Kiwiblog

Tim Donoghue reports at the Dom Post:

Public ill-will towards Wellington City Council’s “spy car” has led to four councillors calling for it to be abandoned.

Councillors John Morrison, Bryan Pepperell, Paul Eagle and Simon Marsh said yesterday there had been so much aggravation surrounding the vehicle that it was time for it to go.

Three other councillors – Jo Coughlan, Justin Lester and Leonie Gill – said they wanted to see the vehicle’s continued operation subjected to an extensive review by councillors.

There’s been numerous stories about the spy car in recent days, including how it snapped a photo of a motorist who pulled over to let it pass.

Mr Morrison described the spy car operation as nothing more than revenue collection. “It runs against the basic Kiwi mentality of people getting a fair go.

“This is clipboard, whistleblowing, white-coat bureaucratic stuff. This bureaucratic behaviour has brought the council into disrespect.”

Too right. Never thought I’d be on the same side of an issue as Bryan Pepperell, but I am on this one.

Former Wellington resident Ann Reeves is taking the council to court next month to contest the $60 ticket she received after being photographed by the spy car on broken yellow lines. She had pulled over to allow the spy car to pass her in a narrow street.

On December 8 last year, elderly Karori resident Donald Massam stopped briefly on yellow lines to drop off Judith, his wife of 52 years, for an urgent dental appointment on The Terrace at the bottom of Bolton St. He was sent a ticket for $60.

Mr Massam said he would be taking the council to court if his fine was not waived.

“If there was a parking warden in the area I could have explained why I had to stop. This is not a fair go. This involved an elderly person and an urgent medical matter,” he said.

It is that lack of discretion which is the issue.

Ms Wade-Brown said the safety of drivers and pedestrians was the most important issue in the suburbs and the city centre.

“The dash cam car is a useful part of enforcement. We must be vigilant that the focus is on safety and enabling legitimate use of on- street parks.

“Some drivers believe that parking on double-yellow lines is OK for a few minutes but a crash can happen in only a moment.”

Oh, what tosh. Someone should OIA how many car crashes have occurred due to someone having pulled over to let someone get out. The safety argument is a red herring.

Anyone want to stand for Mayor in 2013? Send your CVs into me

The Dom Post reports:

Zealandia wildlife sanctuary has asked Wellington City Council for nearly $3 million so it can keep its doors open.

The council has already provided funding of about $10.7m based on projected visitor figures that have never been met, and it is hesitant about providing a bailout of $950,000 a year over three years.

No.

I like Zealandia, but it has devoured far far too much ratepayer money.

Stuff reports:

Her parliamentary ambitions are over, but Annette King may now turn her thoughts to the Wellington mayoralty.

Mrs King scotched suggestions last year that she would run for mayor, when Celia Wade-Brown narrowly defeated Kerry Prendergast, but is not ruling out standing in 2013.

If Annette runs, I can’t imagine she would lose. Would be fascinating to have a Labour MP challenge an incumbent Green Mayor.

The Dom Post reports:

It is time for Wellington to party – and now it can rock all the way through to the finals.

The waterfront festivities have been extended, with Wellington City Council making an about-turn last night on its decision to shut the fanzone straight after the quarterfinals and put an end to Rugby World Cup celebrations.

Mayor Celia Wade-Brown said the fanzone would now show all four big matches after the quarterfinals, including the two semifinals on October 15 and 16, the bronze final on October 21 and the final on October 23

Excellent, one back-down I thoroughly approve of.

Aaarrgh. This is the stupidest decision ever.

The Herald reports:

The Wellington City Council has been slammed for not applying for resource consent for the city’s Fan Zone past the Rugby World Cup quarter-finals.

While New Zealanders around the rest of the country will be able to enjoy the final and semi-finals at free public fan zones, Wellingtonians will either have to watch the games at home or at a pub.

The fan zone, situated next to the new Wharewaka on Odlins Plaza, fits 3,000 fans and was granted resource consent only up to October 12.

Mayor Celia Wade-Brown told Newstalk ZB it has always been the plan to close the waterfront fan zone on October 9.

She said it is part of a country-wide approach, with many overseas supporters likely to follow their teams to Auckland for the final stages of the tournament.

Oh for fuck’s sake, this is such a stupid decision. What about all the Wellingtonians? We’ve been loving the fan zone. I’ve been raving about it to everyone.

Shit, I was planning to watch the final there. Nothing better than celebrating the All Blacks winning the Rugby World Cup than with 3,000 of your mates. And we would all be mates that night.

Please, please City Councillors change this decision. This is probably the last ever Rugby World Cup in NZ. Any Councillor who votes against keeping the fan zone going should be targeted for eviction in 2013!

UPDATE: If the Council won’t budget, can Murray McCully seize control of the Wellington Waterfront also please. Guarantee you a huge spike upwards in the party vote for National in Wellington!

I went to WCC Watch this morning to see if they had any extra info on the investigation of complaints by Rob Goulden against WCC CEO Garry Poole.

But no posts for the last six weeks, so I guess they have died. A pity. I didn’t like their anonymity, but did find some of their work useful.

Dave Burgess at the Dom Post reports:

Shops, bars and restaurants have joined in criticising Wellington City Council plans to charge for two hours of extra parking in the evenings and to increase fees to $5 an hour.

The increase would make Wellington’s parking the most expensive in New Zealand and dearer than Adelaide, Perth and Brisbane.

The Council is just being greedy. The increase to $5/hr is bad enough, but they also are going to make you pay up to 8 pm, instead of 6 pm.

The association also criticised the two-hour extension of the time the council can impose parking fees. “To me it looks like a money grab … I don’t accept the argument that by having higher parking fees you turn over the parks more quickly. I think by having higher parking fees you run the risk of having all the parks empty,” Mr Albertson said.

