Right-wing mayor candidates try to kneecap themselves

82 comments on “Right-wing mayor candidates try to kneecap themselves ”

• Comments are now closed

1. srylands 1

   15 September 2016 at 7:46 am

   It seems to me that odd views are not confined to so called right candidates. Penny Bright is a climate change denier.
   • Sanctuary 1.1

     15 September 2016 at 9:13 am

     And Penny Bright has about as much chance as Vic Crone of winning, so that is another thing they have in common.
     • Lanthanide 1.1.1

       15 September 2016 at 12:25 pm

       Penny has much much less chance.

       For example, if Goff had a heart attack, Vic would be in a great position. Penny still wouldn’t.
     • Matthew Whitehead 1.1.2

       16 September 2016 at 4:26 am

       That doesn’t mean she doesn’t deserve to be critically analyzed as a candidate. I mean, David Seymour has no support nationally and yet we still have to deal with the hologram.
   • Snowboarder Sam 1.2

     16 September 2016 at 11:21 pm

     Odd views? According to the ‘esteemed’ leading Arctic ice expert, Professor Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University, whose article (below) was issued on the 17th of September 2012, Saturday is the end of the world as the “Arctic waters will be completely ice free within four years”. That’s today!

     http://www.commondreams.org/news/2012/09/17/arctic-sea-ice-will-reach-final-collapse-within-four-years-expert

     Except they’re not, as one of the Polar Ocean Challenge crew members posted today: “On that note, the North West Passage has already frozen behind us. So as it turns out we went through a very short window. The V Strait closed almost as soon as we went through, the same was true of Barrow… we were lucky to get through.” Not only did the ice NOT disappear, this year was one of the earliest re-freezes in recent decades.

     http://polarocean.co.uk/its-over-were-in-upernavik/

     To celebrate, I thought I’d go snowboarding, but Mt Ruapehu was closed today due to whiteout conditions with over half-a-metre of snow expected this weekend. So I went for a surf at high-tide instead, and noticed the sea-level was in exactly the same place it has been for the past 40+ years. Nothing “odd” about that at all.
     • One Anonymous Bloke 1.2.1

       17 September 2016 at 6:14 am

       He isn’t very “esteemed” by Dr Peter Gleick. I realise that a gullible fuckwit who believes Anthony Watts over NASA is incapable of rational thought or enquiry, but still.
2. someoneelse 2

   15 September 2016 at 8:27 am

   What is so bad about the council buying cheaper land and building residential zones that we desperately need? Half of you are annoyed that it’s not you earning the money. The other half, I’m not sure why they are against it. I pay $2000. rates for next to nothing every year except library books. I pay separately for rubbish and I don’t have footpaths.
   I think Auckland could be better. I’m voting Palino.
   • One Anonymous Bloke 2.1

     15 September 2016 at 8:46 am

     That’s nice dear. You know he’s a nasty little blackmailer who’s going to lose, eh.
   • dv 2.2

     15 September 2016 at 8:58 am

     So someoneelese you don’t use
     water
     sewage
     roads
     • someoneelse 2.2.1

       15 September 2016 at 11:41 am

       That’s right we don’t get water, sewage or public transport 10 minutes outside of Papakura. Auckland’s water is privatized anyway and the council get huge kickbacks from them as well.
       • Lanthanide 2.2.1.1

         15 September 2016 at 12:27 pm

         So no roads either?
       • One Anonymous Bloke 2.2.1.2

         15 September 2016 at 12:31 pm

         Tiny minority ingrate votes for blackmailer. No-one notices.
       • dv 2.2.1.3

         15 September 2016 at 12:37 pm

         So OK what about the appartment dwellers in ak?
         A well?
         And Shit in the street then?
   • Draco T Bastard 2.3

     15 September 2016 at 9:01 am

     I pay $2000. rates for next to nothing every year

     No, you pay rates so that we actually have a viable city. If you, and everybody else, didn’t the city would fail to work because of the massive services that the council provides would no longer be there. Especially all those subsidies that business gets.

