to steal *our* stuff

Says the guy who took up residence in Mt Albert for the purpose of contesting the by-election and raising his national profile? Oh dear.

Hope you're all hikoiying, folks. Wish I could be there.

Wish I could be there.

Wish You Were Here :) Pink Floyd

Its just another article of faith, with apparantly quite deep philospohical underpinings, promulgated here by the likes of the?

I can understand the frustration of the developers and go-getters, however the evidence to the contrary is?

And the relevance of this is...? Good on him I say.

But if you're trying to talk to me, this "Illuminati elite are staging a coup"?

]]> Mon, 25 May 2009 10:44:40 +1200 http://publicaddress.net/system/cafe/speaker-grand-theft-auckland/?p=111998#post111998 http://publicaddress.net/system/cafe/speaker-grand-theft-auckland/?p=111998#post111998 I'm glad someone has finally posted something critical. I was afraid to put my head above the parapet.

I've read quite a few silly press releases from the Greens about the whole supercity thing. On a lot of issues I happen to agree with the Greens. I just wish the?

]]> Mon, 25 May 2009 10:46:27 +1200 http://publicaddress.net/system/cafe/speaker-grand-theft-auckland/?p=112002#post112002 http://publicaddress.net/system/cafe/speaker-grand-theft-auckland/?p=112002#post112002 text (to the left of the Post Reply box) Kim, and then overwriting the word text with what you want to quote (and I use cut n paste for that too). You'll find it much easier. ]]> Mon, 25 May 2009 10:50:40 +1200 http://publicaddress.net/system/cafe/speaker-grand-theft-auckland/?p=112004#post112004 http://publicaddress.net/system/cafe/speaker-grand-theft-auckland/?p=112004#post112004

but he has some points.

He most certainly does, and wrapping it around a "small group of business elite are rigging it" might even be correct. But I did want to take the chance to explain to him (as a political party leader) that it's a style of message that?

I'm bemused at by how quickly we've gone back to the old Left vs Right arguments of the 80s & 90s, given that National have only been in power for 6 months. It seems obvious to me that Labour dragged it's heels on the SH20 Waterview connection?

The whole supercity process has been redesigned by Hide to produce an outcome – a gerrymandered ACT mayorality that will advance his agenda, ignoring the real opposition of Aucklanders to those?

four dead white males and a lawyer

Which proves what exactly? Why mention the appointment of a laywer? Isn't it possible there might be a whole heap of, um, legal stuff to sort out?

You'll find it much easier.

Thank you (I had my / & my < the wrong way around).

And what you're going to get is local govt which is quite wrong but couched in fashionable terms.

So then you'll be happy, yeah?

And what you're going to get is local govt which is quite wrong but couched in fashionable terms.

So then you'll be happy, yeah?

Then language being used is unfashionable and ineffective. Calls to burn the capitalist citadel might resonate with a small number of people, but if political leaders?

So then you'll be happy, yeah?

Huh? I can't hear you through all that straw...
At this rate what we're going to get is local govt which is quite wrong because the parties best setup to counter it don't connect with the majority of Aucklanders. Water down the "coup by?

inconsistency between local authorities about what is ok for the environment

I can see the frustrations about that, and in some cases it is silly. Nick Smith said something about there being different standards for cellphone mast radiation in Northland and Invercargill, and that would be pointless because radio waves?

Isn't it possible there might be a whole heap of, um, legal stuff to sort out?

And both the councils and central government have whole legal services departments to do that.

I disagree with the whole concept of the Junta. It's supposed to be to stop the elected councils from?

trash gets elected,

s/elected/collected/p

Freudian slip!

Nick I agree spectral politics gets tiresome. But so too does the ruling elite abusing its power. Actional is pure, uncut, outdated, right?

I disagree with the whole concept of the Junta. It's supposed to be to stop the elected councils from sabotaging the supercity, but if the change process had consensus behind it, that wouldn't be neccesary.

Totally agree with this – if you're going to change to a supercity then I?

Geez guys, sounds like Russel N's hit a raw nerve.

Yeah it's a shame this has partly derailed to a discussion on Green messaging when the underlying points are very strong ones. Sorry for my part in that!

Actually, I?

And both the councils and central government have whole legal services departments to do that.

The transition team will need to instruct its own lawyers. The person in charge of instructing them will need a legal background to understand and implement the advice received. Sorry, but I don't see any?

The person in charge of instructing them will need a legal background to understand and implement the advice received

ScottY: Is that to say that only lawyers can understand lawyers? That sounds like a most expensive and inefficient business model.

