Posts by Graeme Edgeler
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The Aucklander, which has been hammering these stories for months, answers to both descriptions.
"Has been hammering these stories" was part of my (and I thought, Craig's) point. It's the other local government stories that are being missed.
The issues with the amalgamation would seem more important if local body politics was considered important.
If APN, and the Aucklander don't think local body politics is important enough about write about the ongoing issues - not with amalgamation but with the normal things councils do and are responsible for year in year out, then why would we believe them when they say this is important. They've already implied that it can't be by not covering the January Council meeting, and the February Council meeting and the ...
-
Just a bit more on The Aucklander's good work on these issues.
They have done a lot. They even took the unusual step of submitting, in person, to the select committee.
I had understood that Craig was getting at media coverage of local body politics more generally. When there's something big on - like this - there's coverage. But except for the six week's before the election, you'd have no idea City Councils were meeting unless someone is thrown out.
-
Do we have any polls recently on Auckland voters? wouldn't mind seeing if there is a difference...
There may well be. But any difference that renders this likely would be incredible (in both senses of the word):
On thier present form National will be luck to win east coast bays and Rodney in Epsom is look shakey.
To get Auckland-wide poll numbers that rendered that likely you'd need National at around 70% in the rest of the Country to get the nationwide poll numbers we're looking at.
-
You can't blame the previous government, who established the Commission, for the rushed timeframe of amalgamation that this government has put in place.
I'm not blaming the previous Government for anything. I'm stating they were the ones who started this process. And observing that if they hadn't started the process, it wouldn't be so advanced now. This is basically a truism.
On thier present form National will be luck to win east coast bays and Rodney in Epsom is look shakey.
I suspect National would be quite pleased to continue with their present form: 20+ points ahead of Labour, and consistently over 50% in the polls.
Can someone explain how National plan to benefit from this politically?
Are you suggesting that National is doing this because they think it's the right thing to do, rather than playing it for political gain =)
-
This report from the Royal Commission.... Rodney's following it to the letter, right?
No. I just don't think the amalgamation would be happening this quickly (i.e. this term) without it. When we're talking about who began this "in the first place", it's nice to remember
That said, some of the Royal Commission's recommendations were appalling, so I'm not too disappointed it hasn't been followed to the letter.
-
Aren't you a supporter of the party that opened the stable door in the first place?
I don't believe Craig is a supporter of the party that set up the Royal Commission into Auckland Governance, but I'll leave it to him to confirm, deny, or keep this to himself =)
-
If landlords sell up and get out of the rental market, they must be selling the house to *someone*. Either it's someone who's currently renting, or it's someone currently a owner-occupier, in which case *they* have to sell their house to someone, who could be currently renting, etc.
Or to someone who's back from overseas, or just moved to Auckland, or was living with their parents, or has split from their long-term partner...
-
Hmmm ... the recent summer?
I saw Qi for the first time on Sunday. There was an error - I'm not really sure whether I should be happy or sad about it =)
-
Yep; the Elder died trying to evacuate people by boat. There is, not incidentally, another great BBC docudrama about this.
And the first episodes of Roman Mysteries, not long aired on TVNZ6 =)
-
These people prefer to engage in politics in ways that do not involve handing money directly to politicians, but they still vote.
Sure.
I'm just not sure why this means I should include money given to MoveOn.org in assessing the amount of money Obama received in donations.