Brownlee moves to kill Chch democracy

91 comments on “Brownlee moves to kill Chch democracy ”

• Comments are now closed

1. mickysavage 1

   21 December 2011 at 8:27 am

   In Brownlee’s twisted world complaints about a $70,000 dollar a year pay rise for one of his mates may be considered to be a crisis.  But not in the real world.
   • hs 1.1

     21 December 2011 at 8:34 am

     http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/5664431/3800-trip-for-Christchurch-council-chief

     Between the waste in local government and central government who know’s we could probably put a big dent in our overseas borrowing.
   • grumpy 1.2

     21 December 2011 at 9:42 am

     It’s not just the CCC CEO salary that’s the issue. It is still only HALF of what Sutton got when he was CEO of Orion. Sutton dropped several 100K to take the job at CERA on half a mill.

     Look at the CEOs of Council owned businesses – Orion, Christchurch Airport etc. and you will see that the CCC CEO salary is chicken feed.
     • John D 1.2.1

       21 December 2011 at 10:54 am

       This may be true, but it comes at a time when people in ChCh are paying double rates because they can’t live in their own property.

       The fact is, the CCC CEO is appointed by an ostensibly democratically elected body. If you don’t pay your rates, you get fined or sent to jail eventually.
2. Colonial Viper 2

   21 December 2011 at 8:31 am

   Christchurch: this is what you get when you vote in Gerry, and vote in John Key.
   • Andy-Roo 2.1

     21 December 2011 at 1:27 pm

     Don’t blame me for that. I did not vote for these assholes.

     I also donated to the Greens a couple of times, and did volunteer work during the campaign.

     I know that this is a pretty weak reed to offer up – but it’s all I’ve got.

     I don’t even want to think about what most of my neighbours did – let alone try and explain it
   • Dr Terry 2.2

     21 December 2011 at 4:34 pm

     It is utterly incredible and incomprehensible that Christchurch so badly wanted National back (did the love affair with Key even go THIS FAR?)
   • Populuxe1 2.3

     21 December 2011 at 5:08 pm

     With respect CV, it’s what you get when you don’t vote at all. And when a big chunk of local Labour supporters have been forced to move elsewhere. And when the local swing voters are still very much traumatised and suffering from the kind of disaster psychology that trends to the conservative and the status quo. I live in Christchurch (and voted Labour) and the vote turn out doesn’t necessarily add up to a whole lot of National love. Don’t hate the sinner, hate the sin – though I have yet to actually meet anyone in Ilam who did actually vote Brownlee.
3. Grumpy 3

   21 December 2011 at 8:36 am

   Heard rumors about this. About time, the council has become a bloated monster, holding back the rebuilding.
   • vto 3.1

     21 December 2011 at 8:46 am

     Yes mr grumpy you are right and wrong. Council has tended towards bloatancy but its people work hard and have an invaluable institutional knowledge.

     Whenever I come across “difficulties” with the Council it stems from them being bound by Wellington-born legislation and nothing else. So when Brownlee and any other fool says “oh blah de blah … Council is just slow and difficult … blah blah rant” they are clearly ignorant of the reasons – the reason is law from Wellington.

     One example – people being evicted from their rockfall-prone houses in the hills. Council is required by law to do this and if it does not then they are in breach f the law themselves. Those complaining about the Council’s actions should, if they had any brains on the matter, be complaining to the central government about their laws and requirements.

     Fools with power – the most dangerous of the lot.
     • grumpy 3.1.1

       21 December 2011 at 9:36 am

       vto, I think I am right and right……..

       There are many cases of bloating in the CCC after the earthquake. Many mid level staff, made redundant in earlier restructuring have been reemployed on inflated salaries in roles way beyond their expertise. Money has been wasted, not only squandered by EQC and CERA but also mainly by the City Council.

