Hard News: The Cullen investment
157 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 … 7 Newer→ Last
-
It does surely make it difficult for the government to accuse Cullen of gross financial impropriety if they've appointed him to an SOE board.
Well, not 'difficult' but perhaps less credible.
-
Next question: Will Judith Tizard really go back there? It would be a poor choice for her.
IMHO, in a heartbeat. Whether they want her back is another question...
-
And, I agree, poor choice on her part if she does.
-
Interesting that very little fuss was made of the appointment of Dr Brash to Transpower at the same time http://www.beehive.govt.nz/sites/all/files/SOE_Composition_of%20SOE_Boards.pdf
-
Hayden - thanks.
Also note Paula Rebstock to NZRC behind Bolger. i.e. Rebstock could well become chair of NZRC if Bolger is on for full retirement. -
Another cracker from the Kiwiblog thread, underlining the impression that they're taking it very personally indeed:
This is a disgraceful day in the history of a National government.
John Key - you should feel ashamed You’ve rewarded the man that so many of your loyal supporters despised so much.
Cullen screwed so many of us over repeatedly, and you reward him in this manner? Sorry – but I don’t turn the other cheek
I did expect that the nutroots and Key would fall out of love eventually, but not over something like this. It's hilarious.
-
Also that Paula Rebstock has been appointed to KiwiRail.
-
Regarding Bolger, his chairmanship of Kiwibank expires in October next year, so obviously Cullen is doing his apprenticeship before taking over, presumably.
-
I did expect that the nutroots and Key would fall out of love eventually, but not over something like this. It's hilarious.
Viz my comment on yesterday's thread about Key not lasting the term.
-
And just for good measure, Judy Kirk to the Lotteries Commission at the same time.
-
No change to the at-large SuperCouncillors elected by block voting though.
I guess they really do hate democracy, then.
-
How is the change from FPP to STV initiated? Binding referendum or just council decision?
-
I did expect that the nutroots and Key would fall out of love eventually, but not over something like this. It's hilarious.
Viz my comment on yesterday's thread about Key not lasting the term.
You might just be on to something, but somehow I doubt that Key's political fortunes are influenced in any way by the gnashings of around two-and-a-half dozen glow-in-the-dark acne cases.
-
OK, so I braved KB. But I'm pleading temporary insanity if anyone asks.
It's beautiful. All the righteous, self-centred indignation. You'd think Shon Key had deliberately picked the second most-offensive (Helen was taken, after all) person possible, just to spite all the RWNJs who view (viewed?) him as somewhere to the right of Messianic.
-
Gareth: either. But since the power of existing councils will be constrained during the transition period, I doubt they would be permitted by Wellington to reintroduce some democracy into their plan.
-
BTW, people may be interested in the little table on p. 29 of the government's response. (small picture here) To help with the interpretation, a "CCO" is a "Council Controlled Organization" - a local body SOE. And from the footnote, the omission of that term is not accidental. The upshot: the government is actively considering privatising Auckland's water. They just can't help themselves, can they?
-
The Supa City decision in full:
1. We don't need any further consultation, because the Royal Commission has already done that.
2. We're ignoring those Royal Commission recommendations we don't like.
-
Actually, there's 12 wards with one councillor each. I therefore hope for 24 Local Boards that specifically fit two into one ward. Strong, simple connections from local level to UberCouncil is required.
And I/S, the text of page 28 does explicitly state: "In future, a single council controlled organisation of the Auckland Council will supply
all drinking water and wastewater services in the Auckland region" -
Not so impressed with there not even being a Minister for Auckland, I have to say. A quarter of the population, something like a third of tax revenue, and it's not worth even one person in Central Government having a brief to keep an eye on things? That's a bit off, really.
-
Minister slams government:
“Without distinctive Maori councillors and mana whenua positions, as the Royal Commission recommended, Maori will almost have no chance of being elected to the board. Representation at-large will cater for the corporate few, while tangata whenua and grass-roots have been marginalised and relegated to the community level.
...“The point of consultation is to take notice of the viewpoints you hear. Before the government sets aside the Royal Commission’s recommendations, it really must inform itself by listening to the people,” said Dr Sharples.
“These announcements are not in the best interestes of Maori and I will be organising a consultation hui for Maori to discuss the best ways we can respond,” said Dr Sharples.
(press release)
-
A quarter of the population, something like a third of tax revenue, and it's not worth even one person in Central Government having a brief to keep an eye on things? That's a bit off, really.
Along with not having one for the South Island. It's a truly bizarre ministerial warrant, which looks like Auckland needs some sort of governmental overlord/sight.
-
We don't need any further consultation, because the Royal Commission has already done that.
The legislation's not even going to Select Committee? That's pretty bad.
since the power of existing councils will be constrained during the transition period, I doubt they would be permitted by Wellington to reintroduce some democracy into their plan.
They seem to think it will work for Maori wards, but I tend to agree. Someone should start the petition for the STV vote, however. Just cos it would be fun :-)
-
Sharples' side-point is a very good one - the argument that it doesn't need consultation because the Royal Commission did that is scuppered when you make major changes to said Commission's model
-
Kyle, I thought the South Island was adequately covered by Agriculture. After all, we're regularly told that what's good for the farmers is good for the country, and most of what the South Island produces comes from farming.
Extracting tongue from cheek, given how paranoid much of the country is about Auckland's clout, including paranoia in the halls of Parliament itself, I'd have thought a Minister just to keep our uppity local pollies in check would've been a wise idea. Instead we'll be lobbying a dozen of them, or more, every time there's a problem.
-
Gareth: And yet they contradict it at the top of that page as well, significantly omitting the term CCO and again stating that it has only been agreed in principle. At the least, its a very sloppy editing job which makes their position uncertain - which doesn't help them.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.