After 6 pm, there are generally lots of parks, so it is a nonsense to say they need to extend the fee to turn parks over more quickly.

If somone stood for Mayor in 2013 on a platform of reducing parking fees, I reckon they could do very well.

Dave Burgess at the Dom Post writes:

It is the mother of all U-turns from Wellington Mayor Celia Wade-Brown, who not only voted for her council to support the Government’s $2.4 billion roading projects package but proposed the motion.

The retreat at last night’s extraordinary meeting of Wellington City Council ended weeks of speculation and confirmed the council’s support of the New Zealand Transport Agency’s roading plan.

Its proposal includes a possible flyover to the north of the Basin Reserve, duplicate Terrace and Mt Victoria tunnels, and four-laning Ruahine St and Wellington Rd.

Excellent. The uncertainity is over.

The overall concept for the region is four lanes from the airport to Levin. That will make a huge difference, once completed. I (and I am sure the NZTA) am flexible on the exact details, so long as you achieve the goal. If that means a tunnel, instead of a flyover around the basin, so be it. But of course cost will be a major determinant.

It has also indicated that, for improvement to public transport, walking and cycling networks to occur, the roading issues need to be dealt with first.

Very rarely is it an option of roads or public transport. Almost all major cities need both. You need roads for buses and cyclists.

Dave Brugess at the Dom Post reports:

Wellington Mayor Celia Wade-Brown has accused Deputy Mayor Ian McKinnon of betrayal in a furious rant in the public reception area of the city council’s offices.

The minute-long verbal spray on Thursday was aimed at Mr McKinnon for supporting calls for an extraordinary meeting of the council to confirm its full support for $2.4 billion of government roading projects.

Ms Wade-Brown had already told councillors that she would schedule a meeting within six weeks. But nine councillors, including Mr McKinnon, sped up the process by signing a resolution forcing the council to schedule the meeting for Wednesday.

The transport issues loom as the biggest threat to the leadership of Ms Wade-Brown, who does not support big roading projects, since she took office six months ago.

The reality is that Celia is in a minority on her own Council on transport issues. The NZTA has warned funding is at risk if the Council keeps sending mixed messages, so the Council is acting to make its formal position clear.

Ms Wade-Brown’s flash of fury after the committee meeting in the council offices was seen by councillors, staff and members of the public. One witness said: “She just totally lost her rag.”

A source said: “Everybody is talking about it in the council building. It is the only topic of conversation.”

Witnesses said Mr McKinnon appeared incandescent with rage at the public dressing-down as Ms Wade-Brown accused him of betrayal for not trying to stop councillors from setting up the meeting, and for supporting it himself

Ian McKinnon made clear when he became Deputy Mayor that he would vote with his conscience on policy issues – and this is a policy issue.

Councillor John Morrison said Mr McKinnon had worked tirelessly to help maintain the integrity of the office of the mayor.

“So for him to be attacked in public and accused of being disloyal to the mayor is totally out of order.”

Councillor Ray Ahipene-Mercer, who saw the mayor’s outburst, said: “It was an aggressive confrontation in a public arena.

“It was inappropriate because staff, visitors and the public were present. The deputy mayor tried to reason with her but was unsuccessful.”

Celia is very silly in attacking Ian like this. Ian is an old fashioned gentleman who has gone out of his way as Deputy Mayor to protect Celia. He has told numerous people that he doesn’t want people to attack her personally or portray her as unsuited to the office, as she deserves respect as the incumbent. He has said that any opposition should be to her policies (when warranted), not to her personally.

I doubt Ian will hold a grudge – he isn’t like that. But if I was Celia, I’d consider apologising. Having a public slanging match with your deputy in such a public area will not engender confidence in her – and it may especially make her Council colleagues less supportive.

Like some other bloggers, I received a copy of the e-mail below by Wellingtom Mayor Celia-Wade Brown to her Council colleagues:

Dear colleagues,

I’d like to discuss training, conferences and personal development when we’re back. I hope some courses on chairing, speed-reading, engagement and participatory democracy, new media or the RMA will appeal. We do need to reduce our expenditure but not to zero. Instead of waiting for conferences to be put up at SPC and then trying to decide who should go, what clashes etc, there are other ways – on-line webinars, local tertiary institutions e.g. Otago’s Sustainable Cities or Victoria’s Policy Institute – or LGNZ’s courses.

Or we can take new lessons in te reo, Mandarin or ballroom dancing – all exercise neural pathways and keep us mentally fit. http://www.newsweek.com/2011/01/03/can-you-build-a-better-brain.html
That might explain why skills we’re already good at don’t make us much smarter: we don’t pay much attention to them. In contrast, taking up a new, cognitively demanding activity ­ballroom dancing, a foreign language ­is more likely to boost processing speed, strengthen synapses, and expand or create functional networks.

For those who consider that mental and physical fitness might be unrelated, have a look at this link… http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/08/100826141327.htm

A study published this year in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience provided evidence that aerobic fitness can keep aging brains healthy. “Even modest amounts of walking, 40 minutes three times a week, can engender substantial improvements in memory, decision making, and other cognitive processes,” said the study’s lead author, University of Illinois psychology professor Art Kramer.

and if you didn’t think it was relevant to your role … “Those with more connectivity … also tend to be better at planning, prioritizing, strategizing and multi-tasking. “- that’s what we have to do – and preferably enjoy doing it!

and for Leonie in particular – Nicotine, they found, has “significant positive effects” on fine motor skills, the accuracy of short-term memory, some forms of attention, and working memory, among other basic cognitive skills. The improvements “likely represent true performance enhancement” and “beneficial cognitive effects.” The reason is that nicotine binds to the brain receptors for the neurotransmitter acetylcholine that are central players in cortical circuits. (Caveat: smoking also increases your risk of dementia, so while cigarettes may boost your memory and attention now, you could pay for it later. ) but I’m not taking it up again – shortness of breath, coughing, lung or throat cancer and most of all, the smell…

Meanwhile, I look forward to us finding efficiencies and shared ways of working so we don’t have to increase prices at Toi Poneke – nor drastically cut library hours ( some may be ok if there really is low use – well said, Stephanie). However we can’t say no to all savings , efficiencies and accept 8% rates!

