The Porirua Wellington Web Blog - February 2006
Political debate is a sign of a healthy community. This blog is a place for opinions and debate about Porirua City, its Council, and the Wellington region.
For current material
please visit The Porirua Wellington Web Blog
- Current Material
Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw
Last night, 6 members of the Association and 5 councillors (Shaw, Murrell, Gillon, Dow and Green) met and a controversial issue was the attendance of councillors at meetings.
I tried to figure out what was the nature of the the topics of discussion on the full agenda. They were largely management issues, with some governance aspects tossed in to complicate things. Often they were multi-agency things. This would be a typical raft of items for a residents' association. This range of items and agencies in itself presents a major challenge. Add to that the complexity of local government and legislation, and you cannot expect things to be easy. Then, on top of those things you can have personality matters and the unease generated by the fact that councillors are elected and must be concerned with politics.
As someone said, rightly I thought, there are "systemic" problems in the management of the council (meaning the governance and management sides). There is a very good feeling around at the moment regarding the need to seek out better ways to work within the council, and this includes better ways to engage the residents' associations.
As a first step in this exploration, I want to see the workshops for the councillors and the workshops for the public on the LTCCP combined into a single series. This will reduce the officers' workload. It will also ensure we are all talking about the same information. It will also satisfy the call to have the councillors present when members of the public speak.
There may well be occasions when the councillors and the officers want to
have a private chat, but such occasions must be infrequent. Indeed, I cannot
think of much that is a real secret in local government governance.
r
Tuesday, February 28, 2006
Hi Pip
Every year Transit brings out its draft plan and consults everyone. This year
it appears in a nice booklet with a "Have your say" sheet.
When they write their draft plan, Transit does their best with what is known
or assumed on the day. Hence, they had to reduce the projects because of cost
increases. They could not simply increase the sum they proposed to spend. This
revealed many things that the community and the Government did not like.
It might be said that we should thank Transit for their plan, because it immediately
flushed out Government Ministers who foolishly made promises. It also made roads
funding a public issue (again).
The Plimmerton Residents Association, like associations throughout NZ, will make
a submission. As will PCC, the RLTC (like the 10 others), etc.
Transit will then make its decisions.
In the case of Wellington we have but one fixed point: the sum of money the Government
said could be spent on the northern road. Everything else is undecided. After
the hearings committee decides, the RLTC will decide, and then GW will decide.
Personally, I do not think GW has very much more status in this than PCC. The
real body that speaks for the region on roading is our RLTC. However, GW argues
that they represent the region and there is truth to that.
You ask about the membership of the RLTC, and as you know it is in part elected
by councils and in part appointed by organisations. I tend to like the system
when they agree with me and not like it when they do not. There is no way of
course that we can change the structures that are in the Act.
However, in my opinion, we can and should get onto the appointed persons and
bring them to an enlightened understanding of the strategy and community demands.
I agree with you that one or two votes can make an incredible difference. If
the Hearings Committee does not support TGM we are dead. If the RLTC does not
then support TGM we are dead.
My view is: Transit will have to go with the RLTC and hence Government direction
on TGM when there is a decision made - they will if need be have to change their
plans.
regards
r
Pip Piper wrote:
Robert – I am a little confused. [this is a reference to the blog below re Transit NZ] I accept that the planning of Land Transport in NZ is the business of RLTC’s . But in the case of Wellington with its 9-9 vote and Terry McD opting for the CH to be scrutinized we discovered that the decision was supported by most of the non-elected members. How can it be that non-elected people can swing such an important vote and put the process back by many months ? I don’t think the Wishbone Study helps in this case. P.
I noticed that the 54 page Hutt Valley advertisment vehicle, "Hutt Alive" cites VIPs who have visited the Riddiford Hotel - and there is a picture of our Jenny. Also noticed John Terris is the "editorial consultant". Watch for how things develop in the next election. The only thing I cannot find in the mag is who is paying for all those free copies.
The net 2006 staff cost is $14.468 million. This does not include contractors. Contractors are used to maintain facilities (eg public toilets), to provide advice (eg lawyers), and for the development of systems (eg computer programs).
The rates increase last year for Porirua City was 3.6 percent. That we are told is great news. The average rates increase for the metropolitan sector was 8.4 percent. What is more our City was in the bottom 20 percent of all cities in New Zealand with regard to its rates increase.
The only problem is that increases depend on the base figure. A 1% increase in Wellington is far less than a 1% increase in Porirua. Our 1% costs you more than their 1% costs their ratepayers.
And also, our 1% adds to our high base. Their 1% adds to their low base.
Porirua maintains a high historical base - our rates have always been too high. "There is nothing we can do about the level of rates, things are not so bad". This is what you learn in workshops, if you attend.
It is like saying hell is inevitable but
you will enjoy the heat.
r
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Council has made great strides in getting its web site working. Agendas and minutes appear in good time and many people check out progress. It is a good way to see how your councillors vote.
We now need to have the Councillor Bulletin material also put on the web.
The Councillors Bulletin is the main (hopefully the only) document issued to
councillors each week by the chief executive. It is publicly available material
and in the public library. I have in this blog quoted figures from that document
- it would be great if people
could see it in full for themselves online.
r
Sunday, February 26, 2006
According to officers' advice (given in workshops for those who were there) the increases in costs this year are:
Cost of services includes the settlement of the Collective Agreement for the Works Business Unit, the market premium paid to fill professional roles (read "consultants"), and a general movement of wages and salaries of 2.4%.
The increase in staff includes:
All this illustrates that we do our budgets the wrong way. We need to start
with what the ratepayers can afford and then work from there. The idea of building
on the current budget and doing more each year generates increasing demand.
This is shown clearly in the level of rates in Porirua City.
r
Sunday, February 26, 2006
Officers are always under pressure from councillors to save the ratepayers' money.. Last year they came up with the following which they called "efficiency gains":
This money was in the 04/05 budget and planned for inclusion in the 05/06 budget. You can see from the items that they are ongong costs and that we benefit from those savings in the 06/07 year, and so on.
I want to make the point that whilst these ongoing savings are worthwhile, they are not in themselves sufficient to satisfy the call for a councillor review of costs and priorities. I believe we need to have a look at each expenditure area of the Council with a view to setting priorities within each area. For me, a structured approach to decision-making like this, is far more important than the "educative" workshops that we are now having.
Some actual funded programmes need to be cut - this entails a reduction in services, and possibly jobs. It will not be popular with officers or the community.
I want to cut the budget, not to keep on hearing about the pressures that make cutting it impossible and why the Council faces cost increases.
As a working figure, I would seek to have last year's budget cut by 10 to 15 percent, and to then use this as the starting point for the discussions this year.
On my calcuation, the officers' advice so far in this budget round has indicates a 15 percent rates increase is needed to cover the increaes in costs and demands that they see as important.
The elected persons themselves need to be directly involved in a "zero based budget exercise". It needs to be done as an integral part of the LTCCP exercise. I keep making this same point every year.
Let us hope that the majority of councillors accept the notion. The officers, for understandable reasons, will not - who would want to plan for a smaller Council. Instead, this year the talk is to:
r
Sunday, February 26, 2006
This Monday, 7.30 pm, at the Pavillon. That is the place to debate the conduct of elected persons! Move motions against them, hang them from the rafters, whatever ...
It is NOT the mayor's business to call meeings on the LTCCP (the Council itself made decisions on meetings, and it the the ceo's job to ensure there is proper consultation).
It is NOT the Council's business to debate the conduct of elected persons (the Council must make decisions that are about Council business - as per the Standing Orders).
r
Saturday, February 25, 2006.
DomPost report:
Transit NZ came in for intense questioning from MPs yesterday over
its 10-year programme as criticism was levelled that it might have "overcooked" a
funding shortfall to get more money out of ministers.
Transit's draft 10-year building programme, announced on Wednesday, outlines expected spending, and proposed start and finish dates for big roading projects during the next decade. The 2006-20007 to 2016-2017 budget is the biggest ever, with $12 billion earmarked over 10 years.
However, many important projects outlined in last year's forecast have been put on hold because of a $685 million reduction in funding.
Within an hour of the report's publication, government ministers had rejected Transit's 10-year programme, its forecast of a $685 million funding shortfall, and vowed roads would be built as planned with the cash found to meet the cost.
Transit executives fronted up to Parliament's transport and industrial relations select committee yesterday for a regular financial review but the focus turned quickly to the draft plan.
National MP Maurice Williamson questioned whether the draft plan was worthwhile given that within an hour of its publication ministers were saying it was being overtaken. Mr Williamson said there were big changes in the plan announced on Wednesday, compared to one announced last year. He cited the Taupo bypass which work was supposed to begin on this year, but under the new plan has a start date of 2014-2015.
"Why do you think it's of value to even do something of this nature when the variations can be so wide-ranging," he asked.
"The feedback I've had from sector groups right across the board . . . is well, what was the point of this?"
Chairman David Stubbs said the draft plan was a "work in progress" and what had changed was the funding line. "It's just simply that the programming is somewhat ahead of the funding arrangements at this point."
The draft plan had cost $75,000 to print and distribute and the board felt the spending was justified, he said.
Transit chief executive Rick van Barneveld said the level of instability in planning was "not satisfactory".
In the past year there had been "global cost impacts" on Transit's business, he said.
The impact of that on Transit's $1 billion annual business was between $150 million and $300 million, less than 2.5 per cent of the cost of its business. In terms of revenue, there was a $350 million reduction in forecast revenue to the National Land Transport Fund as a result of reductions in road user charges and reduced petrol excise tax.
"Revenue to the fund will continue to increase but not as rapidly as has been forecast and the impact of that over 10 years is $350 million less revenue," Mr van Barneveld said. ...
ROBERT COMMENTS
Everyone loves to beat up Transit. They deserve it in many cases. However ...
The Transit document was for consultation - now Ministers have pre-empted that by saying everything is to be funded. That, of course, is most unlikely as the programme runs out over 10 years.
What on earth do people expect Transit to do in their consultation draft? They must put in the current best estimates for projects - and estimates will change all the time. They must make the draft fit the total sum of money Government has allocated. They must suggest some sort of logical order using the best information available at the moment. Hence, there will be much that we will not like. That is why they are consulting.
Then, note that we do not know if Transmission Gully will be built or not. Let alone when. Until the Hearings Committee reports, and a flow of other decisions are made, it is impossible to say much about Wellington.
If you want something to worry about, something real, worry about how we are
going to ensure the doing agencies (particularly Transit) can be brought to
see that their role is road building and not planning. The planning of land
transport, including major roads is the business of 11 elected committees throughout
the country. These committees are the Regional Land Transport Strategy Committees.
They are representative of alls sorts of interest groups, and and what is more
they must work out how to keep the modes in balance (meaning the balance between
private and public transport). The job of Transit is narrowly defined in their
Act, and unfortunately the Act leads them into seeing themselves as the national
planning agency - which they are not. Anyone interested in this topic should
read The Wishbone Study.
r
Friday, February 24, 2006
---------
From: Graeme Ebbett <ebbett.automation@clear.net.nz>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 17:09:02 +1300
To: Paul Mulrooney <paul.mulrooney@dompost.co.nz>, Rebecca <news@kmananews.co.nz>,
Melanie Drummond <melanie.drummond@capitalnews.co.nz>
Cc: TBRA Committee
Subject: Media Statement Re PCC Workshop Stymied
PCC Workshop Stymied
Public news that a long awaited Porirua City Council Workshop on the Long Term
Council Community Plan has had to be aborted because there were not enough Councillors
attending the Workshop to make up a quorum is the last nail in the coffin of
effective representation said Graeme Ebbett, Chairman of the TBRA.
"For too long we in the community have been usually without Ward
Councillors at our meetings. We appreciate the work of officers but all is lost
when the political decision-makers have consistently been out of the loop.
The time has come for reform of the electoral system in Porirua.
That is why the TBRA is now calling for the establishment of a Community Board
in Titahi Bay.
Our community has strived to establish a long term community plan and we see
no assurance of progress without direct advocacy by our own community board".
Graeme Ebbett
Chairman
Titahi Bay Residents Assn Inc
C/- 37 Terrace Rd, Titahi Bay, Porirua.
Work Ph 568 6377, Fx 568 2374
Home Ph 236 8574, Fx 236 8591
Cell 021 499 736
Email ebbett.automation@clear.net.nz
COMMENT FROM THE NORTHERN WARD ON THIS EMAIL
"Attached press release FYI, in case you haven't already seen what Titahi Bay says about this total waste of time, caused by Councillors.
Yes, we're aware that some Councillors find it difficult to attend daytime meetings, but the majority of Council voted for that and so at the least all of that majority should have been at last Wednesday's long-heralded (and very important) meeting. Residents and ratepayers had been advised to participate at that time, set by Council without our having even the slightest say in the convenience or otherwise of the time to us.
Council set the time. Council should have been there. It's as simple as that.
It was a failure. It was a disgrace.
Council officers, residents and ratepayers have all been let down by Councillors and I can only agree with Titahi Bay 's public complaint.
Yes, we know the only Councillors who did turn up on Wednesday were from the northern ward – thanks to those who did! – but this matter required participation of the full Council and you are our representatives on it. I'd very much like to hear what you think about your colleagues' absence (at our expense) and what you propose to do about it. Frankly I'm not impressed by any of you simply saying “It's not my fault”.
Please could one of you have the decency to move a motion at your next Council meeting offering your constituents and the general public an abject apology for Council's expensive stuff up and failure?
Please could you now get your collective act together and, in consultation with constituents, set a new time, in the very near future, for a fully consultative workshop on the LTCCP – at which every Councillor is required and/or committed to participate? Recall your statutory obligation to consult properly. You mustn't let us down again! "
Tim Sheppard
After I returned from my 7am meeting with Council this morning I found an email about the attendance of councillors at meetings. Hands up those who knew that I had a 7am meeting! No one did apart from the officers that I met. You cannot assume your councillors are not on the job because you do not see them.
I am aware that one councillor at present faces a serious family situation. I know of two others who have recently suffered at work because of their committment to the council. Two weeks ago the partners of councillors met in a sort of alcoholic support group. All councillors spend a great deal of time away from home at meetings.
I am pleased that the community is interesting itself in the attendance and attitudes of those elected. Calling elected people to account is an important role for residents' associations. Every so often councillors get a summons from a resident's association, and that is all to the good.
As an elected person I will not make comment
on other elected persons. At least I try not to! Councillors must attend
to the business of the Council and not to each other.
r
Friday, February 24, 2006
"Take the all the money collected as petrol tax and spend it on roads." That
is the most stupid argument that persists. Those who say that should also say,
and "close a hospital", or "close two schools". The Government collects taxes
from many sources. It then distributes the money. Linking one income stream
to a particular cost, has cosmetic effects but no real effect. The National
Party needs to raise the standard of debate, for it is they who are doing the
beat-up on the radio this morning. Our country needs thinking, not slogans.
r
Thursday, February 23, 2006
Message from the Mayor:
At 9.15am this morning (the cut-off time for a quorum - 7 needed) there were only 3 Councillors Dow, Murrell and Shaw and myself present at the LTCCP all-day workshop. The workshop was cancelled much to inconvenience of staff and Councillors present. It will now be held at 5.30pm 1 st and 2 nd March. As these dates are already in your diaries for workshops I expect everyone who possibly can to attend.
While 4 Councillors had put in apologies a reasonable time before the workshop, I was most concerned to find that 4 Councillors left it till this morning to phone in their apologies! This is simply not good enough - meals and a bus had to be cancelled at the last minute let alone the disruption to the time of our very busy staff who had been working extremely hard to prepare material in time for us for us today.
All of you have known about this workshop since December and it would have been only courteous to our managers, staff and those Councillors who did turn up, for those of you who phoned in today - the day of the workshop - with your apology, or the 3 of you who did not turn up in time nor send in any apology, to have let the democratic services staff know long before the day of the workshop that you would not be attending instead of wasting everyone's time!
Mayor Jenny Brash
ROBERT COMMENTS
We can understand some frustration. All those who attended felt that personal frustration. Hopefully people will apologise well in advance of meetings, and the chief executive might make a request regarding that matter. However, is this email from the mayor the right way to deal with the matter? I am reminded of the similar statement issued about the state of the councillors lounge and alcoholism.
Watch for the media to make a play now this matter has been talked up. Reporters love the petty and the miserable. It will drag on and things from the past will be raised ad nauseam. The pity of that is not that it lowers the city or the councillors in the eyes of the public. The public sees right through this sort of circus - the public in our City is very insightful. The pity of it is that we do not engage the public in the important and vital decisions the council must make. Sensible people cannot be bothered talking to councillors whilst this lot continues.
We have to act like a council. The rules are:
It is no big deal if a meeting does not get a quorum. It happens frequently enough. In this particular case it was not a decision-making meeting. Nothing was held up because decisions were delayed. There is a point that the officers' preparation and time goes to waste, although the work will be used in the re-scheduled meeting.
It is good manners for individuals to apologise for meetings well in advance, but sometimes personal circumstances arise.
In the present case there are several reasons why people did not attend:
We need to:
Everyone
should mind their own business. Let us get on with the work.
r
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Our Council has battled long for funds for the development of the Whitford Brown State Highway One Interchange.
Now, I read the mayor says this: “For a long time Transit made it clear they were not keen on an interchange at Whitford Brown. Now they have put it near the top of their funding list. This is very perplexing.”
Well I remember the support of Transit New Zealand when as a member of the Wellington Regional Land Transport Committee I moved to have the project brought into the budget. This was done on the basis of current traffic and projections. It did not at that time include the development of the Aotea Block. One unsettled matter was the proposed Aotea Railway Station. This is unlikely to be advanced because it is too close to the Porirua Station.
At the moment there is a strong case for funding the Whitford Brown / SH1 Interchange. Presumably, the mayor thinks that spending this money will undermine Transmission Gully, but I do not think so because the Interchange relates to current traffic congestion and safety issues.
Transit says the building of the interchange is necessary regardless of whether or not Transmission Gully proceeds. On that point I agree with them.
Transit New Zealand's current plan is to have the interchange built in year
2014/15, at a cost of $29 million. Believe it when you see it.
r
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
MEDIA RELEASE
For immediate use
Date: 22.2.06
Fax: (04) 237 1405
Tel: (04) 237 5089
Porirua City Mayor comments on draft Transit funding package
Porirua City is confident there will be enough funds for future roading developments in the Wellington Region over the medium term, says Porirua City Mayor Jenny Brash.
“The Transit statement released today makes much of the fact that they are planning to spend $12 billion on transport across New Zealand over the next 10 years, and that that level of expenditure on capital projects is unprecedented.
“If this is the case, then on a pro-rata basis Wellington can still look forward to $1.4 billion over the next 10 years. This will be more than enough to cover the projects we are looking at. The real question for us is the level of funding over the second 10 year period.”
Ms Brash said she had taken heart from comments last week by Dr Cullen that the Government was concerned about a projected fall in roading income but remained committed to its programme.
Ms Brash said the Dominion Post this morning made much of the fact that some projects could be delayed.
“The fact is that some of the projects won’t be required at all if the decision is made to proceed with the building of Transmission Gully and the upgrading work on SH1 and SH2 between Petone and Wellington CBD.
“Transit certainly won’t need to spend money on an interchange at Whitford Brown, a Pukerua Bay bypass, a very elaborate grade separated interchange at Paekakariki and a link between Grenada and Petone.”
Ms Brash said Porirua City found it very perplexing that Transit had yet again come out with a vastly different array of figures for various roading projects.
“For example, just two weeks ago Transit told The Treasury that the Petone-Grenada link would cost $180 million. Today they say the cost is $78 million – nearly $100 million less. Which figure are we to believe?”
There were other examples. “For a long time Transit made it clear they were not keen on an interchange at Whitford Brown. Now they have put it near the top of their funding list. This is very perplexing.”
Ms Brash said Transit had asked for public feedback on their latest announcement.
“All I can say about this is that all those wonderful people who spent considerable time and effort preparing a submission for the Hearings Committee (of the Regional Land Transport Committee) in support of Transmission Gully may like to send a copy of their submission to Transit.
“I am sure Transit will then get the message that way.”
Initial media inquiries to Roger Foley on 0275 303381
ROBERT COMMENTS
Two different things to consider.
The first is to point out that Transit NZ is doing the right thing: setting out in advance a programme based on current thinking and money. That document is for discussion. If the Government does give them more money, more will be done. This decision-making process takes place every year in advance of the Government's Budget (The Estimates) being moved in Parliament.
The second thing:
The mayor fires off her opinion on the Transit
draft, and the councillors are cut out of the process. Then officers say to
the councillors,"for
goodness sake do not say anything or we will look as if we are not unified".
The councillors then feel they are being gagged. The councillors are not united.
How can we be when we are being pre-empted? How can we be when there is no
regard for the proper process. Until there is respect for proper processes
of local government we will remain dysfunctional. The mayor has to accept her
leadership responsibility.
r
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
Talofa lava - here's some notes from forum relating to Bird Flu: A Community
Response earlier this month. We have a group of people from community to take
up some of these issues to progress the community response. Marshall Hyland,
Avalon Mikaere, Kathleen Kerwin, Shona Kelly ( Sandra Moe Matthews to do minutes)
Marshall Hyland, Porirua City Council Civil Defence spoke to the Intersectoral
Forum on Wednesday and will wait for feedback from this forum · Good
information to public without scare mongering Q: What kind conversations are
you having in your home about this topic. Answer: We don’t know how ready
services are going to be cut. People talking about it think a lot of it is
scaremongering. ·There are discussions happening with some families ·What
type of food would we need? Do you know collection point in your area – this
needs to be broadcast? Do we need to buy masks? ·People not feeding
seagulls. ·Probably caught Bird Flu ages ago from the amount of children
we have all consumed. ·Always remember your own immune system not too
much antibiotics. ·What can we learn from 1918 pandemic? ·Enough
supply of medication (Panadol) ·How do you get month supply medicines? ·How
equipped are churches, e.g. live alone and disabled. Use networking system.
Somebody in authority should have a list disabled and shut in for whole city.
Look after ourselves and our immediate Neighbours. Theme is communities, get
to know your Neighbours, on own, disabled, blind need to be looked after too. ·CAB
does collating of people in disaster. ·Distribute through rate invoices.
Next general health meeting: Friday March 10th at Pataka 12:30pm.
Editor
Kapi Mana News
The Youth Council set up by the Porirua City Council collapsed. Looking back over the years, it is possible to see groups come and go. A few enthusiastic people work away and all is well. Then people get busy, their priorities change, and organisations collapse.
Some see the Youth Council as a means to gain a voice for youth, whilst others see it as a mechanism to secure facilities for youth.Both of these objectives are unlikely to be much achieved, although they may be achieved a little.
I believe we need to ensure that the voice of youth is heard when the Porirua City Council makes decisions. I also believe it is vital for the health of our community that we train young people in the practice of democracy.
Hence, I conclude that the Council should co-opt youth onto Council committees.
Say one person for each of the two committees of Council. They would have a
vote, the same as every other councillor and they would feel the pressure of
real decision-making. The term of each appointment should be for just one year.
They should be paid at half the rate of an ordinary councillor.
Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY Grape Picking in Blenheim – from next week
It’s the picking season for the grapes and it is good money for fast pickers. Hourly rate is $12/hr and the contract rate should be better than the hourly rate. Accommodation at $80/week & transport to and from the work place is available. Pruning season jobs are also available from late May to early September. Anyone interested should contact Lorreen Hartley , Forum Manager on 2389920, 027-2942295 or email admin@piforum.org.nz by Friday 24 th February 2006 .
Porirua City ratepayers will pay for the development of the Wellington Regional Strategy. They will also pay to see how it relates to Porirua City's plans. Then, they will also pay as regional ratepayers to have the regional council do what it does. Duplication, triplication, is expensive. It is also pointless.
The truth about econmic development is Porirua City is very simple. Those who profit from it want the ratepayers to pay as much as possible.
I have just been reading an officers' paper about how PCC outcomes align to WRS. It contains such gems as making a link between statements such as "Growth in new investment and development in diverse activity" (sic) AND "Unlocking economic potentials". Why do we have to pay people to write such pointless drivel? What on earth does that do for us? I hasten to add that those employed to do the work are fine people doing what they are instructed to do. The fault lies with the decisions of the elected council.
Anyway, the plan is to have two plans - the Wellington Regional Strategy,
and the Porirua City Economic Development Strategy - both to be completed in
September this year. The excitement builds as we all wait for September.
IT'S YOUR MONEY THEY ARE AFTER
r
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
FOOTNOTE
A reader asks me to be more positive: what should the Council do in the area of economic development? The answer is simple and in two parts. Not send all the ratepayers' money for economic development to Wellington City - spend it in our City. Then, contract Business Porirua to do the lot. Our city is too small to have business development activities within the Council and to have them also run by Business Porirua.
In July 2003, two members of the Board of Trustees of Aotea College wrote a plan to address drug use in Porirua City schools (the paper is on my website). They were motivated to do this because of their experiences with students. The cost was $355,000 and it was to be a submission to Government. The plan was strongly supported by the City Council, school representatives, the Police, and those involved in the delivery of drug programmes. The money was available with central government and the organisation that had to access it was Achievement Porirua.
Assurances were given that things would be advanced, by means of the proposal or another way.
Now, as many Porirua City people prepare to march to Parliament demanding action regarding P, I ask: what did Achievement Porirua do? We had a chance to do something practical with the support of the Government money that was, the Minister said, available.
Now we are being asked to march on
Government to protest - that may do some good. But, why is it that we cannot
get our act together to do the really important things?
r
Monday, February 20, 2006
Today $2,100 of our money is spent per person per year by the health sector.
Much of the money is wasted because of bad strategic decisions, vested interests, and inefficiency. We are unable to make sensible decisions - strategic mistakes cost us millions as the years roll by, and day-by-day foolishness adds its toll. No-one seems to be able to get to grips with any of it.
The last time a significant change was made to the system it was driven by an imported ideology that is now totally discredited. Good Kiwi's knew a bad deal when they saw it and they set about to undermine the changes every way they could. Health management established a polite war with the public and of course the public won.
At the same time, we have so called consumer groups and vested interest groups incessantly pushing their own needs. Anyone can say anything and get top billing by our media. The facts, balanced judgment, and the opinions of those qualified, count for nothing against a self appointed consumer advocates. Witness the recent dispute over Herceptin. The media needs to be brought to account for its lack of integrity. They should not be allowed to hide behind their usual simplistic statements.
Many of the problems can be seen in microcosm at Kenepuru. What was a hospital is now a clinic. People are supposed to pay, just as they are in any GP clinic. But watch them avoid paying - see the bad debts mount, false names proliferate, and services be avoided.
The hospital services still left behind at Kenepuru are being pushed to perform as the situation at Newtown becomes increasingly disastrous. The details of this I discovered by meeting people at Maureen Gillon's birthday party.
I have long been of the view that the hub-and-spoke model for hospital services will not work in a place like Wellington. The more we go on with the current plan the more obvious its absurdity becomes.
The only answer is to develop Kenepuru as a hospital. That means establishing a low level Intensive Care Unit.The hospital should be the regional centre for elective surgery (as per the submission of the professional staff to the health board about 5 years ago).
And as the health board struggles to build a skyscraper on a fault line at Newtown, the Kenepuru site is being prepared for sale to help address the current budget crisis. The consultation on this just before the Health Board elections, has yet to be concluded.
Still our Health Board uses the excuse of staff shortages - yet they have never investigated innovative ideas to solve the problem. Over 5 years ago the plan for an international village was developed and it has been ignored ever since. When I discovered Board members were not familiar with what was being discussed in the community, I asked some questions, and discovered the submissions of the public were not even distributed to the Health Board.
Crass stupidity makes me angry - particularly when we have to suffer the results.
r
Monday, February 20, 2006
----Original Message----- From: John.Spence@police.govt.nz [ mailto:John.Spence@police.govt.nz ]
Sent: Monday, 20 February 2006 9:14 a.m.
To: mescal@slingshot.co.nz Cc: rblakeley@pcc.govt.nz
Subject:
Re: Sorry got the information wrong - the young lady is in theatre fighting
for her life
Hi Mescal
A word of explanation re the cyclist struck by the truck on Goat Point (which I attended)
Your second email is correct, the cyclist has not died although she is very seriously hurt She was in fact riding on the footpath (by the railing - so she was well away from the road) when for some reason she seemed to lose her balance. She 'wobbled' towards the curb and her front wheel went onto the road causing her to fall onto the road into the path of the truck. This was from a witness who was walking behind the cyclist (about 10 meters) and witnessed the whole incident. Naturally this was traumatic for the witness and we have provided her with victim support as well.
There is no indication that the truck was speeding and from the information we have, the truck driver was not at fault and could do nothing to avoid hitting her.
Accordingly, the road was not a factor in this sad
incident Could you pass this onto the people on your email list
Regards
John
From Transit NZ's website:
"The Mana transit lanes are legally enforceable under the Land Transport Act, Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004 and by the Transit New Zealand Bylaw.
A transit lane is a special vehicle lane and is defined in the Land Transport Act and Land Transport (Road User) Rule 2004. For further information please visit http://www.landtransport.govt.nz/rules/docs/road-user-rule-2004.pdf or http://www.legislation.govt.nz .
It is an offence for the unauthorised use of a transit lane and this is dealt with in the Land Transport (Offences and Penalties) Regulations 1999.
Designation for the Mana transit lanes is by way of the Transit Lanes Bylaw (PDF, 240KB) ."
ROBERT COMMENTS
Those interested should follow the link to the bylaw above. The key question
Is: is the Bylaw reasonable now? The Bylaw is made under delegated authority
to the chief executive. Hence, it is relatively easy to change.
Sunday, February 19, 2006
I have just read the Council's media policy. Several councillors, particularly Cr Liz Kelly, asked the chief executive that it be circulated for general consideration.
I remember that when it was signed off by Council some years ago. It did not merit a look. I do not like to waste my time. The point of the policy, the whole ethos, was to nail down the coffin with outspoken councillors inside. I was right, it is a classic bureaucratic control document. Its effect was to establish an ongoing cause for conflict., to waste the time of officers, and to generally confuse people about the Council.
Because of the ethos of "control and control" the media policy has failed. Or, more accurately, it has the wrong goals, and it has not achieved even those goals. There are many complaints about media things, and Council's media man is himself the news.
What should be the goals of the media policy? Let me make a suggestion:
Democracy. This means that with reference to the big issues of the day, Council keeps everyone informed about:
Democracy also relates to the responsiveness of Council to new issues. When people have a problem the Council should assist with its resolution. Some gripes have merit and some do not, of course. Responsiveness has a governance (councillor) and a management (officer) aspect, and sometimes these two aspects are mixed together.
There is also a subtle thing to consider. It is around the question of "who speaks for the Council". Who gives the official word? This relates most importantly to responsibilities within the Council structure, and particularly who is responsible for the decisions that Council makes .Looked at another way: whose head should be in the noose when the public complains about something. On this we have great confusion. The current media policy does nothing to help. Indeed, on this vital matter it takes us in the wrong direction, if it does anything at all.
Basically, elected persons should speak for their decisions and officers for their decisions (this is a part of the governance/management divide). Which means,
We have a long tradition in Porirua City of leaving the chief executive to take the heat for the decisions made by elected people. Councillors, in a mistaken view of their own political interests, like to avoid being off-side with the public. You are unlikely to see them confronting angry mobs. Indeed, most councillors spend a great deal of time trying to ingratiate themselves to others.
Leaving the chief executive to front-up on policy will never work. The citizens come to see the council as "officer driven". They feel they are not engaged with their elected representatives, they feel the councillors are impotent, they blame the mayor, they say there is a lack of leadership, no vision, and they start to throw stones at the Council whenever they can. Around the Council there develops a whole feeling of incompetence, arrogance, and frustration.
The councillors, whenever they hear something negative, can turn the discussion towards the officers. Somehow or other the main problem in the council is that we have the wrong group of officers. They have been their too long, they have their own agenda, they should have sorted it out. The chief executive is not doing his job, they say. And, hence the discussion moves away from those who are really responsible to those who are paid to be there. The level of debate is lowered.
Finally, the current media policy is silent on procedures. Hence, all sorts
of strange things happen and cause excitement. I do not like excitement, well
at least not that kind of excitement.
r
Saturday, February 18, 2006
POSTSCRIPT
Someone says to me that the headline is "how to fix the media policy" and so far all I have done is the diagnosis. That is right. I feel we need to get the objectives sorted out before we go any further. I look forward to debate about these things.
I was delighted that the chief executive of Transit New Zealand accepted my invitation to speak to all the councillors and the public in a Committee meeting (City Services Committee, 16 February 2006). His willingness to build a relationship with us is important. This is the first time ever that Transit's chief executive has attended at our Council.
The community side of the issue was put by representatives of the Paremata Residents' Association. They gave a clear and concise summary of issues.
The result is that the chief executive of the Porirua City Council will:
Cr Murrell began this work in General Business, and the ceo has done much
with Transit recently. However, we need to re-look at our policy and look at
the range of actions open to us.
r
Friday, February 17, 2006
The Vodafone vote is instructive regarding the constitutional matters. A vote was taken at a Committee and I chaired the Committee. The decision was not to charge Vodafone. For the reasons set out in this blog I personally think that we should charge Vodafone. But, I cannot now advocate for that view at the full Council meeting. Instead, my job there is to represent the views of the Committee. I have a role to play in the democratic processes of Council. I have a loss of freedom because I was elected to do a job for the councillors.
What would happen if I did not do this? The full Council meeting would not
work properly, because there would be no-one there to advance the recommendations
of the Committee. The work at the Committee would have been pointless. The
full council would become in effect the Committee.
r
Friday, February 17, 2006
Your Council has agreed that Vodafone can put cell towers throughout the city (subject to the final decision at full Council). We will have a network. Well, Vodafone subscribers will have a network. The rest of us just have towers.
Vodafone is a United Kingdom Company. It is registered on the London stock exchange, but not the Australian or New Zealand exchanges. Very few New Zealanders would own shares in Vodafone. Profits from the use of Council land will transfer automatically to the UK. Yum yum they say in London.
But, back here in Porirua City, developers complain that the development levies they pay for the development of parks are too high. Ratepayers say rates are too high. Residents want to be able to use their parks without having towers present. The green ambiance is lost.
In my view, Council should get
something in return for the commercial use of its assets. However, that view
did not prevail, and I now wait for my next opportunity to advance the argument.
r
Friday, February 17, 2006
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
Someone contacted me to say there is a building owner who charges about $4,000
a month to Vodafone to have a tower on the top of his building. Our network
of say 12 sites might on this basis return to the ratepayers $576,000 a year. We
also need to think of companies other than Vodafone.
r
Please read this and think before you make any decision about re-naming Titahi Bay Road.
[1] Why is this discussion behind closed doors. What is there to hide?
[2] The rules state, you cannot name a road after a living person.
[3] Just because the 'few' of council, are on an ego trip, and wish to be in the limelight, do not be like sheep, and follow blindly.
[4] The vast majority do not want it altered, regardless of what Mr Foley espouses. He has to put the 'spin' on it that he is told to.
[5] Who will end up paying for, signs, address changes, maps, phone books, road guides, stationery etc. The already burdened ratepayer. There is too much 'secret squirrel ' with council, no wonder it is held in such low regard.
So, come Thursday, make a name for yourself, stand up for your electorate, and say NO to the name change. It could be the best thing you have done all year.
Regards, Benjamin R Tredrea
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
Mike Gould runs the new website:
The objects of the Trust are:
(a) To promote and facilitate the implementation of the Pauatahanui Inlet Action Plan (including any amendments made to that plan or any plan adopted in substitution for it) by:
(i) fostering community awareness and support for the action plan;
(ii) fostering community awareness and understanding of the management responsibilities that various management agencies and other bodies have within the inlet and its catchment;
(iii) liaising with various management agencies and other bodies to assist with and facilitate the implementation of the plan;
(iv) supporting, promoting and contributing toward programmes and projects aimed at implementing or supporting the action plan and its vision;
(v) monitoring and reviewing the implementation and effectiveness of the action plan; and
(vi) assisting with any review of the action plan.
(b) To promote and support the development and implementation of an action plan for the Porirua Harbour arm.
(c) To engage in any other activities and processes that are complementary to any of the foregoing purpose in adjacent areas as may be deemed appropriate to the circumstances.
Incidentally, The Guardians of the Inlet also have a web site.
http://www.gopi.wellington.net.nz/
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
New Costings An Irresponsible Nonsense
The new “costings” for the Coastal Route tabled by the Porirua City Council on the last day of the Western Corridor hearings are nonsense. We wonder how much the ratepayers of Porirua have coughed up for this “independent” advice. The fact that the cost is said to include $200 million for litigation during the consent process indicates that the consultants have had to dredge up some bizarre items to get the extraordinary figure being quoted.
Tossing unsubstantiated figures on the table at the last minute is irresponsible behaviour and an abuse of process. The hearings committee should refuse to take any notice of this outrageous attempt by the Porirua City Council to muddy the waters.
For the Coastal Highway Group
Dick Jessup
14 February 2006
The ASB / Main Report Regional Economic Scoreboard collates and compares regional
economic statistics and events.
Common themes for the latest quarter include:
The place to be ...
As always some care is required in interpretation of the regional statistics, many of them being subject to a sizeable measurement error. Hence the preference here to look at a number of regional statistics together.
Hi Roger
Thanks for the email and telephone call.
You are caught in the middle of something and have done your part.
The email is a part of councillors to ceo communications and is thus public.
We are an open, transparent, and accountable City Council. You will remember
when the Dom Post asked for all email between yourself and a councillor - that
demonstrated quite well that such communication is available (in accordance
with the Act). Please let me know if you think otherwise.
I have not heard from John Green.
Thanks and regards
r
Roger Blakeley - PCC wrote:
Robert Cr Green has expressed to me his concern that a personal email
to me
and the Mayor asking for his apology to be recorded and explaining why
(which I forwarded to you as Chair) has now appeared on your blog. Cr Green
has requested that you please remove it. Roger
Wednesday, February 15, 2006
ROBERT COMMENTS
"Wars are Won By Fighting" was the headline in this blog some months ago. Your Council took that call to heart and invested $200,000 of the ratepayers' money in the battle over Transmission Gully. The result was that we could fund experts and punch their messages through. Assumptions about money, earthquakes, and community compliance, were dashed. The Mayor of Wellington now looks very foolish as she advocates that we do not take a strategic approach to land transport, and as she says that the Porirua Council should not seek the truth. Her regional spirit is lacking at this moment.
The Porirua City Council was asked by the Hearings Committee to give a further
presentation. It did this yesterday, and it turned out quite well. Dr Blakeley
also did well on the radio this morning.
r
DOMINION POST STORY THAT PERTAINS
14 February 2006
By CHALPAT SONTI
Transmission Gully could be built for about the same cost as the coastal
highway, Porirua City Council says.
However, that has been rejected by Wellington City Council, which says diverting
funds from other projects is "built on smoke and mirrors".The Porirua council,
which backs the Gully option, commissioned John Rutledge, chief executive of
consultancy Opus International, to cost the coastal highway. He estimated it
would cost at least $950 million, rather than the $730 million previously mentioned
by Transit New Zealand. The Gully road would cost $994 million according to Treasury
estimates, the council says.Wellington City Council, in a submission last night
to the Western Corridor Transport Hearings Committee, says there should not be
any problems getting consents for the coastal highway, which it supports. It
says building the Gully road would bankrupt the Wellington region, because population
and traffic growth predictions show it will never be needed.
From: John Green [ mailto:john.green@paradise.net.nz ]
Sent: Sunday, 12 February 2006 9:48 a.m.
To: Roger Blakeley
Cc: Jenny Brash
Subject: Meeting
Schedule - 10 February 2006
Roger
I note the Meeting Schedule for the next fortnight enclosed with the Councillors Bulletin Issue 144.
In particular I note the meeting times for Committee meetings on Thursday 16/2 and the LTCCP workshop on Wednesday 22/2.
You are aware of my concerns of the deficiencies in the process which led to the changes of committee structures and particularly in the shift of committee meetings from evenings to daytime and the potential for disenfranchisement this had for working councillors.
I recognise there are provisions in legislation for elected representatives to take time out from employed positions however those provisions are a blunt tool and do not recognise the nature of ones commitment to their employment or the responsibilities they have in those roles. You are aware that last year my employer expressed grave concern at the workability of the proposed changes of meetings times.
The lack of depth of the research and consultation, and the intransigent attitude of a number of councillors, have lead unfortunately to a position where next week I am unable to fulfil my elected responsibilities due to my employment responsibilities. I am at a critical stage in the set-up of a new class in a new year and whereas the meeting times of 5.30pm which applied when I stood for election, or even 4.00pm as per my amendment late last year, would have allowed participation, the notified changes to 9.00am and 1.30pm do not.
I therefore ask that you please advise my apologies to the respective chairs of the meetings for 16/2 and 22/2.
Sincerely
John Green
Phone: 238-9358
Fax: 238-9359
Mobile: 027 4494469
Email: john.green@paradise.net.nz
Judi Thanks , I will pass that on to the Committee. You should
be aware that the consequence of the 200m radius from houses appears to be
that it would be impractical for Vodafone to provide coverage in parts of the
City. For example, a very thorough investigation was made of alternative sites
in Titahi Bay as part of the recent public consultation and the best compromise
possible being
the Mana Ave site is about 50m radius from the nearest house. In other cases
the 200m was possible, but if that is a fixed requirement the consequence appears
to be that Vodafone could not establish a complete network in the City and
residents in at least parts of the City would therefore not have the choice
of coverage from that telecommunications company. Regards, Roger -----Original
Message-----
From: Judi Doornbos [mailto:judid@paradise.net.nz]
Sent: Thursday, 9 February 2006 1:23 p.m.
To: Roger Blakeley - PCC
Cc: Euoan (Ccl) Murrel; GenManSuppServ PCC PRAMinutes; John
(Ccl) Green; Margaret (Ccl) Shields; Robert (Ccl) Shaw; Sue (Ccl) Dow
Subject: Thurs 9 Feb - Cellphone towers
This is to advise that at the last committee meeting of the Paremata Residents Association a motion was passed in support of Councillor Ah Hoi's proposal re siting of cellphone towers.
Judi Doornbos Hon Secretary
-----Original Message-----Highlights of the report for the year ending March 2005 (almost a year out of date by the time we get it ) are:
Keep the councillors and the community together by having all planning workshops open to the public. Hence:
r
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Councillor David Stanley is the last councillor to get email and internet access at home. We are all wired.
Hence, the chief executive may now establish a new system to distribute information to councillors. He can simply place it on the internet for the councillors and the community. No longer do we need to wait until the end of the week for a delivery to our door. And, how great it will be for the community to be able to keep up with their Council.
Our community is very literate and involved in Council decision-making. Consequently, the discussions that people will hold with councillors about the chief executive's papers will be informative.
How useful it will be to have the information in a form that
can be accessed years later. Having been on Councils for about 12 years,
my heap of papers is rather large and hence it is very difficult to find anything
from the past. An internet based system will solve that problem for everyone.
Of course the councillors should be given an allowance to assist with their
costs at home (say $2000 per three years), and the agendas should continue
to be printed for meetings.
r
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Community Board members in Christchurch are paid $22,450 a year and the chairpersons
$35,850. Of course we would not have to pay the Titahi Bay representatives
so much. Christchurch is a little larger than Porirua City.
r
Sunday, February 12, 2006
Mana Esplanade is a dangerous place. It is a part of the state highway system and there is uncertainty about how it should be managed. We are about to conduct practical experiments. The arrangement expected by residents was that there would be no through traffic using the kerbside lanes along Mana Esplanade outside of the clearway (busy) hours. There was good reason for the residents to expect that situation.
The road belongs to Transit New Zealand and they will decide on its management. However, the Porirua City Council in its role as a community advocate has taken a stance on this issue. The Council has a policy and the chief executive has been busy advocating for it on our behalf. We now face two questions:
Some will claim that the first question sets out what is already Council policy. The chief executive makes it clear that is his interpretation of our policy (see earlier blog).Without doing some research I cannot be certain about that, and it does not matter. We must face the situation now and if a declaration that this is our policy would assist the sensible resolution of issues, so be it.
Fortunately, Transit New Zealand has accepted the Council's invitation to
address the next meeting of the City Services Committee, and this will provide
useful information, it also demonstrates Transit's preparedness to work towards
a solution.
r
Sunday, February 12, 2006
The internet has changed public debate and the dissemination of information. That change can be seen right here in Porirua City - a much wider group of people can read the views of others, and an historical record builds up.
With regard to our Council and other public bodies: public bodies are paid for by all of us, and everyone has a right to know what is going on and make informed comment. That is not just my opinion, but what is set out clearly in the preamble to New Zealand's official information legislation. Recently, several people have asked that I remove things from the blog, and I have tried to be accommodating. They never seem to object to what I write, but what other people have written. My view is that if something is in public circulation on the internet it is available to everyone. Readers can distinguish for themselves the difference between opinion and fact. Where opposing views appear I will try to provide them. Please do not shoot the messenger.
When the City Council wants to keep something confidential, it places that matter in the public-excluded section of meetings. This must be done in accordance with the legislation. The Council has no other mechanism to keep things confidential. Publicly-excluded matters are not placed on this blog. There are also things that involve me in my role as a council chairperson and they do not appear on the blog.
The views of councillors are treated the same as the views of other people. If you need guidance on the availability of email, reflect on the situation when the Dominion Post asked for the confidential email between the chief executive and Cr Ah Hoy. The Ombudsman forced the release of everything. I said at the time, all it proved was that Cr Ah Hoy writes well. However, it also proves that email involving the council is public.
Finally, let us not get too excited when the
Council or individuals make mistakes. The only people who do not make mistakes
are those who do not do anything. There will always be errors of judgment.
We should just acknowledge them and move on. We do not have to hang anyone
by the neck. And, nor should you think that the reputation of the City is somehow
at stake in this: everyone understands that politics and errors indicate healthy,
vibrant, democratic action. We should be proud of the high level of involvement
in our City's decision-making.
Saturday, February 11, 2006
From the PCC chief executive:
HWTM AND COUNCILLORS
This item missed the Councillors' Bulletin
today, but is to inform you on proposed actions prior to a presentation by
the CE of Transit to the City Services Committee on Thursday 16 February.
On
Tuesday 7 February 2006, I met with Rick van Barneveld, Chief Executive,
Graham Taylor, Regional Manager and Kevin Locke of Transit, along with Inspector
John Spence, Area Commander, Kapiti Mana Police District and Peter Bailey,
to discuss our concerns about traffic and safety issues on the Mana Esplanade
and seek further action by Transit to address the serious concerns that we
and residents have about issues of traffic behaviour and safety and non compliance
with the spirit and letter of the Environment Court conditions relating to
the Mana Esplanade.
Over the last couple of months we have had frequent reports from residents on the Mana Esplanade and St Andrews Road expressing their serious concerns about problems of safety and traffic behaviour. These included:
* Cars routinely exceeding the speed limits.
* Vehicles including trucks driving at speed down the left-hand lane outside of clearway hours, when the conditions of the Environment Court decision required Transit to encourage vehicles to use the centre lanes outside the Transit lane hours. This was a deliberate decision to move traffic as far as possible away from the nearby houses on either side and reduce impacts of traffic noise and vibration.
* Dangerous driving where drivers are weaving in and out of the left-hand lane.
Part of the problem is that relatively few cars are parking when they are entitled to outside of the Transit lane hours. Evidence from residents is that many people are scared to park there because they are afraid of their cars being rammed from behind by vehicles speeding down the left-hand lane. Also, it is hazardous for residents to get out of their driveways. The net result has been that the Mana Esplanade looks like a four-lane expressway, and motorists are treating it as such. That is contrary to the letter and spirit of the Environment Court decision in relation to the Mana Esplanade. Hence, I took this up with the Chief Executive Transit before Christmas and suggested that better permanent markings were needed to clearly indicate to drivers that they should be traveling in the central lanes when they are not eligible to travel in the Transit lane.
The action points that arose out of our meeting with Transit on Tuesday were as follows:
1. Kevin Locke, Transit and Peter Bailey will discuss and resolve the proposed changes to the road marking on the Mana Esplanade. It was proposed that a draft standard that has been developed in Auckland will be used, including the use of sections of the kerbside lane painted green at intervals of approximately 80 metres in both directions. The painted sections will have a taper beyond each intersection to encourage drivers to use the central lane outside of transit lane hours.
2. More 50kph speed signs will be placed.
3. 50kph speed signs will be painted on the road surface at either end of the Esplanade, that is at Goat Point and at the Paremata Bridge.
4. Fixed speed camera will be positioned in the most appropriate place.
5. Transit will look at the size and clarity of the signs that indicate clearway hours and parking available at other times.
6. Transit will develop a communications strategy for further public education to coincide with the implementation of these measures. This will include use of Kapi Mana News and other media. It will reinforce that the Environment Court conditions require Transit to encourage motorists to use the centre lanes outside of Transit lane hours. The Transit public relations manager will coordinate with the PCC Communications Manager Roger Foley.
On behalf of Committee Chairman Councillor Robert Shaw, I invited Rick van Barneveld to give a presentation to the PCC City Services Committee at 1.30pm on Thursday 16th February 2006 on these measures that will be taken.
Regards, Roger Blakeley Chief Executive Porirua City Council Phone: +64 4 237 1401 Fax: + 64 4 237 1443 Mobile: 0275 324 869 Email: <mailto:rblakeley@pcc.govt.nz> rblakeley@pcc.govt.nz
One of the problems at Council is that no one knows what they are supposed to do. Hence, people flap around and strange traditions begin.
We are actually there to conduct the business of the Council. That is what the law says. What is more, the scope of the business of the Council is defined in statute and other official documents. It is also within the oath that councillors must all take when they assume office. In all cases it is about public policy and advancing the public interest within the territory (ie in our case Porirua City). (I will not deal with grants schemes and regulatory matters at this moment.)
When Councillors decided they would like to discuss this blog you are now reading in a meeting they could not! This blog may be about the Council, but it is not Council business. It is a private matter.
Two provisions in Council's Standing Orders make the position clear. One sets out that Councillors must focus only on Council business, and the other sets out that they must not discuss each other (which is the negative way of saying the first thing). The easiest way to see what Council business is, is to look at the terms of reference for the the committee. The personality defects (real or imagined) of councillors is unlikely to be listed. Nor are councillors' blogs mentioned.
Section 113 says Councillors may not impute improper motives to others, or
make offensive remarks about the private affairs of any member of the Council
or its staff. I notice we can make offensive remarks about members of the
public!
r
Saturday, February 11, 2006
It has taken me over 4 hours to prepare for the meetings next week (two major meetings ahead). This is the reading of the papers and thinking about a few problems. I have also made two phone calls to seek information from people in the community. There was one person who rang me about Vodafone towers, and there have been 3 email messages about current issues. I have sent the chief executive one email asking why something I thought we agreed appears not to have been implemented as we agreed. This email to the ceo is the only action that is in my chairperson's role, the rest just mentioned are "ordinary councillor" things.
Last week there were two meetings of the Council that I attended. The first was totally pointless. It cost us all 2 hours and did not "value add" to the business of the council at all. Indeed, it was worst than neutral - because everyone became tired and relationships were strained. That meeting was the Chief Executive's Employment Committee. There were only two items on the agenda: (1) That we note a long list of things that he had done recently, and (2) that we approve the mayor's keeping tabs on the ceo's credit card. Why six people had to spend two hours on those things is totally beyond my comprehension.
The second meeting was a workshop on financial things. It left most of the councillors totally confused. It did deal with some real issues that appear for us, particularly in relation to how we handle depreciation in the accounts and the Porirua Council's decisions not to run balanced budgets. This latter point might alarm you, but it is not actually as bad as it sounds. It is to some extent, and I stress "to some extent" an aberration of accounting and local government legislation. We are not actually going broke. Of course going broke is something you cannot really do when you have the power to tax.
The public might well have been invited to the workshop on finances - it would
have been a more efficient use of everyone's time. I have this morning fielded
complaints from people upset by a meeting the officers held with all the residents'
associations. This meeting was about the long-term, strategic plan. Evidently,
people were not happy because the officers present could not answer questions
that were about political direction. Nor did the meeting seem to get to the
heart of the matter, as it were. Well I have long held views about consultation
meetings, and now is not the time to repeat them.
r
Saturday, February 11, 2006
The new committee system for the Council begins its work in public next week. That is not to say there has not been a great deal of work done already out of the sight of the public. The chief executive has sorted out what advice he wants to give to the committees, and the chairpersons have decided what they will allow onto the agenda for the meetings. The chairpersons have also sorted out what they think is a basic set of motions to be considered at the meetings.
The plan at the moment is to tighten up on the agendas. The councillors are
to focus more on the higher-level, strategic direction of the Council, and
let the officers get on with running the operational side of the Council. To
this end work is being done on the delegations manual. There are also important
changes to be made in relation to Council's communications with the public.
We have to make the Councillors responsible for their decisions, and the chief
executive responsible for the rest. At the moment we have a real mess of officer
and councillor media statements, and no-one knows who is responsible for what.
The result is that no-one is responsible for anything.
r
Saturday, February 11, 2006
Community Board Workshop.
The
Titahi Bay Residents' Association is convening a workshop to provide all interested
with information about Community Boards. In 2006 the City Council is obliged
to review the local body electoral system for Porirua. PCC is asking for submissions
on Community Boards by 28 February . A Community Board in your village community
could benefit local services and advocacy.
The Workshop : 7.30PM, Wednesday,
22 February, Mana Gospel Chapel Hall, Mana Avenue, Titahi Bay.
Thanks,
Don Borrie, 236 6422
Next week the Council will consider a motion to grant Vodafone the right to erect towers in most suburbs of the City. If the decision is to proceed the chief executive will negotiate and conclude a contract with Vodafone. The meeting is to be held at 1.30 pm next Thursday at the Council Chamber.
EDITORIAL: SATURDAY , 04 FEBRUARY 2006
Modern society rests on the contest of ideas, the ability to question
perceived wisdom and to challenge authority, The Dominion Post writes in an
editorial.
Without that contest, and the right to free speech that makes it possible, societies stultify and become entrenched in their beliefs. That freedom to question and to challenge must include the right to be offensive, to affront people's most heartfelt beliefs, even to disparage that which they hold sacred. Otherwise it is an empty freedom.
Our decision to publish the 12 cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed from the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten (Jutland Post) at the centre of the escalating row between the Muslim world and the nations of the West is not one that the newspaper has taken lightly. However, in the clash of values at the centre of the dispute not to publish because of fear of disturbing the sensibilities of Muslims would be to give way in the face of bullying threats. That is what Muslims are seeking to have the Western democracies do with their threats of bombs and trade boycotts.
There is no doubt that Muslims find the portrayal of the Prophet offensive. The Koran is clear that the slander and mockery of Islam and prayer crosses a sacred boundary, and warns that those who cross that boundary will be hurled into "crushing disaster". Mufti Abdul Barkatullah, a member of the British Muslim Council, calls it a no-go area at any cost, adding "the Prophet is held above everything in the universe, over one's own person, family, parents, the whole world. It is less offensive to condemn and vilify God".
That is certainly true – for Muslims.
However Denmark , and the other countries where the cartoons have been reproduced, including in Britain by the BBC and in newspapers in France , Switzerland , Spain , Italy and Germany , are not Muslim countries.
They are democratic, secular countries which are not ruled by religious dogma, whether it be Muslim or Christian.
They have the same values as New Zealand , which includes the right to free speech in its Bill of Rights. There is an acceptance that people can write and say what they wish – except in tightly defined circumstances – even if others are offended by it, and that being shocked can be part of the price for being informed.
The Muslim case is not helped by the hypocrisy when it comes to respecting the religious values of others. No doubt many fundamentalist Christian Americans find it deeply offensive for their country to be constantly labeled the Great Satan.
And, as the German newspaper Die Welt pointed out when it published one of the cartoons, "when Syrian television showed drama documentaries in prime time depicting rabbis as cannibals, the imams were quiet".
There have been earlier cultural confrontations between the West and a resurgent Islam, beginning with the death sentence pronounced in 1989 on author Salman Rushdie for The Satanic Verses, and including the murder in 2004 of Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh after he made a film dealing with violence against Islamic women.
They are confrontations the West cannot afford to lose. The right to freedom of speech is a precious one that has to be defended.
Final note:
The purpose of this blog is to inform those with an interest in Porirua City and the Wellington Region about issues and opinions. I hope that debate develops and in that way our region becomes smarter and the councils make better decisions. The letters copied here are in their original form, and not the way they were published by the newspaper. Most of the letters were sent to the Kapi Mana News, The Porirua News, The Dominion-Post, the Whitby NewsBrief, or the Northerner. The statements from others are not edited or sanitised. A blog is not a newspaper - no attempt is made to ensure there is balanced opinion.
Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor