Hard News by Russell Brown

Read Post

Hard News: Auckland: where only one man votes

214 Responses

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 9 Newer→ Last

  • Neil Graham,

    Thoughts?

    Add a secessionist movement and you got yourself a movie deal.

    Were you thinking Burton Or Gilliam?

    Christchurch • Since Nov 2006 • 118 posts Report Reply

  • Nick Kearney,

    Point 1: it takes time to find directors.

    Point2: it takes even longer to recruit them.

    Point 3: I'd prefer the directors are in place before November 2010, rather than 9 months later (the expected timeframe it'll take to find, scrutinise and appoint).

    No director is going to go near a CCO if their appointment is temporary, until the new Council decides to "Len Brown" them out of office.

    As for accountability - how many here manage to keep track of the 332 CCO's currently in place across Auckland? Or, even from your own city?

    I expect the silence to deafen the answer.

    And Sacha, as for me being a "major player", I always laugh at descriptors like that, I mean, ACT is at 2% or thereabouts and is not even represented in Cabinet, yet somehow a pleb like me working voluntarily and trying to keep the party going on the Shore converts into a "major player".

    Puhlease.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 73 posts Report Reply

  • Ross Mason,

    Sigh....

    Thank you Epsom........

    Upper Hutt • Since Jun 2007 • 1588 posts Report Reply

  • Nick Kearney,

    Or, thank you MMP, which you probably voted for.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 73 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Heh. It's all relative, Nick - as you note, just being a member makes you different than most of the readers here, let alone an active one in local body politics. Never even heard of any others.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19686 posts Report Reply

  • Ben Gracewood,

    (BTW, an interesting survey crossed my desk the other day if anyone has an interest...)

    Any idea who's running that survey Slarty?

    Orkland • Since Nov 2006 • 168 posts Report Reply

  • Nick Kearney,

    Never even heard of any others.

    That's 'cos they're all working behind the scenes, under the radar as it were, corporatising and privatising Auckland's assets and stealing Auckland's democracy from its ratepayers.

    You heard it here first

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 73 posts Report Reply

  • Andrew C,

    Point 1: it takes time to find directors.

    Point2: it takes even longer to recruit them.

    Point 3: I'd prefer the directors are in place before November 2010, rather than 9 months later (the expected timeframe it'll take to find, scrutinise and appoint).

    we should subvert democracy because its hard..?

    Auckland • Since May 2008 • 167 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    Thoughts?

    It's just democracy in action.

    One man one vote, in this case Mr Hide is the one man.

    On a serious note - it is kind of amazing that people think Auckland politics isn't important enough to have proper oversight. Over a million people and a budget bigger than a bunch of democratic countries.

    But don't worry we'll just let one right wing arse make all the decisions and trust him implicitly to be fair honest and reasonable. Oversight? Who needs it that would just slow the one man down right? Who cares if he appoints his buddies to all the positions of authority, he's just choosing good blokes who he knows will do a good job - depressing really.

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4451 posts Report Reply

  • Sofie Bribiesca,

    corporatising and privatising Auckland's assets and stealing Auckland's democracy from its ratepayers.
    You heard it here first

    Thanks Nick, finally a bit of honesty. I will be quoting you on that. I feel a letter to Rodney to confirm your statement.

    here and there. • Since Nov 2007 • 6796 posts Report Reply

  • Andre Alessi,

    I have an idea for the Herald, - perhaps they can run stories on the SuperCity under banner headlines of "DEMOCRACY UNDER ATTACK".


    Or have they already cried wolf on that one?

    I see what you did there.

    No director is going to go near a CCO if their appointment is temporary, until the new Council decides to "Len Brown" them out of office.

    You mean you have a problem with elected officials having the ability to influence/fire the officials that are nominally working under them?

    Democracy is hard, we should just give it up.

    Devonport, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 864 posts Report Reply

  • Andre Alessi,

    The proposed "Council Investments" COO does look to have been specifically set up to sell off some assets eventually:

    Link:

    This CCO would include investments or CCOs not held by the other CCOs proposed in this structure with a view to maximising returns for the Council. It is not proposed that the returns from this CCO will be tagged to any particular activity in the way that Auckland Regional Holdings returns are at present. Investments and commercial activities likely to be held by this activity include:

    • Auckland International Airport Limited (AIAL) Shares (Auckland City Council)
    • Manukau City Investments Ltd
    (the holder of Manukau City Council’s AIAL shares)
    • Auckland Regional Holdings (ARH) assets including Ports of Auckland shares, diversified financial assets and cash
    • Shares in NZ Local Government Insurance Corporation Ltd
    • Waitakere City Council’s Vehicle Testing Station (a business unit of Waitakere
    City Council)
    • City Parks (a business unit of Auckland City Council)
    • North West Auckland Airport Ltd

    Probably just my liberal paranoia distorting my view of reality, though.

    Devonport, New Zealand • Since Nov 2006 • 864 posts Report Reply

  • Nick Kearney,

    Now now Sofie, said in total jest of course, with tongue firmly in cheek.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 73 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes,

    Irrespective Martin, we'd still have elected politicians appointing directors. It's just that, if it's Brown, it's the "better" elected politician, or one on the "proper" side at least.

    That's what this is really about - the Labour/Left crowd are shut out for a few years and don't like it.

    Which is why the whole thing should not have been rushed, it takes time to do things correctly but moments to do a smash and grab whilst nobody is looking. The fact that, as you say, "the Labour/Left crowd are shut out for a few years" is beyond doubt a travesty of democracy and for what? So the "Right" can take the cream before the people have a chance to have their say?
    We should have been looking at devolving Auckland governance as far as I am concerned, this would have made it harder for the powerful to make that grab for our assets which is, no doubt, on the cards.
    Well, when it's all over and done and the people are left wondering why they are paying so much for water and the Libraries are charging us while the trees disappear, the traffic backs up into permanent gridlock on the motorways which used to be parkland and homes. While our waterfront turns into a slum for the rich and tasteless and our schools start to demand vouchers to educate our children. You will be one of the first against the wall, right after Rodney.

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Andy Milne,

    Thanks Nick, finally a bit of honesty. I will be quoting you on that. I feel a letter to Rodney to confirm your statement.

    Was that necessary? Let the man get his snark on a little if he wants to - its not like its the first recorded use of sarcasm on PAS now is it?

    Being on t'other island I must admit that the machinations of Auckland local body politics aren't something I pay a lot of attention to. It would be nice if this story got a wider airing though, as the issues it raises seem to have implications wider than just Auckland politics.

    Christchurch • Since Aug 2007 • 59 posts Report Reply

  • Nick Kearney,

    Thanks Andy.

    I don't come by here very often, please don't ruin the times I do visit.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 73 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    Oversight? Who needs it that would just slow the one man down right?

    That's an accurate summary of the core principle. Auckland (currently rated one of the top cities in the world to live in, remember) could "perform better" if only it were run as a business - by the same plonkers who brought you our woefully-governed corporate sector. Good business practices in the right place, I am fine with.

    elected officials having the ability to influence/fire the officials that are nominally working under them

    Nominal is the word, all right. The new Transport agency and its unelected secretive directors even gets the power to set bylaws for the Council.

    implications wider than just Auckland politics

    Oh yes, the same changes are coming your way, along with others to the Local Govt Act. If we tolerate this type of behaviour in the local government and infrastructure portfolios, it only encourages similar disrespect in others.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19686 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    finally a bit of honesty

    the VRWC is famous for hiding in plain sight. :)

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19686 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes,

    Now now Sofie, said in total jest of course

    Many a true word etc. I guess when statements like "Corporatising and Privatising Auckland's assets and stealing Auckland's democracy from its ratepayers." are made by ACT party members we tend to rely on our memories, Roger Douglas anybody?. That guy even sold out his family.

    Douglas was born on 5 December 1937. His family had strong ties with the trade-union movement, and actively engaged in politics. His father Norman Douglas and a brother Malcolm Douglas both became Labour politicians.

    Wiki

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Bart Janssen,

    said in total jest of course, with tongue firmly in cheek

    So you admit ACT's plans for the management of one quarter of New Zealand are a total joke?

    Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 4451 posts Report Reply

  • recordari,

    If you tolerate this, your children will be next...

    AUCKLAND • Since Dec 2009 • 2607 posts Report Reply

  • Nick Kearney,

    I do not represent the ACT Party in any manner whatsoever while espousing opinions on this blog, or while making snarky, tongue-in-cheek comments, or on any other blog, any more than any of you do for your respective parties. Honestly folks, take chill pills.

    It's lighthearted banter. Isn't it?

    Work beckons, gotta fly.

    North Shore, Auckland • Since Nov 2006 • 73 posts Report Reply

  • recordari,

    Honestly folks, take chill pills.

    .

    AUCKLAND • Since Dec 2009 • 2607 posts Report Reply

  • Steve Barnes,

    Other notable turncoats include Richard Prebble, once a staunch Labour MP until he was sacked in 1988 for being a right ***t and selling off the Railways and Telecom through his mates (Fay and Richwhite) Prebbo went on to become the second leader of ACT (after Douglas).

    Fay and Richwhite were also involved in a series of transactions between 1986 and 1993 involving their companies European Pacific; Capital Markets; Fay, Richwhite; the Bank of New Zealand; Tranz Rail; and Telecom New Zealand, transactions in which they personally gained over half a billion dollars - at the same time as their minority shareholders lost $277 million

    Wiki
    In his "Retirement" Mr Prebble became a Director of Mainfreight one of the great winners in the Railways debacle.

    These are the bludgers that want our City.
    Lest we forget...

    Peria • Since Dec 2006 • 5521 posts Report Reply

  • Sacha,

    lighthearted banter

    Hey, I can spot and appreciate a tongue in a cheek. The rest is serious stuff. And some of us have never belonged to any party.

    Ak • Since May 2008 • 19686 posts Report Reply

First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 9 Newer→ Last

Post your response…

Please sign in using your Public Address credentials…

Login

You may also create an account or retrieve your password.