Warm regards
Celia
Celia Wade-Brown
Mayor of Wellington

Perhaps it would be easier to avoid an 8% rates rise if Council did not spend its Councillor training budget on ballroom dancing lessons for Councillors.

WCC Watch and Phil Quin also blog on this topic. Quin has a response from Celia also.

The Dom Post reports:

The plum Wellington City Council appointment to the Wellington International Airport board has gone to deputy mayor Ian McKinnon – but not before a colleague suggested he was unqualified for the job.

The role, worth at least $37,500 a year, was previously held by former mayor Kerry Prendergast.

Councillor appointments to council-controlled organisations, committees, boards and portfolios were voted on yesterday at a meeting of the full council.

Mr McKinnon said councillors appointed to eight CCOs, as well as Wellington Airport, were there on merit.

But councillor Helene Ritchie said she would be best suited for the airport role as she is a former chairwoman of both the city’s airport authority and the airport company’s interim board.

“I don’t understand what knowledge and experience he has other than flying in an aeroplane.”

Mayor Celia Wade-Brown, who showed great backroom diplomacy in getting almost unanimous support for scores of councillor appointments, backed Mr McKinnon.

“It’s not totally based on the knowledge of the subject matter. It’s also knowledge about governance, finance and relationships.”

Good to see near-unanimous agreement on the roles.If the only dissent is from someone saying they wanted that role instead (rather than someone else saying that person should get that role), then you’ve done a good job.

The Dom Post reports:

New Wellington Mayor Celia Wade-Brown has nominated Ian McKinnon to be her deputy for the next three years.

This is a very good call in two respects.

The first is that Ian has been a good Deputy Mayor, and will continue to do so.

The second is that it should lead to a more harmonious Council. If Celia played favourites with who is nominated for Deputy Mayor and Committee Chairs, then she would have a grumpy minority.

So a good start.

The Dom Post reports:

Kerry Prendergast’s tenuous hold on the Wellington mayoralty is likely to be undone by a wave of Green special votes, analysts predict.

Her political future hangs on a knife edge, with 40 votes separating her from rival Celia Wade-Brown and more than 900 special votes still to be counted.

Special votes, which have historically favoured left-wing challengers, could lead to victory for Green Party member Ms Wade-Brown. ….

Ms Wade-Brown said she had reviewed figures from the last election, which showed that, of the 800 valid special votes, 265 went to Ms Prendergast while 409 went to the second and third-placed candidates.

I’m glad I managed to squeak my vote in at 11.53 am on Saturday, as if Kerry lost by one vote I’d be very upset.

I agree that Celia is favoured to win on the specials. Graeme Edgeler pointed out that in 2007 Kerry got 12% fewer first preferences in the specials, than amongst ordinary votes.

Celia needs to win 52% of the specials to become Mayor. In this context “win” means be ranked higher than Kerry.

Wellington has not had a National MP elected since 1993. Despite that it has had centre-right Mayors for the last 15 years. But STV has made it even harder as all the votes against you tend to accumulate. I will be interested to see the vote iterations when they are published.

Kerry Prendergast has a margin of just 40 votes on the ordinary votes. If this holds up against specials, then it will be congrats to Kerry on winning a 4th term – a hard thing to do in an STV environment where all the votes of those against you accumulate.

Either way it is congrats to Celia Wade-Brown for a strong campaign. Celia did not stand for Council again, but if she does lose and stays active may be a front runner for 2013.

There are 900 special votes, so Celia may still win. She needs to be ranked higher than Kerry in 52.3% of the specials.

(Note re-written from the original which was based on a media story declaring Kerry elected)

UPDATE: We now have fuller results:

• In Northern Ward Justin Lester has beaten Hayley Wain. Lester topped the ward followed by best and then Ritchie – groan but at least she was last elected.
• In Onslow-Western the three sitting Councillors all got re-elected. in order Foster, Morrison and Coughlan. Ruben lost badly which is good.
• Lambton Ward saw the three incumbents re-elected also – in order McKinnon, Pannett and Cook. Marcus Ganley came close to winning the last spot off Cook.
• In Eastern Ward, Rob Goulden lost his seat to Swampy Marsh. Most of his fellow Councillors will be happy with that. In fact Goulden came 5th behind Allan Probert also. Gill topped the ward ahead of Ahipene-Mercer which surprises me a bit.
• In Southern Ward they re-elected Paul Eagle and sadly Bryan Pepperell.

For the Wellington Regional Council, the results are:

• Wellington – Fran Wilde, Chris Laidlaw, Judith Aitken, Paul Bruce and Daran Ponter
• Lower Hutt – Peter Glensor, Sandra Greig, Prudence Lamason
• Porirua-Tawa – Jenny Brash, Barbara Donaldson
• Kapiti Coast – not known
• Upper Hutt – Paul Swain
• Wairarapa – Gary McPhee

On Monday 20 September I blogged my views on the Wellington City Council elections.

Around 12 days later on 1 October, Eastern Ward Councillr Rob Goulden sent the following complaint to the WCC Returning Officer:

This email is in relation to information I sent to the Electoral Officer as a candidate profile.

My profile was sent for WCC to circulate on its website to the media, as general information as to who was standing, and for publication in the Candidates handbook.