ScottY: Is that to say that only lawyers can understand lawyers? That sounds like a most expensive and inefficient business model.

No. It's how most large organisations operate. In most large corporates for example, the Head of Legal or Company Secretary (usually a lawyer) has to explain to the board?

Sorry, but I don't see any vast right-wing conspiracy in that.

Perhaps that's because no-one's talking about such a thing.

With your talk of "illuminati elites" and "burn the capitalist citadel" you guys appear to be imposing a subtext which, frankly, I fail to see in Russel's post.

In fact?

It is normal commercial practice.

That says it all, really. Auckland is being treated as if it's a business, with the sole shareholder R. Hide, of Epsom. As opposed to a democratic body for the exercise of the people's will.

The reason there isn't STV, or Maori seats, or a?

about how Exectutive Power opposed for Bush is now being mooted for Obama

That is some scary shit. The politics of fear Obama-style.

I had some hope (but not much) when he was voted in but it didn't take too long for the real power in Washington to exert itself.?

In fact he was very specific about the narrow group of interested parties who are set to benefit from the proposed changes.

Yes, apparently the only problem with the super city is that it's going to mean more developments and more roads – which would happen to be Greens issues.?

In fact he was very specific about the narrow group of interested parties who are set to benefit from the proposed changes.

These people?

And those select few who make a whole lot of money from the Growth Machine – the property developers, the motorway builders, the corporate investors

BTW,?

That says it all, really. Auckland is being treated as if it's a business, with the sole shareholder R. Hide, of Epsom. As opposed to a democratic body for the exercise of the people's will.

I don't find the fact that there's a lawyer on there at all unusual. I?

As some have already mentioned, legal input at the highest level is often invaluable. Given the legal labyrinth that the transition group will have to contend with and the well funded, legally backed, agendas that are being pushed (from all sides; not just that which?

While not very democratic, this is more so than electing a Lord Mayor through bandwagon voting.

Also, the new council is having various parts of Waikato that weren't in the ARC area appended, in?

I liked the placard: "we've been feeding all of you for 1,000 years".

Maori are now fond of Royal Commissions to a degree they weren't when they were recommending that the Maori seats be abolished.

And the Mayor of North Shore City is a?

Also, the new council is having various parts of Waikato that weren't in the ARC area appended

And other parts are going to Environment Waikato. Not sure about the relative sizes, but the transfer is not all one-way. There are logical reasons for doing it, and it was the Commission?

Having worked with Ms Dean on many occasions can I also add that she has a frighteningly ferocious appetite for hard work and a knack for asking the hard questions, both of which also make her ideally suited.

Well, thank -you very much. Nice to know someone has knowledge of?

At a glance the ex to be Watercare guy was the one that privatised it

Watercare is not privatised. It's owned by all the existing Auckland councils.

There seem to be some strange reactions here. Such as 'how is this going to play?' Stop thinking about the game and look at what is happening here.

This essentially reads to me like a call?

now we have criminals created because the bank made a mistake

You're havin' a laugh aren't you ?

Those poor people, turned into terrible criminals by the nasty bank.

At what that's got to do with Rodney Hide and the super city ? you lost me.

The government's intention to get rid of MMP arises from the same source. Democracy prevents these procedural pirates from seizing assets and milking us for our cash. So democracy is the enemy.

Hasn't Key said there'll be a referendum on MMP in 2011, what's undemocratic about that ?

And there?

Those poor people, turned into terrible criminals by the nasty bank.

At what that's got to do with Rodney Hide and the super city ? you lost me.

Hypocrisy, but let's not open that can of worms.

Watercare is not privatised. It's owned by all the existing Auckland councils.
Thanks. Got that wrong then.

Cool, now can you answer the next question:

Why does Auckland City buy the water from Watercare at 'Wholesale' prices, and then mark it up to a 'retail' price before providing it to me??

Why does Auckland City buy the water from Watercare at 'Wholesale' prices, and then mark it up to a 'retail' price before providing it to me?

Plus put the price up if you don't use enough.That's just been announced. I guess timing is everything.

And under the new Supercity structure will?

Why does Auckland City buy the water from Watercare at 'Wholesale' prices, and then mark it up to a 'retail' price before providing it to me?

Metrowater (being Auckland City's water retailer) have a network as well – they own, manage and maintain all the pipes from the local reservoirs?

And typically, when that happens, senior management get given shares and go from being a salaried employee on good money to a very wealthy part owner of the business.?

sell Watercare

I just really can't see how they could possibly spin that? Where would the benefit be in handing over a full monopoly of the most basic necessary to service to private owners? It wouldn't make water cheaper at all, and that's pretty much the only benefit privatisation can?

I just really can't see how they could possibly spin that? Where would the benefit be in handing over a full monopoly of the most basic necessary to service to private owners? It wouldn't make water cheaper at all, and that's pretty much the only benefit privatisation can bring.

Gareth,?

sell Watercare
I just really can't see how they could possibly spin that? Where would the benefit be in handing over a full monopoly of the most basic necessary to service to private owners? It wouldn't make water cheaper at all, and that's pretty much the only benefit privatisation can?

How would they spin it? National managed to convince people that electrickery would get cheaper through their machinations with ElectriCorp.

"ECNZ might be very efficient in practice, but unfortunately it doesn't work in theory"

Water companies the world over have been sold off and the result is always the same.

It's actually quite rare – happened in the UK (and what a mess THAT was) but not in many other spots.

Maybe I'm being naive but I really see the case for privatising water?

Rodney Hide feels no need to justify his behaviour – his power drunk display so far over his SuperCity tells us that. We will get a gerrymandered?

What evidence do we have that anyone's looking to sell Watercare? Or that Hide's going to gerrymander the system to keep the CitRats in power forever? How would he do this?

Now don't get me wrong – I'm?

privatisation of Auckland's water supply

Sorry Scott I don't have the energy tonight to dig up references, but it's pretty widely talked about that one of the prizes?

"Auckland, wanna score some infrastructure?"

Act wants councils to privatise their commercial activities and to supply water on a "fully commercial basis"

And I'd be surprised if ACT didn't want to privatise the water. Hell, they'd sell the air we breathe if they could just work out how.

But that doesn't?

Numerous charitable and government organisations have lawyers and accountants on their boards. Wouldn't you want a group of people handling millions of dollars to have among them someone with these professional skills? I'm not advocating that every board member should be a lawyer or accountant.

No reason at all then?

Any mayor who advocates asset sales in this environment is a dead man walking.

And that's stopped them before? I seem to recall Gruppen-Fuhrer Banks campaigning on frozen rates and cessation of the dividend payments from WaterCare. Increased rates in excess of inflation? Check. Continuing WaterCare dividend payments? Check.

They?

They don't have to do anything except sit there like little Miss Muffet with her asset-rich pie.

Nice. I imagine in practice it's like all those internal coups by politicians who are happy in their current role and have no plans to become leader. Who needs a plan when you?

it'll be much easier to force it on the rest of the country

And?

it'll be much easier to force it on the rest of the country

And this should not be seen as an "Auckland issue".

I'm not sure if I read it somewhere, or thought of it myself, but as soon as I saw Act's position on WaterCare (can't recall if it?

But the case for privatising monopoly delivery of an essential service just seems nonexistent. It wouldn't be cheaper than current provision (which is setup commercially so is not being subsidised), and the only argument for privatising a?

Try telling that to a Nactional government and let's see what answer you get...

If it ever comes to that I'd really like to actually. If they think there is a case for privatisation I'd like to ask them to explain it to me!
But that's all supposition as it?

There are no doubt perfectly good arguments for privatising public?

There are no doubt perfectly good arguments for privatising public assets if you think about the world a certain way.

Oh, of course. They mostly revolve around this mythical notion of a competitive market driving prices down in reflection of the long-run marginal cost

They dissolve once one realises that?

OK, I know it doesn't have to be an actual conspiracy, just that rich folk with an eye to looting an asset-heavy state monopoly happen?

Doug Armstrong, the chairman of the Auckland City Council's finance committee, wasted no time in dismissing a staff proposal to place community services such as parks, libraries, swimming pools and zoos in a separate, commercially run holding company.

Ratepayers would have to be consulted before any assets were placed in a holding company. Any timeline suggests the proposal will be swamped by the royal commission's report.

Ha Ha.
Thanks for that Sacha. Glad to know we are safe, yeah right :)

Slightly different matter – that was setting the council budget in a way that adversely affected its poorest communities. The idea of commercialising services like libaries and art galleries was suggested by staff – from the finance team. Funny, that.

How does one know that one wasn't being 'toyed' with?

How does one know that one wasn't being 'toyed' with by the Cit's'n'Rats over this issue?

And we wonder why there is so much in the budget for roads? Then, Key's confidence with Standard and Poors?None of this is fluke, Mr 3 and a bit % has got Auckland (and?