Exactly! TV3 also guilty but not quite as bad in my experience. Making yourself the news is not a good look.
I sincerely hope that TVNZ goes for improved quality. While on holiday last week, we were in a bach that only received TV1 and TV2 so I had to watch TVNZ news. I had forgotten how appalling it is. Way too many meaningless crap stories and way too many self-promoting stories, e.g. new revelations (yawn) about Robin Bain that will be featured in the Sainsbury programme up next. Then reporting on those revelations in the news again the next day and promoting Sainsbury again. Hideous. And the NZ Herald style of starting stories with "As reported by TVNZ last week . . ." or "As revealed by TVNZ yesterday . . ." Piss off! Hope I never have to watch their stupid news programme again.
Pardon diversion but this is quite amusing and mentions our good friend Russell Brown.
I'm saying that I don't particularly appreciate people trying to sell inexperience as "freshness". As if being a public servant, elected or otherwise, was somehow disqualifying. So, if you ask us if this bloke should get less of a look because he's inexperienced, my answer would be yes. Which is not to say that he won't or shouldn't win, just that experience in local government is actually an asset.
Yip, agreed that experience is a good thing. I guess I just see John Banks and, to some degree, Len Brown as having a bit too much experience, i.e. the darker side of envy, greed, power, etc. that comes with being in politics too long.
In a sense, the whole Supercity package is being sold to us on "freshness". "Hey, let's all try the new model cos the old one was crap!"
If we're going to have a fresh new city (and, yes, I know it's just the same old one with all its joys and downfalls), why not have a fresh new mayor?
I'm not going to vote for John based on his previous experience - his prior works are why I'm NOT going to vote for him.
Len I'm still in two minds about.
Apologies for use of CAPS - don't know how to do italics.
Is Len Brown vile now? Wow.
You're just teasing me now Giovanni. Both you and Steve Withers are implying that the only options are the devils you know. Perhaps I have a fundamentally naive idea of council workings whereby I envisage someone with a bit of imagination and flair being able to express that in their mayoralty. Perhaps all that optimism just gets buried in the first week. However, being new to the SPECIFIC world of council workings shouldn't immediately mean someone is incapable of being a good leader.
BTW, computer seems to be choking on Public Address constantly today. Is it just me?
So no matter how vile, as long as they have previous experience . . .
Agreed but still pretty quick to be PM is it not? I guess the analogy I'm looking for is whether John Key is the leader of the country for his experience in politics or for his vision/charisma/enthusiasm (again, whether or not you agree with his politics).
Could Simon be a worthy mayor with no prior experience in local body politics. I think yes. He's worked hard to make the Auckland Festival happen and that can be no mean feat of financial and political management.
Does his lack of experience make his less appealing than the experienced alternatives?
Yes, I understand that experience is a very helpful thing in the down and dirty world of council politics but that doesn't mean we have to disqualify someone straight away because they haven't been there before. One could argue that John Key is brand new in his job and he seems to be managing pretty well - whether or not you like his politics. Simon at least brings a true love of Auckland and its unique characteristics that isn't just focussed on economics. And it also doesn't have to be a bad thing if he doesn't identify (or is identified with) either of the main national political parties. His may be the politics of Auckland.
No mention of Simon Praast for mayor? I am so glad he has joined the race cos he brings something very different compared to the other two. I said from the beginning that one of the rules for Super Mayor should be that you can't be an existing or past mayor of greater Aucks. Go Simon!
Based on the logic that we are all on the verge of moving to Australia (or farther afield) because we can earn more money, what is it that makes anyone come to NZ in first place? Why do we get immigrants or kiwi OEs returning to NZ? It has been made painfully clear by our gummint that it isn't for money. The reason our population continues to increase is because it's a f@*#ing cool place to live, even if you do earn a bit less. So why not forget about tiddling around with + or - a few bucks on tax cuts and put money into what makes the country truly appealing - outdoors, first-world health and education, relatively safe cities, multi-cultural, arts, politically stable, blah blah blah. That's what makes people want to live in NZ - that's our point of difference. Stick your tax cuts where the sun don't shine.