I did not and have not given permission for my information to be published on the Kiwiblog website.

I am also required by the Electoral Act to authorise such publication. I have given no such authorisation to the Mr David Farrar the author and owner of the Kiwiblog website.

I believe his publication under the banner of Local Government Election 2010 on his website is a breach of the act. He tells people how to vote in numerical order, and whom they should vote for.

I do not see this as any different from circulating a leaflet doing the same thing, which was the subject of a recent complaint in Tawa.

I wish information about me to be removed from his website.

Can you please consider this matter as a formal complaint?

The first I knew of this complaint was today.

I should point out at this stage that in my blog post, I did not actually advocate a vote for or against Rob Goulden. I did endorse Simon “Swampy” Marsh and Amanda Nicolle for two of the three spots and said:

The three current Councillors are all quite well known. I’d keep at least one of them on – so people should also support their preferred incumbent.

Ironically several people wanted me to explicitly state that Rob should be ranked in an unwinnable spot. But because of some shared history I declined to do so, and did not state any preferences amongst the three incumbent Councillors. I won’t be as generous in future.

I also provided links to the official candidate supplied statements on the WCC site, allowing readers to make up their own minds on who to support.

Anyway back to the complaint, the Returning Officer responded the same day:

I acknowledge receipt of your complaint and, as required by section 138 of the Local Electoral Act 2001, your complaint will be referred to the Police for their investigation and appropriate action.

Oh what fun. I’ve been under Police investigation without knowing about it. The Police responded quickly:

Police response on Kiwiblog complaint

The Police very sensibly can tell the difference between an advertisement and a hyperlink.

Anyway I found out about all this today when Rob e-mailed me and said:

Please see the attached. I hope you will comply forthwith and remove my information from your website.

Now I am under no legal obligation to remove the link – it is to a public elections site. And I am bemused why Rob didn’t just e-mail me directly in the first place. But just so Rob doesn’t lose any more sleep about this, I have removed the hyperlink.

But perhaps I should replace that hyperlink, with another one. This hyperlink is to the WCC Watch Blog, specifically (by coincidence) to a blog post they did today on Cr Goulden.

UPDATE: A further e-mail from Cr Goulden:

I sent you an email tonight with the Police and Electoral Officers response attached.

I made a complaint to the Electoral Officer because that is the process I am required to follow.

You published my material without permission, which is why you have been asked to remove it.

For the record in 2007, you also published on your website defamatory material about me. You were told  to remove and you subsequently did.

I note already a defamatory remark made in response to your latest post.

I am not going to be as lenient as I was last time and intend to do something about you and your posts.

I will give you until the morning to remove them and no longer.

I have responded:

I am disappointed you have not learnt anything from this.  Polite requests go down better than threats and complaints.

You have not specified which of the comments you feel is defamatory. If you do so, I will consider your request.

I will continue to blog updates.

Okay, well here are my thoughts on my local Council.

Mayor

• Al Mansell
• Bernard O’Shaughnessy
• Bryan Robert Pepperell
• Kerry Prendergast
• Celia Wade-Brown
• Jack Yan

It is effectively a two person race between Kerry Prendergast and Celia Wade-Brown.

I’m voting for Kerry on the very simple grounds that I think she has done a good job, that Wellington is heading in the right direction, and that she is effective at making things happen.

Have not agreed with Kerry on every issue – especially the daft proposal to have a city wide liquor ban. But I do think she has been a good Mayor.

She can be tough, but you need this at times. For example she was one of the local government negotiators that got the Government to agree to up its contributions to sorting out leaky homes from 10% to 25%.

Celia Wade-Brown is a good Councillor in my opinion, and has run an energetic campaign. She is a Green Party member and while she has some good policies, she is opposed to the very sensible four lanes expressway from the airport to Levin.

I will be ranking Kerry No 1.

Celia will be No 2, Jack Yan No 3, Bernard No 4, Al Mansell No 5 and Bryan Pepperell No 6.

Lambton Ward (3 councillors)

• John Bishop
• Stephanie Cook
• Adam Cunningham
• Michael Fowler
• Marcus Ganley
• Mark Greening
• Ian McKinnon
• Iona Katherine Mary Pannett
• Kris Price

Two of the three choices are very easy to make – Ian McKinnon and John Bishop. Ian does an excellent job as Deputy Mayor and is highly respected.

John would be a superb addition to the Council. He is very good at working with diverse groups of people to achieve good outcomes, has sensible instincts and is not one of those people who will grandstand or cause trouble just to get name recognition. He will lend a good strategic focus to Council.

The third choice is harder.. You have incumbent Councillors Stephanie Cook and Iona Pannett. You also have former Mayor Michael Fowler.

Sir Michael was a great Mayor, but I think his contributions lay in the past.

I have voted for Stephanie Cook in the past, despite her Alliance/Green background. She has been good with the community groups. However I think people can serve too long on a Council and after 15 years she seems to be losing her energy.

The Wellingtonian had a panel assess Councillors in July, and Stephanie got rated pretty poorly.

My third pick is going to be Green City Councillor Iona Pannett. It goes without saying we disagree on quite a few policy areas. However she was the leader of the forces against the daft city wide liquor ban, which I very much supported her on.

Being a Councillor is not just about voting on policy and spending, but also about representing and helping the community and Iona does an excellent job there. The Wellingtonian panel actually rated her the most accessible and effective Councillor – which is a real tribute for a first termer.

She also works hard for election. She knocked on my door in 2007  and did so again in 2010. I like candidates who put in the hard yards actually meeting the voters.

So Iona will be ranked No 3.

Northern Ward (3 Councillors)

• Ngaire Best
• Camilia Chin
• Justin Lester
• Gareth R Morgan
• Helene Ritchie
• Gary W Roberts
• Hayley Wain

I always recommend voting Helene Ritchie bottom. Over a period of around 30 years she has shown herself to be almost incapable fo working with others. She even got sacked as Deputy Mayor in the 1980s by her own team, she was so bad.

Ngaire Best is an incumbent Councillor and who I would rank 1 if in the ward.

When Hayley Wain was elected to Council in 2004 I was delighted. I think it was great that an 18 year old wanted to stand, and could get elected. And I think she did a pretty good job in her first term.

I’m not sure what has happened, but she doesn’t seem to have done well this term. The Wellingtonian panel absolutely caned her and said she was the least effective Councillor.

I feel a bit sad saying this, as I like Hayley, but I think it is time for her to have a break from the Council, finish her studies, and get a job in the “real world”. Then down the track I think she would be in a very strong position to continue contributing.

So who to support from the challengers? I like Justin Lester. He is a small business owner, has run a good campaign and seems a good choice.

Gary Roberts looks a reasonable punt also. Don’t know about him but he is a former military policeman, and head of the local RSA which I approve of.

As with all these positions, comments from locals sharing their views is welcome.

Onslow-Western Ward (3 Councillors)

• Sharon Blaikie
• Jo Coughlan
• Mike Fleming
• Andy Foster
• John Morrison
• Jack Ruben
• Ingrid Sage

Fairly simple here. I would re-elect Jo Coughlan, John Morrison and Andy Foster – rank them 1, 2 and 3 and rank Jack Ruben 7. The three Councillors are all good people, even if Andy did have a brain fart over the indoor stadium.

Eastern Ward (3 Councillors)

• Ray Ahipene-Mercer
• Taima Fagaloa
• Mike Fiechter
• Leonie Gill
• Rob Goulden
• Simon ‘Swampy’ Marsh
• Mike Mellor
• Amanda Nicolle
• Allan Probert
• Rosemary Russell
• Tony Travers

I would rank Simon “Swampy” Marsh as No 1. He is a great guy, who was an iconic radio figure for many years. He is one of the more creative guys you can meet, and has strong community and business links. I think Swampy would be an excellent addition to the Council.

I would also put in a good word for Amanda Nicolle. Amanda is a fellow panelist on Face Off on ZB with me, and has a passion for Wellington. She is a good peron to get things done.

The three current Councillors are all quite well known. I’d keep at least one of them on – so people should also support their preferred incumbent.

Southern Ward (2 Councillors)

• Paul Eagle
• Ida Faiumu-Isa’ako
• Keith Johnson
• Greg McPhee
• Will Moore
• Thomas Morgan
• Rex Nairn
• Bernard O’Shaughnessy
• Seann Paurini
• Bryan Robert Pepperell

I’ll just put in a plug for Seann Paurini. Seann is an old friend, and cares deeply about helping those most in need. I don’t agree with all his policies, but do know he would be a diligent advocate.

As always I recommend ranking Peperell bottom. Of course they won’t, and he’ll get back in as name recognition is what most people vote on.

Hard to judge the others on the basis of bios. Rex Nairn looks like he might be okay. Again comments welcome from locals.

Wellingtonians may wish to subscribe to WCC Watch. It provides detailed analysis of who is standing for Council, and related issues. Every local body should have a blog like this.

My only criticism is that the site is anonymous. I trust people – I don’t trust URLs. For all we know, one of the candidates runs it. It leans left, but seems pretty fair with their comments.

The Dom Post reports:

It has been 27 years since Sir Michael Fowler last donned the mayoral chains – but the octogenarian is back for another tilt at Wellington City Council.

Promising not to be “a nuisance to anybody this time”, the 80-year-old artist and former architect is standing for the city’s Lambton ward.

“Actually, I thought about standing for mayor but my son would not let me. He’s right, of course. I’ve been there, done that and I know what it’s like … But he’s let me have a go as a councillor.”

Sir Michael served on the council for 15 years from 1968 – the last nine as mayor. He was credited by many for modernising central Wellington but criticised by others for overseeing the demolition of many historic buildings.

Sir Michael was one of the outstanding Mayors of Wellington. I am however unsure about how well he would fit in, being just an ordinary Councillor – and 27 years after he left Council.

Being in Lambton Ward, I’m going to have some hard choices. The candidates are:

• John Bishop
• Stephanie Cook
• Adam Cunningham
• Michael Fowler
• Marcus Ganley
• Mark Greening
• Ian McKinnon
• Iona Katherine Mary Pannett
• Kris Price

I’m definitely supporting John Bishop and Ian McKinnon. Stephanie Cook and Iona Pannett are both conscientious Councillors – even through their politics are not mine (they are Green). And a couple of the other challengers are quite decent also. Plus you have Sir Michael.

Back to the Dom Post article:

27 YEARS AGO

Wellington’s mayor was paid $31,200 per year, of which $6000 was tax-free.

Councillors were paid $29 per meeting, to a maximum of $2320 per year.

Average rates bill was $400.

WELLINGTON IN 2010

Wellington’s mayor is paid $153,660 a year and the deputy mayor $107,615.

Councillors are paid between $69,240 and $88,409, depending on their responsibilities.

The rates bill on an average home is around $2000.

Inflation over the 27 years has been 192%. The CPI went from 276 to 1100. If one takes that into account, the increases in real terms per year have been:

• Mayoral Salary – 2.5%
• Rates – 2.6%
• Councillor Salary – 34.1%

This reflects a belief I have long had – that Councillors went from being a part-time role to full-time jobs – and I think this has been a bad thing. I think it was better when Councillors were part-time Governors – like company directors. Instead too many are now professional politicians.

As every Council Mayor and CEO is having their credit card expenses OIAed, I am getting the feeling that the media seem to think a story must be written, even if nothing newsworthy. Take the Wgtn City Council CEO:

Wellington ratepayers have funded the drinks tab for Air New Zealand executives, motivational books and luxury accommodation – including a council boss’s two-night hotel bill of nearly $1200.

Wellington City Council chief executive Garry Poole – who was not available for comment as the council does “not think it’s necessary for him to actually have to defend such minor spending” – racked up $5940 in two years from July 2008 on his “purchase card”.

That’s an average of $250 a month.

Mr Poole’s two-night $1192.68 accommodation plus expenses tab was for The Heathman Hotel, in Portland, Oregon, described as luxury accommodation and named as one of the top 500 hotels in the world, by Travel + Leisure magazine.

Council spokesman Richard MacLean said US$250 a night was an acceptable amount to pay for accommodation, and was hampered by a “grotesque” exchange rate at the time.

“We do not expect our chief executive to stay in a backpackers in a rural suburb of Portland.”

US$250 a night is not an unreasonable tariff. I have stayed in US hotels that cost way more than that. Now sure, I paid my own way, but the point is that many US hotels costs this much.

This is a good idea.

The Wellingtonian has had a panel rate the performances of all the City Councillors.

I don’t agree with all the ratings, but it is good to see scrutiny and appraisal of Councillors. Far too many people get elected on name recognition alone with the public having no idea who is or is not effective etc.

The Herald focuses on the SFO:

Helen Clark’s Government threatened to abolish the SFO and merge its functions with a police unit.

Having survived that, the SFO is now facing a renewed barrage of criticism and an overhaul that seems likely to comprehensively change its mode of operation.

Judith Collins, the Minister Responsible for the SFO, has talked of rebuilding “its capabilities after years of political neglect”. …

The upshot appears to be that five senior staff with more than 70 years of fraud investigation experience among them, including Gib Beattie, the present assistant director, are unlikely to reapply for new roles.

All have been involved in high-profile cases, including, most recently, that of ASB Bank fraudster Stephen Versalko. If they depart, the SFO will lose a huge fund of institutional knowledge.

It will surely face a greater struggle to combine with other regulators to ensure the “speedier, united response to cases of suspected fraud” demanded by Ms Collins.

Too much of the criticism of the SFO has been over the top. It should not be the whipping boy for the finance-company debacle and nor should it be restructured in such a way that valuable experience is driven away.

If a wiser approach is not adopted, white-collar criminals will be the only winners.

In the end, the SFO will be judged on its results.

The Press calls for goodwill on the foreshore & seabed issue:

In recent New Zealand political and social history, few issues have been as divisive as the foreshore and seabed. This controversial debate was triggered by the Court of Appeal ruling in the 2003 Ngati Apa legal action, which suggested that in some narrow cases iwi might be able to convert customary title into freehold title.

For the then-Labour Government, this raised the spectre that Maori could end up controlling sections of the coastline and limiting public access. Labour over-reacted by passing legislation that placed the foreshore and seabed in Crown ownership, albeit with a process for recognising customary rights, and this triggered the formation of the Maori Party.

Now, National has offered an olive branch to iwi and the Maori Party. It is, inevitably, a compromise solution but, with goodwill on all sides, it does have the potential to heal the lingering sore that has been the foreshore and seabed issue.

People should not be surprised that most Iwi will say they want more, than what is in the proposed solution. To some degrees, this is like any other commercial negotiation. You never have one party say “Oh well actually I think we have enough money/resource, so we won’t try and get any more”. Of course you do.

But this tension is not the only reason why the Maori Party has been circumspect in its reaction to National’s foreshore and seabed proposal. Maori leaders will want to be seen as pushing for the maximum concessions possible.

The party will be acutely conscious that within its ranks are those who would agree with its MP Hone Harawira’s view that Maori should have full ownership, rather than just customary title.

And that is a view some may have. But that is not what the Court of Appeal ruled. In fact, it is a million miles from what the Court of Appeal said.

But this would be totally unacceptable to National, and Prime Minister John Key has delivered a blunt warning that if he cannot forge a consensus around his party’s proposal, then the status quo will prevail.

Given that the Maori Party was originally formed to get rid of the hated foreshore and seabed legislation, the chance to achieve this and to get customary title through the courts is one which, while not ideal for all iwi, should still be firmly grasped.

And so far, there does seem to be goodwill.

The Dominion Post looks at Labour’s plans for Wellington City Council:

The Labour Party has announced it will relaunch itself into local body politics, and put up a slate of council candidates as well as, perhaps, someone for mayor.

So Labour want to take over the Council. I’m tempted to joke that at least it makes it easy to know who not to vote for, but in fact I don’t vote purely on ideological lines for local bodies. I regard (for example) that Ray Ahipene-Mercer does a good job as a Councillor, and he is left of centre. Celia Stephanie Cook also does a reasonable job, and she is Green.

Does Wellington want local body politics to return to tribal affiliations? Would that be good for the city?

The answer is “maybe”. Having a stance thrashed out at caucus meetings – which MPs hold regularly – before council meetings might mean that the fractious debate that so marks Wellington City Council disappears. Arguments would happen within the caucus instead.

That might improve the council’s public reputation.

On the other hand, councillors who represent a political party would be subject to the party whip – that is, be forced to toe the party line – or risk being dropped from the party ticket at the next election.

The same might be true, of course, of those who rely on Sir Robert’s patronage when or if they stand in October.

Party politics have their place. That might be around a council table. But cleaving to rigid ideologies is no substitute for considered thought, which is what ratepayers vote councillors into office to provide – especially when Wellington’s future is at stake in a post-Auckland super-city environment.

The over-riding concern of any councillor must surely be what is best for the city they have the honour to represent.

That is not possible for Labour Councillors. I agree a ticket can sometimes be of value, to get a coherent agenda through. But tickets are best as groupings of like minded people, but not as a party that bans Councillors from voting against the majority.

Labour has specific rules on local body elections.

• Rule 87 bans party members from standing as Independents if Labour contests the election
• Rule 91 requires candidates to sign a pledge that they will vote in line with the Caucus for that local body

So be aware, if you vote for a Labour candidate, you are voting for candidates who are forbidden freedom of opinion on any issue that comes before Council.

The ODT focuses on land in Africa and New Zealand:

During the past two or three years, as many as 20 million hectares of African land, an area equivalent to all the arable farming land in France and worth about $US20 billion-$US30 billion, have been acquired by countries such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and China.

These vast tracts have been either bought or leased to grow staple crops, or biofuels, which are then repatriated, says a 2009 Economist magazine article. …

It is partly against this background that attempts to buy up large parcels of New Zealand land should be considered.

The latest such move came to light on Wednesday when it was reported that a company, Southern Pastures, registered in Auckland, is seeking $500 million from local and offshore investors either to buy outright or controlling shares in farming concerns thoughout the southern hemisphere, but with a bias towards New Zealand. …

Leadership is required, and care needed, to devise policy on how New Zealand will play its part in the food supply chain over the next several decades.

On the one hand, the country requires inward investment to develop further aspects of food production infrastructure; on the other, once the land is gone, it is gone forever.

Measurable gains from such sales will need to be demonstrably substantial and long-lasting before they can be permitted.

If we ban Chinese firms from investing in NZ farms, then we can’t complain if China bans Fonterra from investing in Chinese dairy operations.

The Herald strikes out at a possible faceless Super City:

From right to left, from John Banks and Michael Barnett to Len Brown and Mike Lee, Auckland’s local politicians have begun protesting at a distinctly undemocratic element in the constitution being written for the Super City.

Legislation setting up the new Auckland Council threatens to delegate most decisions to a number of “council-controlled organisations” (CCOs), a piece of Orwellian newspeak if ever there was one.

They will not be directly controlled by the council. They will be run by boards appointed by the council but short of dismissing them there will be little public representatives can do to have a say in decisions about Auckland’s roads and public transport, waterfront development and much else.

I look forward to seeing the final version of the Super City, when the bill comes out of select committee, and when the Auckland Transition Authority produces some final outputs.

No Press editorial online today.

The Dominion Post looks at the upcoming Wellington Mayoral campaign:

The worst-kept secret in Wellington is out. Mayor Kerry Prendergast has announced that she will seek a fourth term, having said after she won the 2007 election that she had promised husband and hotelier Rex Nicholls to give politics away later this year to spend more time with her family.

Ms Prendergast is just the latest to announce her candidacy. She has vowed to stand again as an independent, even though commercial property owner Sir Robert Jones has had hopes of persuading her to stand at the head of the ticket he and a shadowy group of business folk intend will contest the local body elections in October.

Others to have thrown their hats into the ring include sitting councillors Bryan Pepperell, who has had several unsuccessful tilts at the top job, the Greens’ Celia Wade-Brown, and local businessmen Allan Probert and Jack Yan.

You have to say Kerry’s chances look pretty good.

Unspoken, however, is probably another reason for Ms Prendergast’s fourth bid for the mayoralty. That is a perceived lack of experience – perhaps even gravitas – among those who would snatch the chains from her.

The joker in the pack, of course, is Sir Robert. One of Wellington’s biggest ratepayers, even though he lives in Lower Hutt, he wants to turn the Golden Mile into a pedestrian precinct, along the lines of those of some European cities. Ms Prendergast can see the fishhooks in that, which is presumably why she has chosen not to be the knight’s mayoral anointee.

I hope Kerry is only sceptical, not opposed. I think it is a brillant idea, and would like to see a full costed study of how to do it. My intentions at this stage would be to vote Kerry as Mayor, but vote for the “Golden Mile”ticket for Council – unless the candidates are total wallies.

The ODT focuses on wool:

New Zealand’s economy may have been built from wool off the sheep’s back, but the present perilous state of the industry means its contribution could be consigned to history.

It is a widely held view that the strong wool sector, which supplies fibre for carpets and upholstery, has one last chance to remain a credible export industry, let alone regain its former status Strong or crossbred wool made up 89% of the clip last year and earned $570 million in export receipts. …

I am very sceptical that the sector can unite.

The Herald says RNZ savings are not worth it:

Radio NZ’s budget last year was just $38.2 million, of which $34.2 million was public money. That points to the swingeing nature of the Government’s programme. While it is reasonable that all state-funded bodies should tighten their belts, it seems excessive to be waving a big stick at organisations where the potential savings are trifling.

The same penchant was, however, evident in last year’s Budget. Most controversially, cuts were made to adult night school programmes.

Again, the savings seemed hardly worth the trouble. Community education takes just 0.6 per cent of the tertiary education allocation, and the canned programmes provided value for money, if only because they gave hands-on instruction at schools that would, otherwise, not have been in use.

The Herald may be right that politically it might not be smart to take a lot of political heat, for relatively small fiscal savings. However I think it is more complex than that. If the Govt goes soft on one or two state agencies, then it is harder to keep fiscal discipline with the rest of them. State sector CEOs will find ways to live within means if they think everyone is doing so. But if you start giving into media campaigns for more funding, it incentivises other agencies to do the same. And then you end up having to borrow even more than $240 million a week.

The Press talks protecting police:

In response to the weekend violence the Government is considering introducing extra penalties for offenders who assault police officers, as is the case in Western Australia. Such a move might not deter drugged or drunken offenders from attacking officers, however.

Yet, it is still worth considering, as it would reinforce the special position the police have in our society to uphold the rule of law. It would also acknowledge the real, every-day risks faced by officers as they perform their duties.

If the Government did move to strengthen penalties it would have to be determined whether the new law would apply to off-duty officers who intervened in an incident. But because the public expects off-duty officers to respond to crimes they come across, and they would not be wearing anti-stab vests, they too should have the protection of such a law.

I favour increased penalties for assaults on Police. The Police get assaulted, basically on our behalf. They deal with the criminals and risk their lives often doing so.

The Dom Post flicks at Wellington parking wardens:

Of all the low-down, mean, sneaky tricks … While football fans were cheering the Wellington Phoenix to a nail-biting victory at Westpac Stadium on Sunday evening, parking wardens were ticketing the vehicles of 61 fans who had exceeded the maximum parking time outside the ground – because the match went into extra time, then a penalty shootout.

To its credit, Wellington City Council has waived the tickets, which threatened to turn the Phoenix’s triumph into a public relations disaster. But coming on top of other recent instances of over-zealous ticketing, the incident suggests something is amiss with parking operations. Proposals to install Big Brother-style parking surveillance cameras in Courtenay Place add weight to the theory.

The purpose of parking restrictions should be to ensure that as many people as possible can park in city and suburban streets, do their business and be on their way. It should not be to fatten the coffers of Tenix, the private company which manages Wellington parking, Parkwise, the Armourguard subsidiary to which Tenix contracts ticketing, or the council itself.

Hear hear. The incentives are all about revenue maximization, not giving parkers a fair go.

And the ODT looks at water woes in Canterbury:

Seldom has a local authority received such a slating as that just given to Canterbury’s regional council, Environment Canterbury (ECan), by a Government review panel.

The panel says the gap between what ECan does and what it should do is enormous and unprecedented. …

Yet some argue no change is needed.

The NZ Herald slams the latest stunt by the anti-whaling activists:

Peter Bethune knew precisely what he was doing, and the consequences, when he boarded the whaling vessel Shonan Maru 2 to make what fellow-protesters described as a citizen’s arrest of its captain. …

Mr Bethune was intent simply on grabbing publicity. He, and the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society, wanted to prompt a diplomatic incident, thereby putting further pressure on the Japanese to end whaling. …

The Dominion Post argues against a city wide liquor ban:

On one of Wellington’s rare balmy nights there is little to compare to a quiet picnic on the south coast, watching the sun go down and the kids paddle in the surf as you enjoy some cold roast chicken, a nice green salad , and a glass of Martinborough’s best sauvignon blanc.

Soon that pleasure may come with the dubious frisson of being a law-breaker, and the prospect of a visit from police to tell you you are breaching a Wellington City Council bylaw. Under the proposed liquor ban, the wine has to be tipped out on the sand, or the picnic packed up and moved to a non-public place. If you refuse, you will be arrested. If you wait till police go away and then carry on enjoying your picnic, you will be arrested should they return.

That is the future that could face Wellingtonians should the city council go ahead and pass its city-wide booze ban.

It’s a daft idea that should be shot down. Have outdoors liquor bans in areas where there is a problem.

The Press talks about the future of their regional council:

Environment Canterbury chairman Alec Neill managed to put on a brave face after the damning report into his institution’s performance and governance yesterday. The reality is that if the Government adopts the recommendations in the report, ECan as we know it today will be gone. …

The report will provide vindication for the region’s mayors, business figures and farmers, who have been queuing up to slate ECan for some years.

They would also agree with the comment of review leader Wyatt Creech that ECan had a “fortress” and “we know best” culture. …

I predict it will be gone.

The ODT talks about electoral issues:

It will be recalled that, in 2005, the Exclusive Brethren attempted to influence the outcome of the poll by mounting a covert and costly campaign against the Greens and Labour.

Labour had also been concerned about the extent to which campaign finance was both anonymous and uncapped, raising the spectre, it claimed, of “big money” interests tilting the odds against a fair contest: the even playing field argument.

In an attempt to close loopholes in the campaign finance rules, and to prevent parties “jumping the gun” and subverting the spending caps, it also created a controversial regulated campaign period of three months prior to polling day.

Ummn, no. That was the old regulated period. Labour extended the period to be all of election year.

Bob Jones writes in the Dom Post:

First, it is not the cars that are the main concern. In fact very few cars traverse the Golden Mile during the day, a response to the Wellington City Council’s wise initiatives intended to deter them.

They have worked. Rather, it is the abrasive buses which are the principal problem. Buses and pedestrians are a terrible mix. The present council’s policy seems geared to making the city friendly towards buses rather than to its citizens and it’s both wrong and unnecessary. …

Mr Finny also argues that parts of the Golden Mile are so wide that the danger exists of a “dead look”.

In fact the wide sections, notably the end of Lambton Quay and Courtenay Place, will provide opportunity to pay for the proposal. In the case of Lambton Quay, exactly as with all the pedestrianised cities, the spacious parts can be used for (partially) outdoor cafes, florists, newsagents and the like.

With Courtenay Place, apartment building sites with ground-level retail can be created in a plaza setting. Other options include a skating rink, fountains and other visual and recreational features.

As for goods delivery, in fact all of the office buildings along the route are serviced from the rear, off streets such as The Terrace etc. …

We will additionally detail our proposal to establish a Saturday Lambton Quay street market, as exists in all European cities and which, without exception, draws thousands of folk, regardless of the weather. Our proposal is not new. Consultants engaged by the council from Europe and America have recommended exactly this to previous councils but they have lacked the initiative to act.

People like a man and a team with vision, even if they don’t agree with it 100%.

I think there is a reasonable chance that a ticket standing on the issue of creating a vehicle free golden mile, as advocated by Sir Bob, could win most if not all the spots on Council.

This could be the most exciting Council elections since 1995.