Neo Libs not
  • Community Master Plans. Social Libs would allow a strict prescription based plan and development to occur in some areas (Town Centres), Neo Libs would still do the zone and let the people and developer do the rest right across the board

 

As for the “Redux” here it is; my social liberal (and well read) Submission to the (then) Draft Auckland Plan where extensive mention of land use was made out:

 

Unfortunately though despite the hearings and constant lobbying, this extensive submission gathers (digital and actual) dust sitting in the draw. So while the conservatives bludgeon each other and boring us with no actual solutions, this liberal document waits for some brave political soul to bring it into the light and see it through in execution.

 

Honesty and Integrity Part Two

·

Democracy Won – Sort Of

 

Result Needed? – Didn’t Happen

 

And so Monday has been and gone, the issue for Howick Local Board basically being kicked into touch until the Local Government Elections in September/October. For just under two hours I watched as the issue of removing the  Local Board Deputy Chair went through its protracted motions in “moving” to remove the Deputy Chair – Adele White, only for the entire process to come to a shuddering halt when the Chair – Caesar Michael Williams after that 2:45 hours withdrew the motion and an amended motion to “fix” the underlying issue was passed.

 

What was the situation?

Honesty and Integrity – Such is a Demand of OUR Civic Leaders

 

This particular issue has been simmering away for a while but has just recently come to (over)boiling point as the particular issue comes to ahead tomorrow evening.

The particular issue? Howick Local Board Chair Michael Williams trying to force his Deputy Chair Adele White to “stand down” or be “forced” to be “stood down.” The reason for this? The real reason is currently unknown despite what is coming through the Main Stream Media, Facebook and Whale Oil.

Now one might be asking: Why is BR:AKL bringing this up now rather one of his Rail Efficiency Posts, or Rates and Len Brown posts.  Well the REP, Rates and Len Brown posts will be still coming, however I am bringing up the Williams issue two-fold; first is that I have been watching this issue from the word get-go, second the issue falls into the branch of “What Do I Stand For and Believe In – For a Better Auckland.”

…

 

Result after Monday?

  • Best political scrap I have ever seen in a while
  • The Deputy Chair remaining
  • Cowards hiding behind silence of procedure
  • Character attacks
  • A Board still effectively paralysed
  • Democracy still on critical life-support even after the victory for Adele White
  • Honesty and Integrity still not there
  • Oh and the best sledge I have ever seen from a person

 

Whale Oil – Cameron Slater was also at the proceedings on Monday and gives a pretty good account of it over at his blog:

A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM, CAESAR GOT RINSED

by Whaleoil on January 22, 2013

Last night was a delight to behold politically, deep in Pakuranga. I haven’t enjoyed a political meeting like that in quite sometime.

A tin pot dictator got rinsed. It took three hours but the momentum through the night built and built and built and still the dictator tried it on…only in the face of certain defeat did he through in the towel and move to remove the motion from the paper…a gutless cowardly end to a night of even more gutlessness and cowardice from Michael Williams and his band of dupes.

In the end Caesar was in fact stabbed by Brutus, as I predicted.

The evening started by a move of venue. The original venue was too small and was inundated by 5:30pm. Eventually around 200 people showed up to witness a good old-fashioned political shellacking.

The first order of business in the standing room only hall was the presentation of a petition organised by Jami-lee Ross with 821 signatures supporting Adele White. Jami-lee Ross spoke for ten minutes strongly and forcefully, making several strong points including using Steve Udy’s quote describing Michael Williams as having a Caesar Complex. He finished to a standing ovation after mentioning road safety several times.

Then 12 citizens who had asked to speak, one after the other stood and spoke and all spoke in favour of the work of Adele White, and against the cowardly bullying of Michael Williams and his group of other cowards. They were all very strong speakers and some directly attacked the actions of Michael Williams and Jim Donald.

David Collings added drama by endlessly raising points of order against Michael Williams and eventually proposed a motion to be added to the original motion. He tried to also add a motion to debate the recent news of Michael Williams drunk driving but Williams pals saw that off.

…

You can read the rest over at WO.

 

But it is this point Slater made that hit the mark home:

If Michael Williams was an honourable man he would resign today. He failed utterly and has no integrity and no shame.

Go Caesar, go now, before the mob gets angry.

 

Williams did not resign – and will not resign until the voters of the Howick Local Board area throw him out at the next elections (Lord help us if that does not happen) and this is where Honesty and Integrity basically collapsed and Democracy still been bludgeoned to near death by Caesar Williams and his Deputy Jim Donald (who should have been (I have to be polite) put out to pasture long, long ago).

How?

Because Caesar Williams and now Jim Donald (an accomplice is just as guilty as the original sinner) are still absolutely and utterly in contempt of these two points made in my Honesty and Integrity (MK I ) post:

What The Williams Affair does show is that Michael Williams is in contempt in two main areas that I hold civic leaders to that allows him to execute his duties as Chair of the Howick Local Board. They are:

1) 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

And

2) Listen and Engage: God gave us two ears and one mouth. In my line of work you actively listen with both ears THEN engage in dialogue with your one mouth. Not the other way around as that is usually monologue and the fastest way to get your ears clipped. Same applies to civic institutions:  you actively listen with both ears THEN engage in dialogue with your one mouth unless you like getting your ears clipped… Oh and remember some days all the person wants you to do is JUST LISTEN to their little piece – as all we want some days is just to get it off our chests.

Monday night showed in its absolute display Williams and Donald unable (most likely never could even comprehend to begin with) act with honesty and integrity (Such as a Demand of Our Civic Leaders – for which they are) and fulfil those two rather easy and straight forward “commitments.” I had a great deal of sympathy for the ratepayers of the Howick Local Board area and those few Local Board members who do act with honesty and integrity and actually fulfil the two points made above, because they (those Local Board Members) are in the minority while representing the majority of good local citizens. The sympathy lies (and was proven) in the fact the Local Board is in a state of paralyse at the worst POSSIBLE TIME.

 

I have mentioned in the first Honesty and Integrity post of the Unitary Plan and the resources needed from Local Boards to do what they need to do to make sure the Unitary Plan does not adversely affect them (which in the form I am hearing – will):

The Howick Local Board needs its absolute resources and dedication with a clear conscious and voice that can handle robust debate and outside-the-square thinking as the Unitary Plan comes rocking to all of our doors. You Mr Williams cloud that conscious and voice and could do very well irreparable damage to Howick due to your “short-comings” that can not be fixed and lack of proper judgement and responsibility in your mistakes (drunk driving and resisting arrest).

Your Caucus Leader, Councillor Chris Fletcher spells out the such high risk in the game that is called The Unitary Plan:

“Been pondering over summer why Auckland Council is hell bent on accommodating an extra million people. Auckland’s relatively small (internationally speaking) population gives us a natural competitive advantage. Leaves me wondering about the drivers of the Unitary Plan.”

 

And I’ll further add to the weight of Councillor Fletcher’s concern:

“The current Stats NZ population clock has us I believe just shy of 1.5m people. Current conservative and “normal” projections have Auckland at 2 million by 2032-ish while high end has 2 million by 2024-ish. I believe it is a case of when and not if (this is the 5th attempt to get this section edited) we get to 2 million – so I suppose Council is being prudent in its planning via The Unitary Plan for it.

However what needs to be watched is Council “forcing” growth (to suit an (usually failed) agenda rather than allowing growth to happen at a more natural and organic rate (leave what be) and planning around that.

 

How the heck can Howick trust you now Mr Williams when (to me and as I expect my Civic Leaders to have regardless of “jurisdiction” crap) when this entire mess shows you clearly have no honesty and integrity in you to execute the responsibilities of Local Board Chair when your community is staring down the barrel of the Unitary Plan to which Councillor Fletcher, and myself have just vividly pointed out.

 

That last question above still applies even after Monday, even after Adele White stays on as Deputy Chair, even after the amended motion to “fix” the underlying issues paralysing the Local Board. “How the heck can Howick trust you now Mr Williams when (to me and as I expect my Civic Leaders to have regardless of “jurisdiction” crap) when this entire mess shows you clearly have no honesty and integrity in you to execute the responsibilities of Local Board Chair when your community is staring down the barrel of the Unitary Plan” and was raised by your own constituents time and time again on Monday.

 

As good as intentions the amended motion was “resolve” the issues, there at times when things can not be fixed and need to be turfed out and replaced. With Williams and Donald (who were in deep discussion with one another after Monday’s proverbial collective spanking they received) still there and fully capable of doing what they have done (leopard does not change its spots) I don’t expect much fence mending to occur – nor sadly the collective fire power be gathered that will be needed for Len and Penny’s Unitary Plan.

 

With prayer and luck Howick can “hang on” until September/October when they can vote in a new Local Board (bringing back the honest ones and dumping the dishonest ones). Hopefully Howick Local Board has enough resources and energy left to fight their way through the Unitary Plan process. And hopefully Caesar William’s damage to Howick does not spread to the other Local Boards nor the Main Council (so far it doesn’t seem so).

 

 

While we hope this issue is long and buried, sadly I doubt it will be as maximum friction will undoubtedly continue. More blood will be spilt, more of the Caesar complex will continue, and honesty and integrity will continue to allude some. So while Democracy sort of won – in Adele White staying, Democracy also lost in Williams not resigning from Chair and the Board…

 

An eye will be kept on Howick Local Board as this term runs down.

 

And yes finally, Caesar got “rinsed” and Adele White dropped this pearler of a sledge:

She finished up her speech with an outstanding sledge where she referred to fellow board member Shirley Warren’s previous role as Michael Williams’ play centre teacher. She said she was sorry to tell Mrs Warren that she didn’t do a good job with Mr Williams because “He doesn’t share his toys and he doesn’t play nicely.”

The crowd roared with approval.

 

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.