Home    Contact

The Porirua Wellington Web Blog - December 2005

For current material please visit The Porirua Wellington Web Blog - Current Material

Porirua City Councillor Robert Shaw

STAFF CHANGES ON THE FINANCE SIDE

HWTM AND COUNCILLORS This is to inform you of arrangements that I have agreed to in relation to the general management of the support services functions. As you will be aware, Keith Miller has been attempting to fill the position of Financial Controller following the departure of Andrew Egan. Despite energetic efforts, this has so far proved unsucessful. That is simply a reflection of the very tight labour market. At the same time Keith Miller is facing major workload challenges in other areas such as the financial model and budget for the draft 2006 LTCCP amongst many other things. I have therefore agreed to the recommendation of Keith Miller to appoint Mike Chapman as Acting Manager with responsibility for Information , Administration and Democratic Services, HR, MIS and Property. This will allow Keith Miller to focus on the important issues relating to the finance area. This arrangement will apply until such time as a replacement can be appointed for the Financial Controller position. These arrangements are in effect immediately. Regards , Roger Roger Blakeley Chief Executive

ROBERT COMMENTS - HOW TO REDUCE THE OFFICERS' WORKLOAD (THE ADVICE SIDE)

Over the many years councillors have required more and more of the officers. Chairpersons have the ability to ask officers for a report, and some reports entail much work. Reports are, strictly speaking, advice to the council. This means, again strictly speaking, advice to the full council. There are three things that result in "extra" reports being produced:

• A council committee, unable to make a decision, asks for more on the topic. This may include consultation, or financial information, or business plans.
• A councillor speaks strongly about some important matter and the chairperson supports the councillor's request for a report.
• Officers, unwilling to take responsibility for a decision find it easier to put something to the council and thus to avoid the responsibility.

How do now proceed differently? There are four things that need to be done to reduce the officers' workload:

• Firm business plans need to be seen by the councillors once they have signed off the Annual Plan. Such business plans for each division of the council are produced in some councils but not in the Porirua Council. The ideas is that the councillors come to appreciate that the officers are responding to the priorities signed off by the councillors in the Annual Plan, and that there is no extra capacity. To ask for more is to say something in the Annual Plan can be cut. Some progress was recently made in this direction, however. We have a plan now to plan ahead the agenda of several meetings. On my calculation this a committee meeting can on average deal with one paper every half hour. Hence, a meeting, once every 6 weeks, will deal with five or six matters. The officers will have to plan and deliver accordingly.
• The chairpersons have to stop asking for papers, on behalf of councillors. Both Cr Douglas and I are inclined to say "no". It might be a case of "do not ask for a report as a refusal may offend". Councillors, however, have an important right to information, and we need to ensure they get it. That is also a responsibility of the chairpersons. Whilst absolutely all information should be available, it must be recognised that at a particular moment, when a particular decision is to be made, their is a limit to the amount of information that will be available. In management theory there is a term for this - a manager must satisfice. That means, make a decision without all the information that one might have, but nevertheless, for a host of reasons, you must proceed. You proceed on the minimum amount of information possible to have a sporting chance of success. It is, of course, the nature of life itself.
• We need to explore new ways to facilitate communication between officers and councillors. It is obvious that many councillors do not read the big heap of papers they are sent now. Hence, adding to the paper war is not going to help. What we need is to develop an opportunity for the councillors to informally explore things with officers - but for this to happen when we are all together - hence, to facilitate a more profound level of understanding, and to have more councillors understanding of each matter. This facility needs to be outside of, and extra to, the formal decision-making meetings.
• The chairpersons need to explain the situation to everyone - councillors and officers. We do not want to overwork the officers for no good purpose. Nor do we want to have the committees clogged up with advice that does nothing much.

r
Sunday, December 25, 2005

UNDERSTANDING THE NEW COMMITTEE STRUCTURE - HOW TO USE THE TERMS OF REFERENCE TO MANAGE THE BUSINESS OF THE COUNCIL AND NOT CREATE POINTLESS CATEGORIES AND A WHOLE NEW BURDEN OF REGULAR DECISIONS

Council governance is now managed through:

• The full Council (with all elected members)
• Strategy and Policy Committee (with all elected members)
• City Services Committee (with all elected members)
• Several special purpose committees.

The two major committees are advisory to the full council, although they will have some delegations (which are yet to be determined). The key point about this structure is that the same people are on the full council and the two committees. Which committee makes a particular decision makes no difference at all. Consequently, we need not to be worried about the terms of reference for the two committees. Indeed, they might best be called Committee One and Committee Two.

Consequently, we need to reduce the terms of reference for the two committees to generalisations that allow us the maximum practical leeway. The chief executive should decide what goes to which committee, considering particularly the current work load of the committees. We must not let either committee become overburdened. Of course, the basic breakdown for the committees of "policy" and "implementation" is sensible and should be maintained, but mainly for cosmetic reasons. In essence, everything that is decided by the governance body should be "strategic". In a futile effort to protect ratepayers, and sometimes to exercise democracy, the law sets out some decisions that the full-council itself cannot delegate. The law of local government is not entirely systematic and consistent - the law has us pulling in several contradictory directions at once! There is not much we can do about that, but at some stage, we should change the names of our two committees and generalise their terms of reference.

COMMITTEE WORKLOADS AND THE PLANNING PROCESS - HOW TO GET THINGS INTO PROPORTION, HOW TO GET THE STRATEGIC FOCUS

Another, key consideration is the workload of the committees. There is much to be done on this front. The main role of the Strategy Committee is to develop the key planning documents (Long Term Council Community Plan and the Annual Plan). The scheduled meeting times for that committee are for that purpose. What has just happened is that another whole raft of extra meetings have been called to produce the LTCCP. We must work towards making the planning/budgeting decisions the normal, regular work of the Committee. The raft of extra meetings are needed because of separate parts of the document (sometimes separate policy decisions that the council must make by law) are all separated out.

The officers of council should be able to draft the LTCCP in full if they have four key pieces of information (sign off on these basic points would be made a a normal committee meeting, and should have been proceeded by a consultation undertaken by the officers without the involvement of councillors (this would equip the officers to give proper advice):

1. What is the target level of rates through the 10 planned years
2. What is the basic strategy: growth, consolidation, or contraction.
3. What areas of council are to be developed, held, reduced: environmental protection; water infrastructure; transport infrastructure; etc
4. What are the one or two large projects to be undertaken in the time-frame (projects over $5 million).

The full draft should be presented to the Council in a committee meeting that will take about half-a-day. There are various policies that need to be formally signed off in this timeframe. Of course no sum of money in the planning documents should be less than $1 million. Considering smaller amounts is a management role - dare we say it is "beneath the lofty councillor".

There then needs to be oral submissions that will have to be heard over a number of meetings. By-in-large these meetings can be the normal meetings of the committee, but it may be sensible to schedule some special meetings for the convenience of the residents who wish to make submissions. Follow the hearing of submissions there will need to be a meeting to consider any departures from the draft plan. It is unlikely there will be departures, but it is always possible the public will have changed the councillors collective minds. Remember, no sum of money under $1 million will be considered (we are to think strategically, not in terms of wee projects). There will be some key decisions that should be submitted to specific vote because of their significance (as is the striking of the rates at a slightly later stage). There is no need for a special full council meeting to complete the process. The normal full council meetings scheduled are for major strategic work.
Have a good Christmas, everyone.
r
Sunday, December 25, 2005

OPENNESS IN GOVERNMENT TENDER PROCESSES - UK MODEL

"Extract from UK Department of Trade & Industry

Procurement contract guidelines

B . 6 . 4 Information That Should Be Disclosed

For each contract the following information at a minimum must be released on request:

• the name of the successful tenderer;
• the nature of the job, service or goods supplied;
• the performance standards set (which should be output based);
• the criteria for award of contract; and,
• the winning tender price, or range of prices (minimum/maximum) paid.

Where requests for further information are received it will often be reasonable to disclose the following after consideration has been given to the request:

• the circumstances surrounding the contract;
• the nature of the procurement;
• the general contract terms and conditions, or sections of service level agreements;
• the number of tenders received; and,
• the range of tender bids, where three or more were received.

However, care must be taken to ensure that additional information cannot be deduced from what is disclosed. Also, whilst commercial best practice welcomes openness, it also demands confidentiality to preserve the business interests of competing companies and protect the position of the Department in current or future tendering activities.

Because of the large number of contracts let by the Department (well in excess of a thousand each year), irrespective of considerations over confidentiality, it would be highly impracticable and costly to automatically publish the information in every case. Information should therefore be released only on request or when:

• there is a statutory requirement to publish (applicable to procurement under EU Directives);
• there is a public interest factor (for example services to the public); or,
• Ministers or officials feel that publicity is desirable.

All cases are, of course, subject to considerations of confidentiality."

OPENNESS AND TRUST BETWEEN CITIZENS, RATEPAYERS, AND THEIR COUNCIL

From: John Watson To: Roger Blakeley - PCC Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 10:42 AM Subject: Disclosures
Roger  
Thought you might be interested in this snippet. You will notice what are the required minimum disclosures. I leave it with you to ponder the extent of the PCC's level of accountability.   This coming year I will leave no stone unturned to have PCC come to grips with a transparent association with its citizens and drop the notion that we can't be trusted.

You'll never have the citizens on-side or the councillors working as a team alongside the community while you keep the rest of us at arms length and deny the right to know. The councillors have to give up being a cloistered group with varied agendas who are mostly remote from the communities they claim to represent. Only the Mayor is visible - where are the rest explaining matters so as to assist in creating an informed public opinion? Local government has become so complicated that without councillor/public interplay apathy will ever increase.

It's no use saying "Porirua - it's amazing" from on high; its got to come from the bottom up, at which point graffiti and other ills will almost  disappear.  We have a great store of untapped talent waiting to take part, but unfortunately most give it a pass because of the non-inclusive nature of city governance. All the hard work is done by management - most of the time - with councillors sitting back and being content to be served while others do all the thinking. Where is any original thought coming out of council?

The lack of innovation stifles outside interest and support that could so easily be forthcoming from the community. No wonder we are still arguing the toss about the two major projects that other communities take for granted. Where there's a will there's a way!  
Cheers - John W

ROBERT COMMENTS

Whenever someone seeks a grant from the Council, or seeks to do business with the Council, they must proceed on the basis the Council is a public body. Councils spend money that belongs to others. Accordingly, those who pay have a right to know how their money is spend. Indeed, it could be argued that they have a public responsibility to take a critical interest in how their money is spent. No one is forced to apply for a grant, or forced to do business with the Council. If people do not wish to confront the openness of local government then they should not apply for grants or seek contracts. The public sector is not the private sector - both have legitimate roles and their own rules.
r
Saturday, December 24, 2005

BROMLEY RUBBISH CLEAR UP RECORDED PICTORIALLY

Hi there Thank you for the kind words and all the hard work. You all did to get the bank in Bank in Bromley view cleaned up. As you can see by the photos on my web site. It would have been nice if they had taken all the rubbish away, the bank looks a little better than it did the first time but the job is still very ruff I hope they will come back after the Christmas bark and finish the job as there is still the trees with broken branches and other weeds that have to come out. Well that all from me until next time

The Photo s    http://www.frosty.infogen.net.nz/

I hope you all have a very good Christmas and a Happy New Year; Colin Frost  Phone 021-400-209

PLIMMETON PARK AND RIDE

Sorry Jenny can't help as not on the Transport Committee and have not personally seen any reports/discussion on Plimmerton park-and-ride proposals.   Rgds Chris ----- Original Message ----- From: Jenny Brash - PCC To: Roger Blakeley - PCC Cc: 'Robert Shaw' ; 'John Green' ; 'Sue Dow' ; 'Maureen Gillon' ; 'Maureen Gillon' ; 'Chris Turver' ; Euon Murrell (emurrell@leaders.co.nz) Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2005 3:36 PM Subject: RE: Plimmerton Park & Ride

Roger
Can you or anyone else shed any further light on this before I send a rocket to Natasha Hayes ' boss ( ? ) Dave Watson a t GWRC ? . They have apparently made a unilateral decision (taken outside of the Passenger Transport Committee to my knowledge - do you know any more Margaret or Chris? ) to discard the more expensive extended sub-way option for acces s acro s s the railway line to and from the   proposed P limmerton Park n Ride . T h is t would be so muc h safer for the hundreds of children who would use it after being dropped off to walk to Pl i mmerton School . For th em to have to cross an at - grade X-ing further north with the increased frequency of trains being planned for 1 every 15 mins would be extremely dangerous and it I suspect would not be used . I have never heard anything so stupid! !!! Are they really serious about reducing traffic congestion from school travel traffic - doesn ' t appear so! . If anything is to change parents habits of dropping their children off at the school ga tes with the resultant congestion in Plimmerton and e ncouraging them to use the Park n Ride on the eastern side of the railway li ne by Pla nters they would need to be confident about the safety of their children. . An at grade X-ing north of the station would be absolutely usel e ss and dangerous . What are they thinking of after waiting so long for this - I don ' t believe we should accept being short-changed . Comments please.
Jenny B rash

John You are right. I have just found out that the controlled gates like the new ones in the Hutt that I haven't seen are far superior to what is presently there at Steyne Ave which is what I was envisaging - which is a relief. I don't see your points 4 & 5 as being a concern as I understand that the at grade X-ing with controlled gates that would be needed with the expected increase frequency in trains would not be any where near School Rd but at the north end of the Station as stated in the Memo and would not impact on the Archery Club's activities. I have spoken to the Principal and Chair of the BoT of Plimmerton School about walking buses. I still believe extending the present half underpass to a full underpass is the best long-term solution. 

-----Original Message-----
From: John Green [mailto:john.green@paradise.net.nz]
Sent: Tuesday, 20 December 2005 10:03 p.m.
To: Roger Blakeley - PCC; Jenny Brash - PCC
Cc: Gary Simpson; Peter Bailey; emurrell@leaders.co.nz; 'Chris Turver'; 'Maureen Gillon'; 'Maureen Gillon'; 'Sue Dow'; 'Robert Shaw'
Subject: RE: Plimmerton Park & Ride

Jenny

I do not understand the position you are advocating.

1.  GWRC have investigated the options of accessing the Plimmerton Railway Station from the Domain Car park.

2.  They either appear to have reached, or be in the process of reaching, the conclusion that it is too expensive to extend the underpass the full width of the double track, and presumably Ian Welch's tracks as well, to the Domain Car park so are instead considering an at grade crossing, similar to that at the South end of Steyne Ave but controlled in similar fashion to the new gates at Silverstream.

3.  That proposal therefore has nothing to do with school children at Plimmerton School.

4.  We have rec'd reports from Council Officers which raise serious questions about an underpass at or near School Road due to differences in land levels and the resultant flood risk to properties in and around School Road and Steyne Ave.

5.  We have seen reports which raise serious questions about the safety of parents dropping children off in the Domain Car park for them to then walk from there to school if an underpass were to be constructed.  Council, to my knowledge, has no intention of cancelling the lease of the Archery Club and removing the bund.  This would be required if the access road were to be extended into the Domain to drop the children off safely at an underpass as in the present circumstances there is no clear line of sight from the car park to where the underpass (which has already been ruled out as unviable due to the flood risk) would be located.

6.  I do not see it as GWRC's responsibility to address congestion issues in School Road due to parents dropping their children off at school.  A series of walking buses would be a much more environmental solution, would ease the traffic congestion, and provide the children with much needed exercise.

7.  Whilst I agree that an extension of the underpass under the full width of the tracks to enable access to and from the Domain and Steyne Ave is an ideal solution, if an appropriate pedestrian access with controlled gates were installed that would seem to me to be far preferable to the unacceptable situation that exists at present.

8.  Perhaps I have been the one to misunderstand in which case I would appreciate being brought up to date.

Cheers John Green.  

PORIRUA RECIPE BOOK

Copies of the book are now available, at $15.00, from Pataka, Mungavin Blues Restaurant, Black Rose Florists in North City Plaza and Palmers Garden Shop at Plimmerton Roundabout.  
Susan Druitt Recipe Book Project Team Zonta Club of Mana
Thursday, December 22, 2005

FORMER PCC COUNCILLOR DON BORRIE SENDS A REQUEST FOR ASSISTANCE FOR NORTH KOREA

For more information contact Don, dborrie@ihug.co.nz, I provide snippets here:

Dear Friend,
The attachment contains  information about a small practical project to assist food production on a farm in North Korea. Your support at this Christmas time would be greatly appreciated,
Best Wishes,
Don Borrie
Chairman,
NZ DPR of Korea Society

"Agricultural development is one of the DPRK's biggest needs and is an area in which New Zealand can contribute. The Haksan Cooperative Farm, on the outskirts of Pyongyang, was designated the New Zealand Friendship Farm in March 2004, on the third anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations.

In August 2005, the NZ- DPRK Society was able to send a highly experienced New Zealand agricultural scientist, Mr Peter Wilson, to assess the farm's needs and potential.

...As a result of Mr Wilson's visit, a number of proposals have emerged. Firstly, there is a request to supply three tractors, two for the livestock breeding work team, and one for crop ploughing. Secondly, the farm does not have a truck. Transportation is carried out by bullock cart, tractor and trailer. While it is possible to manage with these, at times operations are severely handicapped. A truck would be used for carting compost and fertiliser to the fields, bringing harvests in from the fields and transporting surplus produce to the market. Thirdly, new management technologies for rice have evolved which could result in a lift of perhaps 2 tonne per ha with no increase in costs. The System Rice Intensification (SRI) was evolved by farmers in Madagascar and, with support from Cornell University in the USA , has spread to some 85 countries. Broadly speaking these systems involve transplanting at an earlier age, planting at a wider spacing and managing the water levels in the field."

There are some other immediate practical ways New Zealanders can assist the Farm. The farm's immediate priorities are textbooks in Korean on practical agricultural topics. A budget of $NZ1,000 would cover this. Plans are under way to buy a tractor in China where it will cost around $7,500. We hope to ship it to Pyongyang by rail. This is a priority as currently the farmers are using tractors designed in the 1930s in the former Soviet Union .

The opportunity to development practical aid and assistance projects in the DPRK is one that New Zealand is well placed to take up. For all the difficulties in working in the DPRK, such an undertaking would make a significant contribution to a marginalised people.

Contributions to the Friendship Farm project can be forwarded by cheque to Stuart Vogel at 74 Parau St, Mt Roskill, Auckland 1003, or directly in to the Project's account at the National Bank, Queen St Branch, Auckland, account number 100 005 060 101 0808 535 00; name of the account “NZ-DPRK Farm Project”.

We hope to provide regular updates on progress through Pyongyang Report, and please feel to ask Stuart Vogel (ph +64 9 620 5595; email: s.vogel@xtra.co.nz) for further information."

COULD NOT RESIST THIS

YOU may talk o' gin and beer

When you're quartered safe out here,

And you're sent to penny-fights and Aldershot it,

But when it comes to slaughter,

You will do your work on water,

And you'll lick the bloomin' boots o' them that's got it.

Now in Injia's sunny clime,

Where I used to spend my time,

A-servin' of 'Er Majesty the Queen,

Of all them blackfaced crew,

The finest man I knew

Was our regimental bhisti, Gunga Din.

It was "Din! Din! Din!

You limpin' lump of brick-dust, Gunga Din!

Hi! Slippery hitherao,

Water, get it! Panee lao,

You squidgy-nosed old idol, Gunga Din!"

The uniform 'e wore

Was nothin' much before,

And rather less than 'arf o' that be'ind,

For a piece o' twisty rag

And a goatskin water-bag

Was all the field-equipment 'e could find.

When the sweatin' troop-train lay

In a sidin' through the day,

When the 'eat would make your bloomin' eyebrows crawl,

We shouted "Harry By!"

Till our throats were bricky-dry,

Then we wopped him 'cause 'e couldn't serve us all.

It was "Din! Din! Din!

You 'eathen, where the mischief 'ave you been?

You put some juldee in it

Or I'll marrow you this minute

If you don't fill up my helmet, Gunga Din!"

'E would dot and carry one

Till the longest day was done,

And 'e didn't seem to know the use of fear;

If we charged or broke or cut,

You could bet your bloomin' nut

'E'd be waitin' fifty paces right flank rear.

'E would skip to our attack,

With 'is mussick on 'is back,

And watch us till the bugles made "Retire",

And for all 'is dirty hide,

'E was white, clear white, inside

When 'e went to tend the wounded under fire!

It was "Din! Din! Din!"

With the bullet kickin' dust spots on the green;

When the cartridges ran out,

You could hear the front lines shout,

"Hi! Ammunition-mules an' Gunga Din!"

I shan't forget the night

When I dropped be'ind the fight

With a bullet where my belt-plate should have been.

I was chokin' mad with thirst,

And the man that spied me first

Was our good ol' grinnin', gruntin' Gunga Din.

'E lifted up my head,

And 'e plugged me where I bled,

And 'e gave me 'arf a pint o' water green;

It was crawlin' and it stunk,

But of all the drinks I've drunk,

I'm gratefullest to one from Gunga Din.

It was "Din! Din! Din!

'Ere's a beggar with a bullet through his spleen--

'E's chawin up the ground,

And 'e's kickin' all around,

For Gawd's sake get the water, Gunga Din!"

'E carried me away

To where a dooli lay,

And a bullet came and drilled the beggar clean.

'E put me safe inside,

And just before 'e died,

"I 'ope you liked your drink," sez Gunga Din.

So I'll see 'im later on,

In the place where 'e is gone,

Where it's always double drill and no canteen;

'E'll be squattin' on the coals,

Givin' drink to poor damned souls,

And I'll get a swig in hell from Gunga Din!

And it's "Din! Din! Din!"

You Lazarushian-leather Gunga Din!

Though I've belted you and flayed you,

By the livin' God that made you,

You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!

Rudyard Kipling

TELECOM IS NEW ZEALAND'S WORST CORPORATE CITZEN (AND THE GOVERNMENT MUST TAKE SOME OF THE BLAME FOR TELECOM'S BAD EFFECTS) - BUT WE WILL FIND WAYS TO SIDELINE TELECOM

ADRIAN BATHGATE'S STORY ON STUFF

"A commercial New Zealand satellite is expected to be in orbit in about five years, after a Kiwi company received Government approval to use the country's dedicated orbital slot. NZLSAT estimates it will cost about $US165 million ($NZ240 million) to get the satellite built and into space. Director Paul Hannah-Jones is confident there is enough interest to make it worthwhile. He expects the satellite to be in service by January 2010. The make-up and services provided by the satellite would depend on deals struck with New Zealand users. Potential customers include broadcasters and communications companies. The defence force has said a satellite could be of 'extreme interest'. "

PLIMMERTON - PARK YOUR CAR, TAKE THE TRAIN

Plimmerton Park & Ride

Further to the query raised at the 8 December RLTC meeting, this memo sets out the current situation regarding the proposed park and ride facility at Plimmerton station.

Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) is investigating pedestrian access improvement options which will allow Plimmerton Domain to be used for park & ride, now that it is accessible from a new roundabout on SH1. Community access between Plimmerton and the Domain's recreational facilities will also be improved.

Two options which ensure pedestrians can safely cross the railway lines and access the station platform and Steyne Avenue are either an extended subway link or an at-grade crossing to link to the north end of the rail station. Some initial design work and costing has been carried out on the extended subway option. The initial estimate for the subway work is $400,000 (additional car park improvements not included). We are currently working with Ontrack and Toll to determine the potential for installing a cheaper at-grade crossing. Details on the feasibility of this will be available in the New Year.

Any further queries should be directed to Rhona Nicol - Manager Transport Procurement Tel (04) 802 0353.

NEW TARGET IN PORIRUA CITY

The New Zealand Defence Force has obtained a resource consent to place a 4.5 meter satellite communications dish on the TGH Building (formerly the Housing New Zealand building). As Porirua citizens have enough trouble gaining access to that building it is very safe from terrorists.
r
Saturday, December 17, 2005

COURT DECISION - WHITBY GOLF COURSE SUBDIVISION

Porirua City Council set $50,000 as the Recreation and Civic contribution to be paid by Whitby Coastal Estates for the "College Rise" subdivision which is the first relatively large subdivision on the former Duck Creek Golf Course land. This was appealed by the owner/developer to the Environment Court and then to the High Court. The result is that the $50,000 figure is confirmed. Theory has it that this money should be spent in Whitby in the vicinity of the subdivision.
r
December 17, 2005

REPLY TO APPALLING DOMINION-POST EDITORIAL

Editor
Dominion Post

The threat you issue in your editorial (16 December 2005), lightly disguised as a “warning”, does you no credit. Decision-making on Transmission Gully is proceeding at the prescribed pace and will be concluded by the August deadline. We must not rush to make the wrong decision.

Building Transmission Gully was the key project in Wellington 's Regional Land Transport Plan and the policy of Transit NZ. Transit established the designations for the road, purchased eleven properties, removed coastal route designations, did geotechnical work, and planted trees to advance the project. What is proposed now is to abandon that work and the strategy that cost us over $5 million to research.

The idea that the cost of Transmission Gully is prohibitive is a red herring. It was always the case that our Region would have to contribute a “user-pays” component to the road. The options are a petrol tax, a loan against rates, or a toll. The ability to toll the road is critical: it means that the private sector will invest, and if the ratepayers were to invest they would ultimately recover their money with interest.

The best way to advance our thinking right now is to obtain proposals for Transmission Gully from Macquarie Bank and three other similar companies. Officials need to analyse these proposals and provide advice to the Hearings Committee. They have until the end of February. Then we will see how much of the Government's allocation is left over for other strategic projects. Your editorial says “officials have calculated that only $115million could be raised through tolls” – that opinion relates to a short period under pessimistic circumstances. As the ASB advertisement says “go to the bank Goldstein”.

Sir Brian is right to explore a continuation of the present policy - incremental developments on the coastal route. But, I suspect he will conclude that we have demonstrated rather well over that last five years that this approach frustrates motorists and damages communities.

Your editorial suggests that this project is about ameliorating road congestion – “bottlenecks”. That has never been the major consideration in our regional strategy, and if you focus on congestion you will never understand why Transmission Gully is vital to our Region. We are, by law, obliged to consider many criteria, set real goals, and be strategic.

Finally, the decisions we face will not be resolved by technical calculations. Our choice is to stay within the fiscal envelope provided by Government, or to use the fund to lever our advance. This decision is at heart about the Wellington Region's belief in itself.

Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor

STARK OPTIONS BEFORE THE COMMITTEE: GRACE OSVALD'S SUBMISSION ON TRANSMISSION GULLY

"Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to speak to you about this important national issue. I would like to expand on some of the key points made in our submission that are at the very heart of the debate on the Western Corridor:

The first and most important point is that the problems along this corridor have arisen primarily because regional and national traffic are forced to share the same road as local traffic. No matter what is done to upgrade the Coastal Route, problems will still exist unless an alternative route is provided for all non-local traffic. This is not about keeping all sides happy or finding a compromise interim solution. THERE IS NO COMPROMISE.

It is as plain as daylight that a full Coastal Upgrade is unconsentable, and a government (who only just scraped into power) would never be foolish enough to allow a call-in to be used. From the line of questioning I have heard directed at other submitters it appears that at least one or more members of this sub committee may be considering other options quite apart from either a full Coastal Upgrade or Transmission Gully.

It seems to me that local community representatives are being put on the spot and asked what interim measures they might be prepared to accept if Transmission Gully could not be built in the short to medium term. What these interim measures are, has not been made clear and I presume are not included in the public consultation document.

The region was asked to comment on a full Coastal Upgrade and also on the Transmission Gully route and the region has overwhelmingly expressed their support for an alternative route North. Trying to cobble together some sort of third interim option because you can see the Coastal Route is unconsentable, means that the region will continue to suffer the current problems along this corridor until eventually the government is forced to admit that what was needed all along was an alternative route that separated regional and national traffic from local traffic.

I would like to draw your attention the Wgtn Regional Council's Growth Strategy, which found that the top two priorities of people in the region regarding quality of life are preserving the natural environment of Wellington and keeping main roads away from communities.

This explains why the people of the region have overwhelmingly rejected the Coastal Route upgrade in favour of Transmission Gully. The region has said they will not accept further destruction of communities, that the social and environmental costs of trying to four lane this road are far too destructive to even consider and SHI must be diverted away from coastal communities as soon as possible, nothing less will do.

I would like to address some of the issues that have been raised by other submitters through this process so far. In particular some of the comments made by the Coastal Highway Group on Monday afternoon. This group made a mention of the large number of supporters they have, which they quantified by stating that 100 or so people turned up at a meeting at Southward last year and all indicated their support for the Coastal Group's position. They also state in their written submission that they have a membership of around 120 people. It doesn't take an Einstein to see that 100-120 people does not a mandate make. Hundreds of people attended meetings held around the region to discuss the Western Corridor Plan almost all rejecting the Coastal Route upgrade.

Make no mistake, there is virtually no support in the region for the Coastal Route. If at the end of this process you conclude that the Coastal Route is still an option you will be ignoring the overwhelming majority and endorsing a plan which will result in destruction on a huge scale and which will still not provide the solution so desperately needed.

I would also like to dispel the idea of the Coastal Highway group that excluding the Mana Bypass and spending money only on the section between Pukerua Bay and Paekakariki will remove much of the opposition to the plan. They have no basis for this claim and fail to realise that the overwhelming majority oppose any further upgrade to the current SHI particularly along this beautiful but fragile part of Wellington's coastline. What is required is a proper solution, which includes an alternative route to the current SHI. An alternative that can be engineered to minimise the effects on the environment and withstand natural disasters. Something that the current road will never be capable of.

I question the credibility of a group that cannot offer. any suggestions on preserving the Inlet from further runoff, have no data to back up their claims, cannot produce written evidence from "experts" they have lunch with and suggest having earthmoving equipment on permanent standby for when the road is blocked due to a disaster. This is not a third world country!

Several submitters have also claimed that Mana Esplanade is now working well after the upgrade and therefore a bypass may not be required. This may be true during peak hours, however outside peak times the five sets of traffic lights are still causing traffic to build up past Paremata Roundabout. Removing the traffic lights is not an option and neither is permanent four laning, which has already been examined in great depth and rejected by the commissioner for the environment in 1990.

Mana- Esplanade currently carries around 30,000 vehicles a day. This figure will rise significantly no matter what growth projection scenario is used. Which then begs the question if a bypass is unconsentable, four-laning is impossible and the five sets of traffic lights are still in place what will the delays along the Esplanade be like then?

Again the only long term solution is an alternative route, which would remove a significant volume of traffic on this road, allowing the current upgrade to be reversed and also enabling the old road bridge to be removed as promised by Transit in the Environment Court.

Finding a solution for the Western Corridor is not about choosing between the unconsentable and the unaffordable. Finding a solution is about getting our priorities in the right order. Finding a solution is about people and the environment we live in. Finding a solution is about the long term not just the short term.

Finding a solution is acknowledging that public transport and roading are both important. That not everyone drives a car, so a good public transport system is vital. Equally many do drive cars and will continue to no matter what other transport options are available.

This is about acknowledging that this is SRI we are talking about. The backbone of the country's roading network, the link between the North and South Island and the major road in and out of the region.

This is about acknowledging that the people of the region have indicated in their thousands that they want an alternative SRI and that the majority agree that in this day and age roads should not take priority over people, communities and the environment.

This is about the commitments Transit has made over the years to both the Environment Court and coastal communities that it has no intention of four-laning the Coastal Route and that Transmission Gully is the preferred option. Transit's attitude may have changed but what hasn't changed is our sense of community and the need to preserve the sensitive environment in which we live.

It not good enough to say "you people bought homes around the main road so you have to accept the consequences". People have chosen to live on the coast because of the quality of life it offers, because they value the sense of well being that living by the water provides. Despite the daily intrusion of SH I we ourselves chose to live by the Inlet because it offers our children a unique and special childhood and place to play. Whether on it's sandy shores digging for crabs in winter or making sandcastles and swimming in its calm waters on a hot summer day.

Local people care deeply for the environment we are lucky enough to live in. Early Maori knew this was a special place when they settled it and all of us who live here today are motivated by a desire to preserve the coast and it's communities for our children our grandchildren and our great grandchildren.

This is not about NIMBY ism this is about common sense and priorities. Compromises will not bring a solution, they will only prolong the problems along this corridor. I repeat what I said at the start that the problems we are here to solve have arisen primarily because regional and national traffic are forced to share the same road as local traffic.

I would urge this committee to listen to what the people of the region have said. We do not want a compromise or another short-term patch up. We want what is clearly needed - a second strategic route that will bring benefits to the whole region. We want to preserve our coastal communities and the environment we live in and love. We want a proper solution - there is no compromise.

Grace Osvald"
Friday, December 16, 2005

COASTAL HIGHWAY HEARING

I was pleased to have the opportunity set out my views regarding Transmission Gully.

In short, what I said was:

1 The Transmission Gully decision has become a test of the Region's belief in itself. There are decisions where compromise is impossible or foolish, and in these cases you have to step forward. The issue is more one of confidence than of technical matters.

2 The allocation of the funds to us by Government in two sums, one tagged for specific projects, is most unfortunate. In particular the Granada shortcut is not a strategic upgrade and it is difficult to see why it should be given pride of place in the Region's transport plans. It did not even appear in the third strategy the Region wrote.

3 Transmission Gully has always had a "funding gap" and that gap must be filled by private money. There has to be an element of user-pays in Transmission Gully .People in the region are going to have to contribute through petrol taxes or a loan organised by local government.

4 The good news is that any money invested locally can be recovered from users by having a toll.

5 The Committee can hardly make any decision unless it has some statements from major toll operators such as Macquarie etc. We still do not have the basic information needed to make the decision.

r
Thursday, December 15, 2005

NOTICE THIS MEDIA STATEMENT THAT APPEARED TODAY AND IS ABOUT A TOLL ROAD - OUR PROJECT IS TINY!

"A MACQUARIE Bank-backed consortium is set to win control of a major French motorway after been selected as the preferred bidder for Autoroutes Paris-Rhin-Rhone (APRR).

The French Government announced a consortium comprised of Eiffage SA, Macquarie Infrastructure Group (MIG) and Macquarie European Infrastructure Fund (MEIF) has been named as the front bidder for its 70.2 per cent stake in APRR.

Companies from France, Spain and Australia were selected for a French motorway privatisation which will raise 14.8 billion euros ($23.5 billion) for strained public finances."

HOW TO MAKE THE COUNCIL WORK BETTER - THE CHALLENGE FOR THE NEW CHAIRPERSONS

Ever since I have been on Council I have thought the management of decision-making could be much improved. To much time is spent on minor matters, and it is very difficult for the Councillors to see the strategic importance of things. The context of decisions is lost.

Now, at last, we have some movement towards a better system. Of course it is upsetting people. The classic signs of change are there: we have the strong opponents, who think they are personally losing out. We have the confused, those who seek the security of the old system. And, true to the Porirua style we have the councillors who cannot focus on what is best for the City but prefer to keep up their interest in personalities and themselves. Allowance has to be made for all of this - as the Kipling poem "If" says "and make allowance for their doubting to".

The plan is to have just two committees of Council: Policy Committee, Implementation Committee. All Councillors will be on both Committees. It is radical stuff. There are several things that will need to happen if the new committee-of-the-whole system is to work.

It is going to involve a whole new relationship between the governance and management sides of Council. We are going to make mistakes and learn things along the way. It is the sort of change that can only occur by showing people how it works, telling them will never be enough. Along with the basic move to a committee-as-a-whole system, we might usefully consider the following:

1. The management of the agenda's is going to have to change. The chairpersons will have to give a strong lead on priorities and the relative importance of things. We are going to need a rationing system for the papers of advice.This will have the good effect of reducing the amount of policy advice Councillors receive, but make the advice we do get better.
2. The delegations procedures will need to become much more proficient. The delegations register has to be re-written to make accountability procedures much stronger and more transparent.
3. The distinction between advice and decision responsibility needs to become stronger.
4. Papers of advice should be of two pages maximum. This will be a challenge for our officers, but it can be done.
5. Chairpersons will have to be move involved in the shaping up of the meeting agendas. The Council's decision making will need to be drive off a schedule of papers planned well in advance. This is a step towards the idea of Business Plans derived from the Annual Plan.
6. We must break the tradition of legalism. By this I mean we are far to sensitive to what the law says about local government decision-making and the hard line literal interpretations make us waste time and effort. Such an approach is unlikely to produce a good result. We must use good practice in management/governance terms - not legal algorithms.
7. The motions themselves need to be better written. This is the responsibility of those who move the motions, and hence the responsibility of the chairpersons. The elements of motions need to be clearer - what, by when, who, how much money can be spent.
8. Motions that say "note this" or "receive that" look harmless, but more importantly, they waste time.
9. The foolish tradition of focusing on who is at what meetings has to be replaced by the older tradition: the chief executive calls meetings and those who wish to appear do so. The constant personal focus on who goes where needs to be seen for what it is - personality politics. We are running a Council not a family dinner.
10. The leadership of the chairpersons on issues will have to be much stronger - this means, they must put each motion in context. Our officers seldom do this well. If the chairperson does not give this lead the discussions tend to meander.
11. Opportunities for Councillors to shine in public have to be generated through a new approach to Council's media releases.
12. Councillors must be made to feel they have a genuine responsibility for the Council. This is probably the major challenge for the new chairpersons. There are several techniques that relate to this.
13. Support for councillors learning about governance and management by providing grants to assist them to access tertiary courses.
14. Councillor led training on governance.
15. Automation of the management process for the sending of councillors to conferences. Needs policy and delegation.
16. New technology is needed to make the Standing Orders available to everyone. Hook a laptop up to the screen. Have the Standing Orders on the laptop in a pdf file and use the search facility in Adobe to locate relevant Standing Orders when there is a dispute.
17. New technology needs to be used in the meetings themselves to focus the Councillors on the decision being made and speed up general communications. The motions should be displayed on a screen, from the meeting secretaries laptop computer. Any motions from the floor can be typed in and immediately shown on the screen also.
18. Use visual means to rapidly indicate where we are in processes (eg the LTCCP process), also to provide key information to assist with decision-making.
19. The new chairpersons have to lead the councillors in the education and training needed to bring us into the modern world and produce good decisions for the City. The officers cannot lead this process. The range of topics is very wide - there are basic questions about Porirua, management, and governance.

On the positive side of the ledger: the chief executive and his team are very well disposed towards the changes. They are are at times demoralised and frustrated by our recent history and wish to see professional standards established.
r
Tuesday, December 6, 2005

RECYCLE GLASS - A GOOD IDEA IF IT IS PRACTICAL

New Zealand’s glass recycling capacity has been reached, and it’s costing local councils and ratepayers around the country. Its clear that new ideas are needed to solve this problem.

Efforts to encourage recycling have paid off, and Kiwi’s have proven keen to do their bit for the planet. Unfortunately, recycling glass is no longer economically viable. It wasn’t so long ago that glass bottles could be returned to the retailer for a refund of a few cents. These bottles would be washed and reused. This small financial incentive was the cornerstone of a simple and effective waste reduction scheme. Had bottle deposits been retained, the current glass recycling crisis would never have happened. The reintroduction of bottle deposits would offer a commonsense solution to this problem. It would encourage participation in waste reduction, drastically cut the burden on recycling facilities and landfills,and I don’t think you’d see too many discarded or broken bottles lying around the streets. Last week the Nelson City Council's policy committee decided to support a community led proposal that Council should advocate for a return to bottle deposits, linked to bottle washing and reuse. Bottle deposits are an effective waste reduction method. It’s time to bring them back. Bottle Deposits:

• Provide an economic incentive to redeem bottles which increases return rates, reduces litter & minimises stress on landfills.Save's ratepayers and local authorities the cost of collecting and recycling or disposing of bottles. • Mean less glass in landfill, more natural resources conserved, energy saved & greenhouse gases reduced.
• Offers revenue generation for local authorities or kerbside contractors.
• Means that the cost of a product's waste are the responsibility of beverage producers and their consumers, not ratepayers.
• Create new jobs in the recycling and retail industries and help children, community groups, etc… to raise money.
• Reduce the amount of broken glass in playgrounds and parks, resulting in fewer cuts and lacerations for kids. Container deposit legislation is a central government responsibility, but local councils and ratepayers are bearing the burden of the current uneconomic and inefficient system.

We thus ask you to consider supporting the move by nelson councillors to advocate to the lgnz and local govt and environment ministers for a return to bottle deposits and reuse as a solution to this problem.
thank you Duncan Eddy
Monday, December 5, 2005

I WAS ASKED WHO WOULD HAVE BEEN ELECTED IN THE NORTHERN WARD IF THE SYSTEM HAD BEEN FIRST-PAST-THE-POST

According to an internet source that I have copied above: Kevin Watson, and not Maureen Gillon, would have been on Council had we used the old system of voting. I was the only person elected in the first round.
r
December 3, 2005

USEFUL COMMENT FROM NICK LEGGETT

Robert, my friend. I know you are always happy to hear the other side of the argument on things.  

But first a correction. BOTH you and Euon were elected on the first round as you both exceeded the quota (which was about 1068 from memory). The official count stats will show this to be the case. Shaw and Murrell were elected at the same time on iteration 1.  

NOW for the other side of the argument. One is drawing a very long bow to attempt to translate an STV 1st preference result back to an FPP result. Do you want to know why?   Single Transferable Vote is just that - a single vote. And the system is proportional. So voters get only one vote to electing their 5 city councillors in the northern ward. That one vote either goes to elect someone, be transferred to another candidate to help get them elected OR is extinguished. While it's easy to say, 'Watson would have won under FPP' that is naive in the extreme. STV gives far more weight to candidates that normally wouldn't have a chance. Kevin was a Labour candidate, generally not as popular in the north as elsewhere.

In the 2001 election the quota for election in the northern ward for the least highest polling candidate (yourself on that occasion) was 53% of the vote. This was reduced to about 17% for Maureen and Kevin in 2004. I have little or no doubt that Kevin wouldn't have been within a thousand votes of being elected under FPP because it's highly unlikely that 50% of Northern voters would tick a Labour candidate for council. Maureen on the other hand did exceptionally well on 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th preferences as is evidenced by her leap-frogging two candidates to gain election. Kevin just couldn't match that. This suggests that she would have done far better in a FPP election (as she did in 1998 and 2001 polling 2nd and 3rd respectively) where people have 5 votes to use up.  

Also interesting to note in the three wards across the city where candidates came on the first preference compared to what place they were finally elected:    

Northern Ward

Shaw 1 and 1

Murrell 2 and 2   

Dow 3 and 3                    

Green 4 and 4                    

Gillon 7 and 5                    

Watson 5 and 6

Eastern Ward        

Ah Hoi 1 and 1                    

Fagaloa 4 and 2                    

Palmer 2 and 3                   

Rangi 3 and 4                    

Stanley 5 and 5                   

 Manu 7 and 6

Western  Ward

Douglas 1 and 1                  

Waters 3 and 2                   

Kelly 4 and 3                  

Lavery 2 and 4

Regards, Nick
Thursday, December 8, 2005

MARK WHALEY'S COMPLAINT - CELL TOWERS IN THE SUBURBS - IT IS NOT JUST THE PUTTING RIGHT THAT COUNTS

Mark Whaley, citizen of Titahi Bay, asked the Prime Minister about the establishment and operation of a cell tower in Titahi Bay. The Hon David Benson-Pope, Minister for the Environment, wrote back (3 November, 2005) saying that the Porirua Council had complied with the law. He does not mention that the Porirua Council actually wrote the law that pertains.

The Minister's reply hardly likely to satisfy Mr Whaley. Looking into his question, we can see that he really wants to know how it can be that a company can intrude in a suburb, create concerns about safety, and produce a monstrosity for us all to view. The problem is the District Plan does not protect the residents. Cell towers are "permitted" activities in our suburbs, and that means that they can be hoisted up into the air without warning. The Council is doing well in its amelioration, but altering the rules must be a top priority also. The consultation now being undertaken on cell tower policy is just about cell towers on Council owned land - we need to fix the rules as well and at this moment no progress has been made on that project at all. Mr Whaley might like to ask the Minister for the Environment some other questions: what provisions do the District Plans of our Councils throughout the country have regarding cell towers in suburban areas? Might the Minister suggest how we can better manage issues of aesthetics?
r
Saturday, December 3, 2005

MORE CELL TOWERS ON THE WAY - THE PORIRUA COUNCIL MUST PLAN FOR THEM ALL

"Cellphone deal adds a third choice   03.12.05
By Adam Gifford
  A third choice for mobile phone users may soon be on the way, with Econet Wireless New Zealand signing an agreement with Chinese equipment supplier Huawei Technologies to pilot a W-CDMA network in Auckland.

The third-generation spectrum for the network comes from the Hautaki Trust, which holds it as part of the settlement of Treaty of Waitangi claims to radio spectrum.

The pilot - announced yesterday at the annual meeting of Hautaki's parent body, Te Huarahi Tika Trust - will involve 10 sites and a switch in central Auckland, with installation and testing due to be completed by April.

Econet has registered the telephone number prefix 0281 to its system.

The initial agreement covers up to 410 sites in four cities, indicating the venture will need a roaming agreement with an existing carrier - Telecom or Vodafone - to guarantee national cover.

It is understood the total cost will be around $120 million."
- NZ Hearld

CONTRASTING DECISION-MAKING TECHNIQUES - SOMETIMES PCC NEEDS THE AFRICAN APPROACH

"In order to address this issue, I have decided to do it the African way. In traditional
African meetings (imbizos) which are usually held under the trees in rural areas,
African men will always cite many examples from their previous experiences in order
to justify their suggested solution to the issue before them. It is very common in such
meetings to hear old men (in African thought seniority is always associated with wisdom,
not formal education) citing other experiences and examples before offering a direct
solution to the issues before them. This is because African traditional meetings are not
usually rushed and interrupted by points of order, or time up or calls for votes. Decisions
are also reached by consensus after long discussion and this approach is also intended to
accommodate as many diverse views as possible." - Itumeleng S. Mekoa

When the Council considers its most broad strategic goals, the African approach to decision-making may be better than our current meeting format and vote. The African way has similarities to the marae. The point that I am making is that the decision-making method must be selected to match the task (the nature of the decisions to be made). Council has only one approach to making decisions, and by magic everything is supposed to fit that approach.

I have suggested meetings of (say) 40 people, that will bring the councillors into direct contact with the community. The point of them being that they will actually make the decision - they are not a form of consultation, they are the real decision-making deal.
r
Saturday, December 3, 2005

HOW TO BUY LAND FROM THE COUNCIL

Find a small reserve, preferably handy to your home, and make an offer.

Council has many properties that sit idle and they become targets for those who want to make a profit or extend their own empire. I can cite some examples where people have made great killings. One involved the selling of a property by mistake. Recently, Councillors went to look at such a piece of land between Awatea Street and Jackson Terrace. Someone has seen it sitting there an now wants to buy it. The Council has the land pending its development "one day". It was part of a compensation package given to the community by a developer.

My view is that any sale must be on the open market. Council should be proactive in its management of assets and should move to sell things, not wait passively for offers. Residents Associations should check out all the properties Council owns in their area and decide what they think should happen in the interests of the community. It is usually sensible to vest Council land as "Local Purpose" reserves under the Reserves Act. That way the Council is obliged to have a management plan for the reserve. I have asked that the reserves management plans be put on the Council website, but they have not appeared as yet.

I once had a copy of the Asset Register for the Council - but it is very dated now. Interesting reading. I have asked for another copy and others might do the same. Again, it is a document that should be on the internet.
r
Friday, December 2, 2005

HOW WE VOTE - IT IS TIME TO DO THINGS DIFFERENTLY

Voting technology has changed. The system used in the Porirua City Council was devised when Parliament was devised in England. Basically, there are three levels of accuracy in the recording of votes: the voices, the show of hands, and the Division.

The Division requires that the votes be recorded in the minutes, and in Parliaments, elected people in the good-old-days had to walk through designated doors for "yes" and "no". On the Porirua Council a Division requires that councillors raise their hands and the most senior officer present says the names of the councillors in turn around the table, whilst the secretary writes down the names. It is a process that takes time. Well done, it can add good drama to the Council.

In the distant past I have used the Division as a mechanism to make a political point. If one councillor calls for a "Division" there must be a Division (this rule is an ancient right). So what happens when a councillor, disgruntled about something serious, calls for a Division on every vote - they make a strong political point, and upset people (which is the same thing, looked at from different places). Pity Mayor John Burke, but poor John Seddon who as chief executive had to keep standing up to give the names of councillors. Frequently, 12 of them for something and Borrie and Shaw against. Debates were much tougher in those days - Seddon, Burke, and Borrie were seasoned and competent debaters with a wide knowledge of local government. Also, the Labour Party Caucus was active and had a majority on Council. If you had not memorised the Standing Orders, you did not stand a chance. As mayor, John Burke would time our speeches with one of those clocks that I thought were designed for eggs. Generosity was shown when he allowed you to finish the sentence when your time was up. There were sometimes threats to call the police, and there were sometimes threats of legal action against councillors. I must admit I enjoyed it all greatly and one radio announcer said Council meetings were better entertainment than the movies - that swelled even further the gallery that was often full in those days, as people came to watch the action. I was never removed from the Chamber, although other councillors were, along with the occasional member of the public. When I went on to the Regional Council, I was surprised at how relaxed and philosophical they were.

Many councils today arrange the vote differently. They use a technology. Each councillor has a wee box with three buttons - "yes", "no", "abstain". How each councillor votes is shown on a screen as the event happens. There are several important advantages of this system:

• It saves time.
• It is accurate.
• Councillors are clearly accountable for how they vote.
• Recording is much easier.
• Councillors like seeing their names up in lights, and thus their proper participation in the decisions.
• The public starts to look for trends.
• Divisions are eliminated, because every vote has the characteristics of a Division.
• It is particularly appropriate for larger groups (which is what we now have with our committees of the whole).
• It makes for interest in the gallery - and thus contributes to our effort to involve more people in local government.

As part of the current reform of decision-making procedures at Council, I advocate electronic voting. The disadvantage is that we will not have the drama of the Division.
r
Thursday, December 1, 2005

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.

Robert Shaw
Porirua City Councillor