       I uinderstand there is huge conflict between CERA and the CCC – guess who will win? Sutton or Parker????
     • dave brown 3.1.2

       21 December 2011 at 10:32 am

       Council is just transmission belt for Disaster Capitalism. Which is use the earthquake to restructure ChCh for most benefit to capital. Most of councillors agree with it because they benefit. The so called natural disaster didnt kill anyone. Capitalist profits-before-people which ensured that good planning and safety standards were lacking, did. The NZ ruling class wants to restructure ChCh at most profit and least cost to itself. People do not count unless they are needed as workers, and even then at the least cost to capital. Its a microcosm of class war in NZ. Time that the working class organised to fight this war and stopped pissing around blaming victims and sucking up to the enemy.
   • Colonial Viper 3.2

     21 December 2011 at 8:50 am

     Hmmm hasn’t occurred to Grumpy that standards, consents, and audits helped saved hundreds of lives during the Christchurch earthquake. Blame Gerry Brownlee mate he has ultimate power over Christchurch and therefore ultimate responsibility for why fuck all has been done to rebuild the city.
     • grumpy 3.2.1

       21 December 2011 at 9:44 am

       Bullshit, any building requirements were made by Central Government. In fact lack of enforcement by CCC probably cost lives.
       • ghostwhowalksnz 3.2.1.1

         21 December 2011 at 10:41 am

         Unfortunately CCC seems to have been cavalier in the their earthquake preparedness. From the recent building in liquefaction areas to laxity about house building consent standards.
         • Andy-Roo 3.2.1.1.1

           21 December 2011 at 1:42 pm

           I have some visibility of what the developers who were pushing the opening up of areas like Bexely did in order to get housing developments approved.

           It is very easy to blame the council for what happened but council staff and councilors were faced with multi year legal processes associated with reviewing, and approving these applications.

           Many of the consultants working on these submissions, and the council staff reviewing them knew exactly what the issues were, and how incredibly stupid it was to build in these areas

           Looking at Bexley in particular, the applicants just kept on escalating the claims and delaying the process until they hit a sweet spot in the process where they had a set of councilors and some key council staff that were prepared to accept some pretty dodgy engineering reports from consultants who should have known better.

           Ignoring the advice of the majority of their own internal planning and engineering staff, the council then turned around to support the application before the environment court.

           This was a major WTF moment for lots of staff at the council.

           Where does the blame reside? Sure the council ultimately did not do their job – no argument. But the applicants must surely bear the lions share of the blame. They saw report after report after report that said that what they were proposing to do was just plain bone headed stupid.

           But I bet they made plenty of money, so they got their payoff, and can now blame the poor saps CHCH city council for their moment of weakness.
   • stephen 3.3

     21 December 2011 at 9:08 am

     Have also heard many rumours about this happening here though more consistently hearing that it is Parker that is at the heart of the problem rather than Brownlee’s “some councillors”. Keep hearing that communications and replies from Parker to other parties aren’t the most forthcoming and are slowing things down.

     Still whatever the cause of slowdowns mentioned in rumours by far the biggest hold up in getting things rebuilt still seems to be insurance issues but Brownlee has shown no interest in intervening in that area.

     Personally, as a Christchurch person born and bred and still living here, I’m more than happy for the rebuild to not be rushed and for it to take the time that it needs to be done right with full consultation and discussion with any and all relevant parties. The decisions made now will effect the city for decades to come so should be well considered in a democratic fashion even if it does take a bit longer. In the long term it will be the best thing.
4. vto 4

   21 December 2011 at 8:38 am

   I just did a wee post on open mike…

   You may also wish to consider another rumour gathering momentum – that homes about to be red-zoned on the rich Port Hills will be paid out not by the lowly 2007 government valuation like those poor suburbs in the east but by higher pre-earthquake market value.

   Won’t that be a doozy.
   • hs 4.1

     21 December 2011 at 8:56 am

     If that’s the case a riot would be a reasonable response, along with some effigy immolations.
   • grumpy 4.2

     21 December 2011 at 9:39 am

     vto, I think that is highly unlikely, our “refugees” have a house on the hill and the biggest issue they have is no communication from anyone, EQC, Fletchers, Insurance, Council, CERA etc. etc.

     I think their 2007 valuations were pretty good……………………
   • Populuxe1 4.3

     21 December 2011 at 5:12 pm

     Very strange things have gone on – such as the rumour that damage in Merivale was deliberately under-reported so as not to effect property values. There has been a distinct sense of Have and Have Nots demarcation in the air.
5. Jimmie 5

   21 December 2011 at 8:40 am

   Perhaps he is not killing democracy as much as killing bureaucracy. I’m all for councils being told to get their crap together – having suffered a number of times unreasonable waits for building consents etc.

   But when it comes to rates demands then oh ho the boot is on the other foot and its pay by the due date or else we’ll whack ya with penalties and/or debt collectors.

   The more the paper pushes can be encouraged to cut their 2 hour lunch breaks down the better I reckon.

   Silly Question: Did you ever wonder why you can’t get a paper pusher on the phone after 4;30pm?

   Sad Answer: Hmm: maybe they don’t want anything urgent to spoil their 4:45pm clean up and knock off time.
   • Colonial Viper 5.1

     21 December 2011 at 8:45 am

     Wow, what an irrelevant fantasy driven anti-public servant tirade! Thank goodness for “bureacracy” protecting the citizens of Christchurch with building standards and consents!

     You know what you just did? If frontline Christchurch City Council staff are as shit and lazy as you say – IMO most do an excellent job – why back Gerry Brownlee in giving their manager and CEO a $70K performance bonus?

     Gee you are a loser! I thought it was supposed to be pay for performance you believed in, not pay for poor performance!

     Yet you are backing yet another massive pay increase for a CEO who lets his staff get away with “2 hour lunch breaks” lol seems like it is your Right Wing born to rule attitude which is the problem, lets see you grow a pair and demand the CEO get pay cuts until he does his job and sorts out all those ‘issues’ you’ve identified.
6. Pete George 6

   21 December 2011 at 8:46 am

   creating a crisis,

   Brownlie may be big but I don’t think he’s capable of causing earthquakes.

   I know the implication is post quake but crisis conspiracy crap won’t help Christchurch.
   • vto 6.1

     21 December 2011 at 8:48 am

     Pet, I thought you were a politician. You are a fool if you think politics and its opportunities are absent in Chch.
     • Colonial Viper 6.1.1

       21 December 2011 at 8:51 am

       PG knows full well about ‘disaster capitalism’ he is (a small) part of the machinery.
   • Pascal's bookie 6.2

     21 December 2011 at 8:53 am

     Watcha reckon about this here government’s notion that if things get a bit tricky on account of democracy, then the thing to do is scrap some democracy?
     • Pete George 6.2.1

       21 December 2011 at 9:13 am

       I’ve got concerns about that. It’s an important issue that the democratic process has full scrutiny.

       Putting’deliberate crisis’ conspiracies into the debate detracts from the things that deserve attention.
       • Ant 6.2.1.1

         21 December 2011 at 9:52 am

         Yeah too bad it’s a well established technique for politicians to get what they want.
       • Colonial Viper 6.2.1.2

         21 December 2011 at 9:59 am

         PG’s idea of supporting democracy is to criticise what bloggers say while letting the likes of Brownlee get away scot free. Its as illogical as it is facile.
         • Pete George 6.2.1.2.1

           21 December 2011 at 10:07 am

           That’s not what I’ve said at all. If bloggers weren’t so over the top with some of their rhetoric the important things would get better attention – and be taken more seriously.
           • Colonial Viper 6.2.1.2.1.1

             21 December 2011 at 10:10 am

             So why are you drawing even more attention to the ‘over the top’ things that bloggers are saying???

             Meh.
           • KJT 6.2.1.2.1.2

             21 December 2011 at 10:34 am

             Yes. Pete!
       • Pascal's bookie 6.2.1.3

         21 December 2011 at 10:04 am

         Well if you think it’s such a big distraction, I reckon the thing to do would be to ignore the shit out of that sunovabitch and talk about the thing you reckon is concerning and important.

         But that’s just me.
7. Craig Glen Eden 7

   21 December 2011 at 9:02 am

   I have just spotted a potential carrier advancement for Gerry, he can have all the rice he can eat and 1 million troops at his disposal. Imagine the fear in the world media if they knew he was applying.
8. vto 8

   21 December 2011 at 9:04 am

   It has to be said that at least Brownlee has moved things along at a reasonable clip. The means are the issue. The ends are being achieved.

   And with much of most of Chch the speed of recovery is one of the most important factors.

   But at what cost ..?
9. ad 9

   21 December 2011 at 9:13 am

   This may well be the groundwork for a full local and regional government amalgamation in Canterbury beginning next year.

   We will recall that the core reason given by central gvoernment for amalgamating Auckland was that the politicians were unable to speak with one voice. From there, the reform process was swift and hard, and within 18 months, complete. Show that any political dissent on a Council actually means governmance failure requiring Ministerial intervention, and as a Minister start from there.

   With Environment Canterbury still bereft of democratic representation, there is a significant governance question still hanging there that must be resolved. But with the earthquake responses’ emergency legislative powers, there’s no reason to return to democratic representation any time soon. Probably best to keep it hanging until a really sweeping reform is needed close to the end of the rebuild, probably.

   With the identification by Brownlee this morning that “some parts of Christchurch Council” were holding up the Christchurch rebuild, but not others, and that they were undermining Mayor Parker, the Minsiter has explicitly identified where different parts of the Council align to this central government, or against it. So there is a neat alignment buildiong between executive necessity and taking out the political competition.

   We may also expect to see central government trawling for evidence of benefits in Auckland’s amalgamations in OPEX costs, to use as evidence for other amalgamations, notably the Wellington region. Wellington’s amalgamation is underneath the surface in full swing.

   The cost of this scale of democratic reform is major under-governance; both that the entities under their putative control are rarely in practise acountable to their shareholder or to individual citizens, and also that the strategic direction of the entities becomes very very hard to align. It also increasingly means that central government gets to stamp its policy all over the reform and the structure right from the beginning. This can be a good thing if you like alignment between central and local government, or bad if you view one as a counterweight to the other.

   It strikes me as odd that no-one is treating the Canterbury recovery as a project to which one is held accountable as a programme manager should: here is the timeframe it will be done in with a set of intermediate milestones, here are the costs, and here are my personal costs if I fail to achieve this. I haven’t heard this either from Fletchers or from central Government, or indeed from the Council. Perhaps the progessive side is calling for this and we haven’t heard it.

   All local and regional governments other than in Canterbury will be wondering how much this Minister will engage with his Transport portfolio when it is evident that Canterbury will absorb his life for the whole of this term as construction begins. With about 1/3 of transport public sector spend coming from central government (other than motorways), inattention and underspend in this area from central gvoernment has a massive downward multiplier effect on the economy. The Financial Assistance Rate freeze from NZTA this year was a clear signal of this that had a major impact on transport programmes right across New Zealand.

   It would seem pretty evident that this Canterbury rebuild, instead of leading a construction-sector economic recovery, will instead be Canterbury’s version of the Rugby World Cup: benefiting only the region it was based, and only then within a very narrow sector. In Auckland the RWC economic lift (such as it was) was confined largely to CBD hospitality and retail – the remaining 90% of Auckland was unmoved.

   And if there is evidently no coherent plan for Canterbury other than that generated by the Council, it’s hard to really expect one for the country out of this central government. Other than more of what we have had. I would love to be proved wrong.
   • insider 9.1

     21 December 2011 at 10:01 am

     Why would freezing the FAR affect roading work? It is a rate not a pool. And FARs vary by council AFAIK. So if you are getting 45% FAR now you’d still be getting 45% of cost next year. I could understand if the total funding pool were frozen ( and I wouldn’t be surprised as money is tight) or if changes were planned and budgets set and those now have to be reversed.

     The biggest problem with Chch is its ongoing seismic activity. How can you set milestones and targets when nothing can get done?
     • tsmithfield 9.1.1

       21 December 2011 at 10:12 am

       “The biggest problem with Chch is its ongoing seismic activity”

       Sometimes we don’t get an aftershock for days now. And we haven’t had anything over 4 for a long time. So, I hope I’m not tempting fate, but the worst might be over.
     • ad 9.1.2

       21 December 2011 at 10:44 am

       The recent story in the NZ Herald today will give you some guidance here.
       • insider 9.1.2.1

         21 December 2011 at 11:15 am

         Not really as it doesn’t mention any freeze in FAR rates at all, just a lack of overall funds in the region. So they had Xm dollars for Y projects but all the money got spent on Y-5 projects, leaving a bunch with no money. But if there were money they would get it at the pre-existing FAR rate.

         The only FARish mention is the subsidy rate increasing over a couple of years which I take to be an alternative form of interest payment on the loan. Not sure how you equate that rate increase with a freeze
         • ad 9.1.2.1.1

           21 December 2011 at 11:41 am

           Can’t disclose further. Sorry.
           • insider 9.1.2.1.1.1

             22 December 2011 at 12:01 am

             Well then it sounds like you are talking bollox because you can’t say there was a Far freeze earlier in the year and claim you can’t talk about it, as Far rates are public info along with the proposed changes in the 2012 nltp
10. Jim Nald 10

    21 December 2011 at 9:19 am

    Wow. This man must be nominated for the NZ scammer of the year!
    • Blue 10.1

      21 December 2011 at 10:27 am

      He’s already been runner-up Politician of the Year for his handling of Christchurch. Does that count?
11. tsmithfield 11

    21 December 2011 at 10:09 am

    No need for the government to appoint a commissioner for the CCC when Cera already rules over all.

    I hope they do amalgamate the CCC and ECan’t though.
    • Colonial Viper 11.1

      21 December 2011 at 10:26 am

      While they are at it, the Government should just select its own councillors to the CCC.
12. John D 12

    21 December 2011 at 10:30 am

    Somebody on this blog has got it in for me. I made two comments yesterday about your projections of an undressed Brownlee onto me, and now I get this! Please, it’s not even lunchtime yet.
13. tc 13

    21 December 2011 at 11:15 am

    Behind all this is the very cosy relationship with fletchers, fulton hogan, etc all rubbing their hands together at such an exclusive taxpayer funded spree with sham tendering.

    Hearing plenty from capable org’s that can’t get a look in down there…..went to the wrong parties and schools obviously.
    • insider 13.1

      21 December 2011 at 11:21 am

      Like it or not FB are a big company with big resources and can do everything for you. From a govt pov I suspect the simplicity of dealing with one party and letting them manage the subbies was very attractive. Look at the hassle over invoicing the EQC got targeted with. FH are a locally based national company again with lots of resources. The Govt can’t win either way because if local companies get work they are doing shonkey deals, if they don’t then it is ‘taking local jobs’.
      • Colonial Viper 13.1.1

        21 December 2011 at 11:24 am

        The original mistake was to disband the Ministry of Works.

        Now we have the classic Tory govt gifting profits to the private sector and washing their hands free of the process.
        • Bafacu 13.1.1.1

          21 December 2011 at 2:57 pm

          What a load of unadulterated rubbish. They were more aptly named the “Mystery of Works” because it was a bloody mystery if any work was done. Paying people to lean on a shovel is not what I paid my taxes for!!

          FFS look at this with open eyes and recognise that this is a problem larger and more complex than anything we have had to deal with in the past so there is no precedent – it is necessary, if you want something positive to come out of this, to progress in a structured methodical way – unfortunately nature doesn’t always play by the same rules so adaptation needs to be the rule. This adds complexity which also adds time.

          By all means have your myopic (politically partisan) moans but don’t lose sight of the end game – getting ChCh back on it’s feet and productive again.
          • Colonial Viper 13.1.1.1.1

            21 December 2011 at 3:13 pm

            They were more aptly named the “Mystery of Works” because it was a bloody mystery if any work was done. Paying people to lean on a shovel is not what I paid my taxes for!!

            Don’t be a fucking moron, every dam, every school every hospital, every road, every motorway built before 1980 was either designed by, built by or maintained by the Ministry of Works, mostly all three.

            You’re blind to the history of this country, like most neoliberals.
            • Populuxe1 13.1.1.1.1.1

              21 December 2011 at 5:18 pm

              The MoW had a really sexy line in neo-Brutalist architecture that I am quite nostalgic for – very elegant in its way. They might not have possessed architectural genius themselves, but they knew what it looked like when they copied it. Nor can one neglect the moderne elegance and utility of the old state houses…
              • Colonial Viper …

                21 December 2011 at 5:27 pm

                With just a minimum of maintenance every year, those state houses have kept their integrity and livability for half a century or more. Fraking brilliant.
          • Draco T Bastard 13.1.1.1.2

            21 December 2011 at 3:42 pm

            Paying people to lean on a shovel is not what I paid my taxes for!!

            Then why are you so in favour of the government contracting Fletchers and others to clip the ticket?
            • dv 13.1.1.1.2.1

              21 December 2011 at 5:59 pm

              Didn’t Fletchers get their start in building state houses?
      • tc 13.1.2

        21 December 2011 at 12:07 pm

        Not saying they don’t have a part to play but others aren’t getting a look in.

        I don’t buy the ‘big company/kiwi owned’ BS as rebshocker stood aside whilst they and others acquired most of the building industry over the past 10 years leaving a cosy oligopoly across the industry.

        We’ve got plenty of natural resources (wood etc) yet compare the average cost of building with other countries and checkout the bottom line of fletchers/CHH etc…..it also hides a multitude of inept management decisions and projects over the years.
      • Draco T Bastard 13.1.3

        21 December 2011 at 3:40 pm

        Like it or not FB are a big company with big resources and can do everything for you.

        Actually, no they don’t. What they’ll do is contract subbies to do the work and just clip the ticket as it goes past adding a huge amount of dead weight loss. If the government still had the MoW they’d be able to hire the subbies directly removing that dead weight loss and have better control of the quality.
        • insider 13.1.3.1

          21 December 2011 at 11:55 pm

          I think you need to pull back from your fantasising over the efficiency of the MOW otherwise I’ll have to start rhapsodising about the economic wonder that was sheep and fertiliser subsidies for farmers.

          Of course FC will use subbies, but their advantage is they have the systems and controls to manage thousands of them, run complex procurement and construction programmes, have the cashflow to carry large volumes of work and pay people on time and make sure they work safely. Small players can’t do that, and we saw how eqc struggled to do it even with all the resource and money they were chucking at it.
          • Colonial Viper 13.1.3.1.1

            22 December 2011 at 12:01 am

            Benmore dam, designed and built under budget and in time. Largely (though not wholly) by the Government.

            The Government is not a “small player” and can pull off far more complex projects than the private sector, for cheaper, using lower cost financing. You’re a bit of a useless prick when you spout, aren’t you?
            • insider 13.1.3.1.1.1

              22 December 2011 at 12:11 am

              The govt could if it decided to no doubt, but it would have to replicate in this case everything fletchers is doing. So they would need to relearn a lot and they would be paying a whole lot of private players to design and build the systems they would need, build up a whole lot of knowledge in contract and construction management, as well as a network of suppliers and understanding of pricing. That carries a huge level of time, financial and political risk. The govt’s decided to take a safe option.
              • Colonial Viper …

                22 December 2011 at 12:14 am

                Hahahahahahahahaha.

                Fletchers is the fast option is it? lol
                • insider …

                  22 December 2011 at 12:22 am

                  Oh that’s right, i forgot you would have been in there boots and all and had the city rebuilt by now despite the large aftershocks and lack of money and lack of qualified workforce. I must remember to stop underestimating your genius.
                  • Colonial Viper …

                    22 December 2011 at 12:25 am

                    Fletchers has no fucking idea they are not experts at rebuilding earthquake damaged cities, you are dreaming, the private sector has no advantages in this game.
                    • insider …

                      22 December 2011 at 12:28 am

                      Tell me who are experts in rebuilding quake hit cities in nz?
                    • Colonial Viper …

                      22 December 2011 at 12:30 am

                      There are none, the private sector has no advantages here. Of course a hands off neoliberal government wouldnt give a shit and would give them the contracts anyway.

                      The private sector has lots of disadvantages, including not being able to secure financing as cheaply, having to deal with a profit motive, being answerable only to shareholders and not tax payers.
          • lprent 13.1.3.1.2

            22 December 2011 at 12:08 am

            EQC was pulling amateurs into a system that was unformed and rapidly expanding beyond the spans of control. FC is better placed, but look to me like they will hit the exact same issues – but with a much longer lead time. I wouldn’t be as confident as you evidently are. But their circumstances make it easier.
            • Populuxe1 13.1.3.1.2.1

              22 December 2011 at 12:14 am

              At least we know Fletchers is a family business lol http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/rebuilding-christchurch/6096870/EQC-accused-of-jobs-for-boys-girls
              • Colonial Viper …

                22 December 2011 at 12:17 am

                Frankly, insider is backing the choices made by a neoliberal Government which can’t be fucked doing its job of governing the country, but is instead on focusing on the job of transferring public wealth to the private sector.
            • insider 13.1.3.1.2.2

              22 December 2011 at 12:19 am

              I think eqc probably struggled as well as an organisation in terms of their capabilities – they were pulling people from govt departments all over the place. At least FB basically know what they are doing when it comes to building things on a big scale. Not many others can say the same.
              • Colonial Viper …

                22 December 2011 at 12:21 am

                BULLSHIT

                This is jobs for the boys and girls

                Fletchers has never ever handled a job like this before. They are out of their depth.

                It should be a Government project financed with cheap money that the private sector cannot access, where every dollar spent goes into the rebuilding of Christchurch, not into private shareholder profits.
                • insider …

                  22 December 2011 at 12:26 am

                  But no-one has, not even the govt, so it has no advantage. what basic skills and resources does the govt actually possess in this area that makes it a more vIable choice to do the nitty gritty work (put aside what you think it SHOULD be doing)

                  Do you also object to the caterers who feed the workers earning profit? What about the tool and plant suppliers? The material providers? The accommodation providers? How about the workers themselves? No more than min wage surely – can’t have them profiting
                  • Colonial Viper …

                    22 December 2011 at 12:33 am

                    It has the ability to finance the work far more cheaply than the private sector, it has the ability to draw upon massive resources of expertise from the public sector and from universities, it has the ability to spend every dollar on Christchurch and not have it funneled off for shareholders dividends which help no one in the rebuild zone.

                    Frankly your cheerleading of National’s hands off give the profits to the private sector style of working is stupid.
                    • insider …

                      22 December 2011 at 12:50 am

                      Surely the govt IS funding it. Who is paying fletchers….?

                      In my experience Most of the people in govt are not field experts they are bureaucrats with arts, law and science degrees who administer not do. Thats not a criticism, many a smart good people, but just because you work in dept of building and dhousing doesnt mean you can hold a hammer or manage a design and build contract. And even if you could, who would do your job when you’re seconded?
              • lprent …

                22 December 2011 at 7:14 am

                Fletcher Construction certainly know how to build on a big scale – that has been their profession for many years building commercial buildings. Very suitable for the CBD builds.

                However the skills to rebuild on a wide scale for the residential and small businesses? I don’t see that they are likely to have those. It has been many decades since they last worked at that level. The problem is that they are far more likely to screwup the prioitization towards what they are comfortable with rather than what is required.
14. randal 14

    21 December 2011 at 1:42 pm

    all that and more.
    the nashil gubbint are not democratic and they resent any attempt to ask questions about their activities, actions and most of all who gets the big high paying jobs.
15. gingercrush 15

    21 December 2011 at 4:12 pm

    The council is a mess. Aaron Keown in Shirley-Papanui? Seriously. Thank fuck last council election my street was moved into the Fendalton-Waimairi ward. I can’t believe people voted that guy in and am glad he isn’t representing me. Basically the whole council are bitter towards each other and don’t have a clue.

    I don’t think Brownlee interfering will help either because a lot of the office staff are a bunch of pricks too. Its laughable how long it took the council to move back into their very recently built building.

    Still at least we don’t have Anderton as mayor. One can be thankful for that.
16. james 111 16

    21 December 2011 at 4:24 pm

    Loved the Photo of Gerry Brownlee wonder if you could do one of Heather Simpson, and Helen Clarke just to add some Balance would be a hoot!!

    [lprent: read the last section of the about, and check out the policy. If you want something, then stop being a lazy arsehole and do some work to make it happen on your own site. But trying to tell us how to run our site is a very fast way to get banned from commenting on it. Because no one is particularly interesting in seeing you wanking in the corner while chortling at your own very stale jokes (that we have all heard many times before) ]
    • felix 16.1

      21 December 2011 at 4:27 pm

      Do it yourself and post it on your own blog.
17. james 111 17

    21 December 2011 at 4:54 pm

    Thanks Iprent just thought it would be good form bit of a joke really I know you guys have a great sense of Humour. As for me wanking in the corner now that is really personal. I think that is in your policy I just read. No I wouldnt be sorry not with the Photos of Helen ,and Heather could even crack a semi Woody. Even if Helen was air burshed LOL

    [lprent: If you attract my attention it is a personal waste of time for me. I always attempt to communicate how much I don’t like it. For some reason I find that trolls respond quite well when you penetrate to their personal levels of inadequacy, and it is kind of fun for me pointing it out – my humor is dark humor (and I have no interest in your sense of humor). However at some point it gets boring and I just cut the conversation. Have you read the policy yet? ]
    • McFlock 17.1

      21 December 2011 at 5:16 pm

      Well, I had a nice chuckle over your pseudonym:
       

         
      James III (10 July 1451 – 11 June 1488) was King of Scots from 1460 to 1488. James was an unpopular and ineffective monarch owing to an unwillingness to administer justice fairly, a policy of pursuing alliance with the Kingdom of England, and a disastrous relationship with nearly all his extended family.
      His reputation as the first Renaissance monarch in Scotland has sometimes been exaggerated, […] In fact, the artistic legacy of his reign is slight  

      … and so on.
      Interesting choice, but you’ve obviously got his winning people skills.

      [lprent: He obviously acquired that fatal “attracting the sysops attention” skill. Looks like another twerp who has decided that they’re a deadly troll. I suppose I should be a bit more lenient on dickheads. After all if they are made extinct who would we have to laugh at? ]
18. Dr Livingstone 18

    21 December 2011 at 5:27 pm

    Gingercrush, If we in Christchurch had been fortunate and not had an earthquake Jim Anderton would have made a great Mayor. He has displayed amazing talent over the years I have known him since 1970s. He has done outstanding work as his Electorates M.P and as A Minister of Agriculture. We need more Jim Andertons who have had the courage of their convictions.
    • Hami Shearlie 18.1

      21 December 2011 at 11:39 pm

      Totally agree Doc! Jim Anderton has very innovative ideas – KiwiBank for example! I hope the Labour Party keep in touch with Jim, preferably to be a kind of one-man think-tank. The man has brains and integrity! Bet he’s glad he didn’t become the Christchurch Mayor now! Imagine Jim having to deal with Gerry Brownlee every day?? Let’s face it, Bob Parker was on the road to political oblivion before the earthquake struck! IMHO he’s far too smooth with the artificially modulated voice etc.
19. Populuxe1 19

    21 December 2011 at 11:54 pm

    I think Anderton is a good man, but the whole business in 2010 of him thinking he could potentially be mayor of Christchurch and Member for Wigram struck me as very peculiar at the time.
    • Colonial Viper 19.1

      21 December 2011 at 11:57 pm

      MP and mayor at the same time…its been done before.
      • Populuxe1 19.1.1

        22 December 2011 at 12:06 am

        Really? Who? Where? I know they passed a law against it in Slovenia to prevent conflict of interest. I couldn’t find any other examples immediately to hand.
        • Colonial Viper 19.1.1.1

          22 December 2011 at 12:24 am

          Warren Cooper, Queenstown.
        • ropata 19.1.1.2

          22 December 2011 at 3:10 pm

          I think John Banks tried to do it
20. Skeptic to the max 20

    22 December 2011 at 12:18 am

    For friggs sake remove the photo of Brownlee. It’s Christmas and the majority don’t need to be reminded of the obese, globular, stuffed turkey they can’t afford to buy.
21. fender 21

    22 December 2011 at 12:35 am

    Theres been great ripoffs the unfortunate folks in Chch have had to take. In my local newspaper is a story about a couple who relocated to my area. Their 1904 brick lodge was wrecked, the demolition and removal took a day and a half to complete and the cost was $58,000 !
    Thats just robbery in my book.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS