so you’re suggesting Sue Bradford, Keith locke and Catherine Delahunty have more talent than say John Banks?

Local government is the refuge of busy bodies without the “talent” to get into central government.

Labour extended the powers of local government with the “powers of general competence”, which essentially allow councils to subsidise anything they want, or enter into any business activity they wish, as long as they “consult”. It is a leftwing formula for ever creeping big government at the local level. The only legitimate argument about why local government should exist is to provide public goods – which are precious little in reality – like footpaths, public parks and the like. Frankly almost all that councils provide could be done so commercially or by the voluntary sector.

Look at how rates increased faster than inflation year on year, AND were inflated as property prices skyrocketed. Councils have been growing unsustainably for years, it’s time for less local government – it’s time for local government to be forced to exit any commercial activities that have private sector competition immediately, and to do no more than local streets, rubbish collection, stormwater drains and public parks.

Another who has missed that socialisms use by date has flashed past some time ago.

Who is he exactly?

Some soviet era pundit that some fuckwitted NYT times style editor thinks has got something relevant to say today??

Fucken Herald. What a commie rag.

Let’s analyse some of his main contentions.

Matt: “C&RN strategists have been plotting the takeover of regional governance for year”

What strategists? McCarten clearly knows nothing of the personalities involved.

Matt is a bit behind the times. There is no Auckland Now involvement with C&R.

According to the C&R president he wants to gift the control of the brand to the National Party with C&R being some type of National Party franchise, this is of course is the ultimate admission of organisational weakness. It would also by its very nature exclude anyone who isn’t National party affiliated. This is a major departure for C&R which has always resisted direct Parliamentary political involvement in local government. Indeed it has previously selected Labour Party voting candidates to its ranks and made a public point of this.

Matt: “the centre-right is coalescing around Auckland City Mayor, John Banks, as their standard bearer”

Despite McCarten’s faint praise, Banksie is still a bogeyman for much of the left. The only problem is that Banks himself has said that if he runs he will probably do so as an independent, thus there is a bit of a problem on the standard bearer issue. If such an election is occurring it will be a complex and expensive campaign and will require focus and all of Bank’s considerable skill to win without worrying about a all the other elections.

I also doubt any coattail affect in fact the opposite might be the case if the role of Councillor is essentially to appropriate funds, makes secondary laws, adopt high level policy documents and most importantly, scrutinise and hold to account the administration (Mayor and management) voters may well seek to counter balance the power of the Executive mayor and management in who they elect to the Council.

Matt: “privatisation of our public assets”

Mmmmmmm twin bogeymen; Banksie and the sell off. One needs an imminent cataclysm to Unite the left (pun intended) and to get the necessary discipline for a primary system to work. Nevertheless good thinking from McCarten; he must be in his building phase rather than wrecking phase. Building a movement requires “organisation”. “Organisation” requires an immediate “purpose”. An election where Banksie, privatisation and horrid rightwingers gaining political power will occur unless “we organise” provides the “purpose”. The common enemy Unites the disparate and disputatious left.

The only point I would make is that consistent with McCarten’s nature this is entirely re-active or negative. If the identified enemy doesn’t play the role or confirm the stereotype one is vulnerable. It seems to me that to really prevail the left need to be as broad and expansive as McCarten suggests but also more positive.

Matt: “If, as expected, the new councillors will be elected from parliamentary boundaries”

Yes this isn’t terribly well thought out idea. First it’s been tried in Local government in Auckland; didn’t result in greater turnout or more voter knowledge about the structure or role of the body to which they were electing representatives.

More importantly, it will result in a National led Government with the support of the ACT party creating Maori seats in local government; something that can happen in local government in the regional already but has not happened. What’s more the drawing of Parliamentary boundaries is out of sync with local elections. It’s hard to imagine why population movements in the South Island should determine representation arrangements in local government in the Auckland region. Probably apart from the initial arrangements the approach should be consistent with the current law, representation arrangements should be left to local government itself and the Local Government Commission.

..i just choked on my (whatever)..

phil(whoar.co.nz)

Why do those two words put a smile on my face?