     You’ve just proved that you’re voting Palino because you’re an ignorant schmuck.
   • Molly 2.4

     16 September 2016 at 9:01 am

     Because what will happen is that “friends of the mayor” with marginal land will be offering it to Auckland Council at inflated rates. None of the prerequisite planning and consideration on the appropriateness of housing at that location will be undertaken. And putting houses into greenfield developments, is not without long-term costs regarding infrastructure and social cohesion.

     People live in communities, not just houses.

     Auckland could be better, but anyone who proposes such simplistic solutions is not going to make it so.
3. esoteric pineapples 3

   15 September 2016 at 8:45 am

   Most man made climate change deniers are white males over 35 which suggests this says more about white males over 35 than climate change. I think it is a “men’s shed” syndrome where white males get hold of some information, put it through their superior minds and then come up with a conclusion that is far more likely than that proposed by all the scientists in the world.
   • alwyn 3.1

     15 September 2016 at 10:19 am

     “Most man made climate change deniers are white males over 35”
     And your evidence for this claim?
     I suppose you believe that the people in China are, in spite of the number of coal fired power stations they are building, all accept that they are causing the largest part of climate change and want to stop?
   • Doogs 3.2

     15 September 2016 at 5:31 pm

     How dare you equate my white male over-35ness with dumb-arse climate deniers. You are as bad as they are – sweeping comments with no backup evidence.

     Another example of crap verbiage wasting space.
4. Penny Bright 4

   15 September 2016 at 8:50 am

   Now a REAL debate would be between Auckland Mayoral candidates Penny Bright and Phil Goff.

   I will argue that Neo-liberal ‘Rogernomic$’ wrecked Auckland (and NZ) and Phil Goff can defend the actions of the 1984 -87 Rogernomic$ Labour Government, in which he was a Cabinet Minister.

   I oppose corrupt corporate control, locally, nationally and internationally.

   Therefore, I oppose Council-Controlled Organisations (CCOs), Public-Private Partnerships (PPPs) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA).

   Phil Goff supports all of the above.

   I oppose road tolls.

   Phil Goff supports road tolls.

   Let the ‘Mayoral debate’ shadow-boxing STOP, and the REAL debate start.

   Kind regards

   Penny Bright

   2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.

   ‘Activists – get things done’.
   • Ad 4.1

     15 September 2016 at 9:02 am

     What’s your polling level again?

     It’s not a contest of ideas Penny, it’s actually a popularity contest.

     Voting papers are out next week, so debate time is done.
     • DoublePlusGood 4.1.1

       15 September 2016 at 9:50 am

       Far be it for anyone to suggest that popularity should be based on the quality of people’s ideas and policies…
       • Ad 4.1.1.1

         15 September 2016 at 9:59 am

         Ideas are good for the first three quarters of any campaign.

         Right now, it really is a popularity contest: who gets the votes, wins.
         • BM 4.1.1.1.1

           15 September 2016 at 10:15 am

           Looks grim for Andrew Little then.
           • Ad 4.1.1.1.1.1

             15 September 2016 at 10:42 am

             And then we introduce you to MMP……
             • Puckish Rogue …

               15 September 2016 at 11:04 am

               You do know that since MMP was introduced National has been in power longer then Labour so National do have a pretty good grasp of what it takes to win in an MMP environment

               Just checking because its seems that a lot of people on here like to fall back on the MMP line but don’t seem to realise that National is better at MMP then Labour
               • Lanthanide …

                 15 September 2016 at 12:31 pm

                 It seems National’s way with MMP is to destroy their coalition partners.

                 Since they’ve still never gotten more than 50% of the vote, and overseas experience shows that in MMP systems that is a very rare feat indeed, I think National’s current success with this strategy can be better interpreted as luck, rather than skill.
                 • Puckish Rogue …

                   15 September 2016 at 12:34 pm

                   That’s a lot of “luck” then
                   • Lanthanide …

                     15 September 2016 at 1:08 pm

                     I think it’s more down to Labour’s bad choices, than National’s good.

                     Winston has said he didn’t go with Labour in 1996 because Helen and Jim were literally not talking to each other, and he didn’t see how it would be possible to have a government where the two parties didn’t speak to each other.

                     Clearly 2014 was Labour’s election to lose, and they did, through the media attacking Cunliffe for ridiculous things, and KDC stinking the whole place up with Internet-Mana.
               • Ad …

                 15 September 2016 at 2:17 pm

                 Truly I do.
               • Doogs …

                 15 September 2016 at 5:41 pm

                 It is about the only thing they are good at.

                 You actually think that being good at manipulating a system so that you win every time is an advantage?

                 Go do something useful like clean a toilet.

                 Every time those puffed-up, egocentric, neo-liberalst, self serving popinjays get into power they do absolutely nothing for the common good or for people who are less fortunate. Also, they fuck up social welfare, the health system and education whenever they get their hands on the tiller.

                 If they had the guts I suspect they would all come out as climate change deniers too, only that would be bad for business.
           • Oscar 4.1.1.1.1.2

             15 September 2016 at 10:50 am

             I didn’t know he was standing for Mayor.
           • Anno1701 4.1.1.1.1.3

             15 September 2016 at 4:46 pm

             “Looks grim for Andrew Little then.”

             aaaand another gold star moment
     • Penny Bright 4.1.2

       15 September 2016 at 1:43 pm

       It ain’t over till it’s over.

       It’s not how you start the race – it’s how you finish.

       I look forward to ‘doing a Winston’ and causing a major electoral upset 🙂

       If you think Phil Goff’s support for corporate control by and for the 1% via CCOs, PPPs and the TPPA is going to encourage genuine Labour supporters to vote for him, let alone the disaffected 64% who didn’t bother in 2013, I suggest you think again?

       Kind regards

       Penny Bright

       2016 Auckland Mayoral candidate.
       • Ad 4.1.2.1

         15 September 2016 at 2:20 pm

         I’m sure Goff wakes up quaking in his boots.

         You’ll be there again I am sure when the full Council is sworn in, shouting and jeering gracelessly like you did last time. Trust me I was two rows back and you were just an embarrassment.
   • srylands 4.2

     15 September 2016 at 9:42 am

     I have asked you this before and received no answer:

     If you oppose road pricing to reduce congestion, what is your solution(s) for Auckland transport? And before you repeat it, don’t say the solution is to for the Council to directly own and operate every last public transport service. That is no solution.

     People will use private cars in Auckland if it is the cheapest and most convenient transport option. What is your plan to make public transport more efficient and convenient and to make private MV travel in Auckland more costly, reflecting the congestion costs imposed?
     • Draco T Bastard 4.2.1

       15 September 2016 at 11:08 am

       People will use private cars in Auckland if it is the cheapest and most convenient transport option.

       Thing is, private transport has never been the cheapest system or, in many ways, the most convenient.

       It uses far more resources than public transport and requires that part of a persons land area has to be put aside just to house the bloody things. Then there’s having to drive and maintain the bloody things all of which is a massive inconvenience and unnecessary stressor.

       What is your plan to make public transport more efficient and convenient and to make private MV travel in Auckland more costly, reflecting the congestion costs imposed?

       Don’t actually have to do anything to make public transport more efficient. It is by default even when it’s badly run by private corporations. Because of that super efficiency we don’t have to make private vehicles more costly – just have to make sure that the costs are properly associated and placed fully upon the users of cars. Of course, to me that does mean using congestion charging and road user charges based upon mass.

       Cars are a direct result of the Delusions of Scale.
       • Matthew Whitehead 4.2.1.1

         16 September 2016 at 8:08 am

         On-form as usual there, Draco. 🙂

         +1 and such.
       • Molly 4.2.1.2

         16 September 2016 at 9:02 am

         +100
       • srylands 4.2.1.3

         20 September 2016 at 6:55 pm

         I assume you don’t have a car. Or children. Or a dog.

         If you have children it is impossible to meaningfully participate in society without owning a motor vehicle. Try doing the shopping or taking the kids to piano lessons or ballet or rugby by public transport in New Zealand.

         I use public transport. But your blinkered view suggests to me you have no clue about raising children.
         • Draco T Bastard 4.2.1.3.1

           20 September 2016 at 8:08 pm

           If you have children it is impossible to meaningfully participate in society without owning a motor vehicle.

           And yet people do it all the time around the world. Instead of using cars they use feet, peddles and public transport.

           Try doing the shopping or taking the kids to piano lessons or ballet or rugby by public transport in New Zealand.

           Oh dear, you failed to learn the lesson of Dick Quax:

           An Auckland politician has sparked the invention of a new word named in his “honour” following an online stoush about public transport.

           The term “quaxing”, named for Howick councillor and former Olympian Dick Quax, began circling following a Twitter argument earlier this year and has now been appropriated by groups as far away as England and Germany.

           Its use has become so popular the term was “officially” defined this week on the blog By The Motorway. It means: “to shop, in the western world, by means of walking, cycling or public transit.”

           Yeah, he was just as ignorant as you are.
     • mickysavage 4.2.2

       15 September 2016 at 11:40 am

       Ever been to Tokyo srylands? They have electric rail all over the place. Lots of people walk or cycle. There is no traffic congestion and the city functions perfectly well.

       Auckland just needs to be brave and do stuff for the long term.
       • maninthemiddle 4.2.2.1

         15 September 2016 at 11:52 am

         Tokyo
         Population: 13.62m
         Size: 2,188km2

         Auckland
         Population: 1.377m
         Size: 1,086km2

         The cost imposition of public transport in Auckland is prohibitive, and likely always will be.
         • Draco T Bastard 4.2.2.1.1

           20 September 2016 at 8:11 pm

           Lies.

           The cost of public transport is far cheaper than cars:

           So, weighing all factors, dollar for dollar, railways go so much farther in terms of handling capacity than do highways, all things being equal.

           But the real beauty of this whole conversation is that with the railway versus the highway, the difference in regard to energy/emissions-savings is like night and day. Historically, in this regard, railways have come out on top.
           • maninthemiddle 4.2.2.1.1.1

             20 September 2016 at 9:16 pm

             No, it isn’t. You’re example cherry picks data to try to support a pre-conceived conclusion, and assumes that people will choose public over private transport. It also assume the only options are rail over cars. Public transport includes buses, which drive on the same roads as cars, hence sharing the cost.
       • Lanthanide 4.2.2.2

         15 September 2016 at 12:33 pm

         No traffic congestion?

         I recently had a meal with some Japanese who own my company. *Everyone* takes the train to work, because a car is too expensive and slow, due to all the traffic.

         Trains are squashed standing-room only, during morning and evening rush hour.
       • srylands 4.2.2.3

         15 September 2016 at 2:26 pm

         Yes and yes I agree with you.
     • lprent 4.2.3

       15 September 2016 at 12:45 pm

       If you oppose road pricing to reduce congestion, what is your solution(s) for Auckland transport?

       I don’t oppose road pricing. I embrace it. I just think that your opinion about what it is is simply way too narrow.

       Tax motor vehicles and their carbon fuels in exactly the way we are now. Just make them pay the full costs – which we aren’t doing now, and stop the distortions of cross-subsidies.

       The most expensive part of roads is making them in the first place, followed by the cost of maintenance. So charge drivers up front for their roads AND for having the alternates.

       Road user charges and fuel taxes should pay for very cheap public transport and rail infrastructure because it reduces the cost of creating a road AND reduces road maintenance.

       Do road user charges progressively on axle weight to provide a direct correlation to road maintenance. In other words stop subsidizing the road transport industry from the taxes for light vehicles. Truck costs should be an order of magnitude higher than they are now to pay the full cost of their contribution to road maintenance. Buses and cars have low axle weights by comparison and are being massively over charged.

       Tax fuel for the full cost of removing their waste pollution from the atmosphere at the current costs to do so. Which means that they should be a lot higher than they are now. That will make low pollution vehicles a whole lot more attractive.

       That should help relieve both congestion and the need to put in new roads. And it fits the economic model of making people pay full costs for what they actually use. ie road pricing.
       • Macro 4.2.3.1

         15 September 2016 at 1:03 pm

         Do road user charges progressively on axle weight to provide a direct correlation to road maintenance. In other words stop subsidizing the road transport industry from the taxes for light vehicles. Truck costs should be an order of magnitude higher than they are now to pay the full cost of their contribution to road maintenance. Buses and cars have low axle weights by comparison and are being massively over charged.

         Quoted for truth.

         There should also be regulations promoting fuel efficient cars. Electric cars are great – but at present only available to the wealthy in society. The Greens have been asking Govt for this for years – but it won’t happen because of “nanny” state – i.e. can’t upset the V8 brigade.
         • Doogs 4.2.3.1.1

           15 September 2016 at 5:51 pm

           Have you thought of the knock-on effect of slamming trucks with massive RUC? Everything we use, and I mean EVERYTHING is transported either a lot or a little at some stage in its processing. Imagine the exponential extra costs that would bring to everyday items.

           Catch 22 really – trucks should pay a hell of a lot more towards road maintenance, yet the downstream effects of that would be quite unsettling economically.
           • McFlock 4.2.3.1.1.1

             15 September 2016 at 6:11 pm

             Ships and trains would be able to compete on a level playing field.

             Which would boost their traffic and increase their efficiency.
           • Macro 4.2.3.1.1.2

             15 September 2016 at 8:55 pm

             Imagine if we had to pay the real costs on items. World wide Oil was subsidised by half a Trillion Dollars in 2014.
             Consumerism, as it is now, is causing the destruction of the Earth.
             Most of the costs of our consumption we leave to future generations to pick up the tab. Climate Change is only the tip of the ice berg.
             Western economies are out of whack with the environment – we behave as if the environment was a subset of the economy, whereas in reality it is the other way round. Our economies are unsustainable and sooner rather than later they are going to collapse. Trucks will again become used just for local distribution – as they should be. The road trains of today will disappear to be replaced by more energy efficient rail and coastal shipping.
             • Pat …

               16 September 2016 at 5:05 am

               “Our economies are unsustainable and sooner rather than later they are going to collapse. Trucks will again become used just for local distribution – as they should be”

               Agree with the first part of that statement but would suggest if we are correct then the second part is unlikely….collapse by its very nature is disorderly and the organisational/technological wherewithal to support any form of distribution will be severely compromised let alone one based on distantly sourced stock/energy.
               • Macro …

                 16 September 2016 at 11:49 am

                 Yes unfortunately you may be right. I live in hope.
           • Draco T Bastard 4.2.3.1.1.3

             16 September 2016 at 8:42 am

             Have you thought of the knock-on effect of slamming trucks with massive RUC?

             Yes, I have. Great thing about trains is that they pay all their own costs and are still competitive with trucks.

             Catch 22 really – trucks should pay a hell of a lot more towards road maintenance, yet the downstream effects of that would be quite unsettling economically.

             What it would mean is that we’d start acting economically rather than uneconomically as we do now.
   • save nz 4.3

     15 September 2016 at 10:10 am

     +1 Penny. I like the fact we have an archaist in the mix. Shake it up, Penny.

     If there is one thing NZ seems very short of these days, it is new ideas and challenges to the status quo.

     Why not demand you know where you rates money is going?

     I have no problem with that.

     And Goff will not change anything. In fact he could make things worse. Sorry to be so pessimistic but he is short of ideas for the future and the ability to implement them quickly (and still hung up on old and out dated neoliberal ideology). Fresh ideas that actually are practical and work is what is most missing in Auckland.
     • save nz 4.3.1

       15 September 2016 at 10:13 am

       And of course high speed rail. What is the point of the outer limits being built on if we have 8000 new cars on the road each week (month? can’t remember how many but it’s a lot).
       • save nz 4.3.1.1

         15 September 2016 at 10:16 am

         With the billion they just wasted on IT for the failed supercity we could have got rail. Nobody even cares about that, but a park for Kids costing a few 100,000 or a library or something like that, or living wages, and we have massive public outrage fanned by MSM and politicians.
     • Draco T Bastard 4.3.2

       15 September 2016 at 11:09 am

       And Goff will not change anything. In fact he could make things worse. Sorry to be so pessimistic but he is short of ideas for the future and the ability to implement them quickly (and still hung up on old and out dated neoliberal ideology). Fresh ideas that actually are practical and work is what is most missing in Auckland.

       Truth.
   • mosa 4.4

     15 September 2016 at 8:14 pm

     Penny i would vote for you if i was still in Auckland but i got out some years ago and headed south to buy a home and have a quality of life that Auckland just does not provide which was hard after living in the city of sails all of my life and i miss all the places i know so well.
     So i still take an interest in the big smoke from afar and the city is going into a critical phase in its development so this election is one of the citys most important in its history and there are massive challenges to confront.
     All the best in your campaign and i hope your a part of Aucklands future direction.
5. Draco T Bastard 5

   15 September 2016 at 8:57 am

   When National criticises Auckland Council for not doing enough on housing, it’s because the council isn’t pulling their 1 lever hard enough, while National are neglecting touching their many, bigger, levers at all…

   Oh, they’re touching those levers alright – they’re holding them firmly in place so as to hold on to the delusion of getting richer from housing.
   • srylands 5.1

     15 September 2016 at 9:28 am

     Except it is not a delusion. Aucklanders who have sold up in the last 12 months and relocated to a retirement spot in Northland or Hawkes Bay will have in many cases pocketed $1 million plus in cash for their retirement overseas travel fund. Sometimes $2 million.
     • whispering kate 5.1.1

       15 September 2016 at 9:36 am

       Srylands – On the backs of young New Zealanders who will never own a home in Auckland. An apartment maybe but that comes with conditions such as very high Body Corp Fees and rates as well – no place to have a couple of kids in. Where is the fairness in that – typical.
       • srylands 5.1.1.1

         15 September 2016 at 9:46 am

         Why do you say “typical”? Is that directed at me? I have posted on this forum many times what a debacle the housing market is in New Zealand. I agree it is very unfair. I was simply stating the obvious – many private individuals are in the process of funding lavish retirements on the back of Auckland housing. I know two of them.

         If I have misunderstood your comment, I apologise.
     • Draco T Bastard 5.1.2

       15 September 2016 at 9:41 am

       But the country hasn’t become wealthier and so that extra money is delusion.
       • srylands 5.1.2.1

         15 September 2016 at 9:47 am

         Yes. It is simply transferring wealth from some people to others – especially from the young to the old(er). But the extra money is quite real for the recipients. But you are correct – it does nothing for the nation.
         • Draco T Bastard 5.1.2.1.1

           15 September 2016 at 9:57 am

           Thank you for pointing out the precise delusion of the present system.

           Money isn’t real nor is it based upon real economic activity.
     • McFlock 5.1.3

       15 September 2016 at 11:45 am

       in exactly the same way that the people who sold out of Madoff’s ponzi before it collapsed were richer.

       But for most investors, it is a delusion.
     • Anno1701 5.1.4

       15 September 2016 at 2:59 pm

       “retirement overseas travel fund.”

       hallelujah the world can rest safely

       some baby boomers are going to be able to whinge there way around the world ( probably on some poxy cruise ship) a couple of times

       i can sleep well tonight …..
6. mac1 6

   15 September 2016 at 9:37 am

   Attended a candidate’s meeting in our little town. The Deputy Mayor in answer to a question about climate change still does not get the difference between climate and weather. Luckily, he also espouses, so he told us, the need for collective responsibility, so I guess he will swallow his views and act accordingly with the rest of the council, should he get re-elected. I’ve changed my view of him.

   These meetings are invaluable, as you can if nothing else observe the body language of candidates for two hours and see how they react to differing views, as well as question and evaluate their own answers.
7. TC 7

   15 September 2016 at 11:14 am

   Its not a contest the right want to win or they would throw the national dirty politics machine behind a plausible candidate which they have chosen not to do.

   Goff ticks boxes their own candidate would tick so why bother burning resources when you can change laws under urgency if you want anyway.

   John Palino is there for comedic value and thomas will parrot the nat/CT lines as a dress rehersal for next years GE.
   • maninthemiddle 7.1

     15 September 2016 at 12:08 pm

     “Goff ticks boxes their own candidate would tick so why bother burning resources when you can change laws under urgency if you want anyway.”

     Exactly. Goff is a moderate, from the centre right of the Labour Party. He is not a reformist, and will most likely be a cooperative safe pair of hands as far as National are concerned. Besides, he can’t be worse than Brown. Can he?
     • save nz 7.1.1

       15 September 2016 at 12:48 pm

       Besides, he can’t be worse than Brown. Can he?

       Yes we can get worse. The PPP Skypath where they charge walkers and cyclists to use the harbour bridge is a case in point. I’m for Skypath, just not the PPP and the charging of the walkers and cyclists…

       It’s that weird anti logic that Auckland council seems to be going for.

       Mining, taxing, pretty much anything bad for society or the environment, they love.
       • maninthemiddle 7.1.1.1

         15 September 2016 at 1:44 pm

         Who is ‘they’?
8. Takere 8

   15 September 2016 at 12:54 pm

   1. Goff wins
   2. Sends message throughout council of impending cull coming
   3. All procurement contracts to be reviewed eg; Madison Recruitment’s $11m contract. WTF?
   4. Initiates cull in meaningless cling-on sectors such as;
   ATEED – Dismantle Steven Joyce’s National Party Ratepayer Funded Talk-fests & Bussiness (MBie) stick up rate payer funded “Central Govt” spending projects at Rate Payers expense.
   AT – Return to Core Business
   IMSB – Hijacked Quango
   Panuku Dev Group (Use to be Auckland Waterfront Dev)

   Then get to work! Simple plan!
9. Patrick Cummoskey 9

   15 September 2016 at 2:49 pm

   Looks like Phil Goff will get in. This is great news as it mean less cars and more trains!
10. AB 10

    15 September 2016 at 3:00 pm

    And what are the odds that when she was in business she regarded evidence-based decision making as important?
    The sheer hilarity of it makes the contest farcical.
11. Anne Hartly 11

    15 September 2016 at 3:39 pm

    From the polls it looks like Phil is going to win. This is tremendous news as it means fewer cars on the road and more trains.

    [Released from ‘pending’ before noticing it is word for word the same as the other, well identical, comment from Patrick Commoskey. Bending over backwards to leave this here and not ban on the suspicion of using multiple id’s.] – Bill
    • Anne Hartly 11.1

      15 September 2016 at 4:14 pm

      Patrick is a friend of mine and asked me to post. Please remove the post if it has breached this web site’s policies and accept my sincerest apologies. 🙂
      • Bill 11.1.1

        15 September 2016 at 4:39 pm

        Thanks for the clarification. That was the scenario I decided to let my ‘element of doubt’ dictate to me in letting your own comment stand while throwing Patrick’s into spam due to it being a duplicate.
12. Takere 12

    15 September 2016 at 4:07 pm

    If anybody has Vic’s home address, could you flick it to me? I’ve found her tinfoil hat. She must of lost it when a gust of wind blew it off her little head … WTF?! Zero Shareholders dump more shares and the price plummets from $17.00 too? Is that climate change?
13. Richard Rawshark 13

    15 September 2016 at 6:16 pm

    The quality of mayoral candidates is , well, outstanding /sarc

    Not a single one of them are about the people, it’s all about their own personal points of view and they will drive their dream home.

    Well as I’ve always thought to myself, what selfish pricks they all are.

    Dreams, making ones mark, most of the time these MARKS on our landscape, are either needed or wanted.

    But what ever..I’ve started giving up on proper governance and people who serve the people not their own dreams for personal satisfaction.

    Goff just going to play political football depending on who’s in power. The rest of them are..no bodies or shit stirrers.

    Right wing? more morons if you ask me. But it’s got to be better than the current joke, Clown Len.

    IMHO
14. mosa 14

    15 September 2016 at 6:41 pm

    Palino got a cheek standing after his behaviour at the last election.
    He has got more front than Brighton pier !

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS