In @nzherald (22Oct) Simon Wilson described the tactics of ToryAnybody who believes either of those mayoral clowns could run a village fete coconut shy is deluded. They need to go, especially the wellington laughing stock.
Whanau’s opponents as suicide bombing: destroying their own budget and >possibly the council itself to get the govt to move against her. Govt
has just announced it will appoint an observer.
See :Simon Wilson: "What's the difference between Wayne Brown and Tory >Whanau?"in The Herald (behind a paywall of course as it is critical of
the Government!)
Wellington did have a history of conservative (National Party-led)
Councils who had a consistent chant of keeping rates low. That led to >underspending on water pipes around the city, with photographs of
leaks throwing water above house height in Aro Valley and elsewhere.
Recent Councils have been Green / Labour majorities, and they have put
huge amounts of money into fixing local pipes - some were still
brick-lined! But the National party is still there in a vocal
minority; and they thought that they could force Tory Whanau out in
favour of one of their own.
So two Councillors were persuaded to reverse their vote on the sale of >Airport shares. Not a problem really; however the shareholding has
been very good in returning about 11% to the Council and they can
borrow more at a lower rate - so why not keep the shares? Unlike other >Councils around New Zealand, Wellington Council has an AA credit
rating, and room to move within prudent borrowing levels - with a
possible sale of airport shares if money gets too tight. But there are
plenty around that know that a sell-off of state or Council -owned
assets is a good way to get wealthy - even better than being a
landlord! But power is far more important; hence the turn-around -
they can always do the sell-off under a Nat-led Council if they can
get that . . .
So there are no answers to why an Observer is being appointed - its
not clear who will pay for that, but it is ideal for a recently
retired Nat politician - will they get Andrew Bayly to ''retire'' and
take up an appointment?
Meanwhile there are Councils without assets they can sell, who are up
against borrowing limits and face higher rates increases than
Wellington due to government decisions - can the appointment distract
voters from the real depth of the government over-reach into local >government?
In @nzherald (22Oct) Simon Wilson described the tactics of Tory
WhanauÂ’s opponents as suicide bombing: destroying their own budget and possibly the council itself to get the govt to move against her. Govt
has just announced it will appoint an observer.
See :Simon Wilson: "What's the difference between Wayne Brown and Tory Whanau?"in The Herald (behind a paywall of course as it is critical of
the Government!)
Wellington did have a history of conservative (National Party-led)
Councils who had a consistent chant of keeping rates low. That led to underspending on water pipes around the city, with photographs of
leaks throwing water above house height in Aro Valley and elsewhere.
Recent Councils have been Green / Labour majorities, and they have put
huge amounts of money into fixing local pipes - some were still
brick-lined!
But the National party is still there in a vocal
minority; and they thought that they could force Tory Whanau out in
favour of one of their own.
So two Councillors were persuaded to reverse their vote on the sale of Airport shares. Not a problem really; however the shareholding has
been very good in returning about 11% to the Council and they can
borrow more at a lower rate - so why not keep the shares? Unlike other Councils around New Zealand, Wellington Council has an AA credit
rating, and room to move within prudent borrowing levels - with a
possible sale of airport shares if money gets too tight. But there are
plenty around that know that a sell-off of state or Council -owned
assets is a good way to get wealthy - even better than being a
landlord! But power is far more important; hence the turn-around -
they can always do the sell-off under a Nat-led Council if they can
get that . . .
So there are no answers to why an Observer is being appointed - its
not clear who will pay for that, but it is ideal for a recently
retired Nat politician - will they get Andrew Bayly to ''retire'' and
take up an appointment?
Meanwhile there are Councils without assets they can sell, who are up
against borrowing limits and face higher rates increases than
Wellington due to government decisions - can the appointment distract
voters from the real depth of the government over-reach into local government?
On 2024-10-25, Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:Indeed - at the last Council election there were still some right wing candidates talking about keeping rates low . . .
In @nzherald (22Oct) Simon Wilson described the tactics of Tory
Whanau?s opponents as suicide bombing: destroying their own budget and
possibly the council itself to get the govt to move against her. Govt
has just announced it will appoint an observer.
See :Simon Wilson: "What's the difference between Wayne Brown and Tory
Whanau?"in The Herald (behind a paywall of course as it is critical of
the Government!)
That is waht the Forth Estate is supposed to do. Hold the Governmrnt to >account.
Wellington did have a history of conservative (National Party-led)
Councils who had a consistent chant of keeping rates low. That led to
underspending on water pipes around the city, with photographs of
leaks throwing water above house height in Aro Valley and elsewhere.
That was democracy in action. The people voted for the Council.
No, and that is why the Wellington City Council has been spending hugeRecent Councils have been Green / Labour majorities, and they have put
huge amounts of money into fixing local pipes - some were still
brick-lined!
But were they fit for purpose?
But the National party is still there in a vocal
minority; and they thought that they could force Tory Whanau out in
favour of one of their own.
So two Councillors were persuaded to reverse their vote on the sale of
Airport shares. Not a problem really; however the shareholding has
been very good in returning about 11% to the Council and they can
borrow more at a lower rate - so why not keep the shares? Unlike other
Councils around New Zealand, Wellington Council has an AA credit
rating, and room to move within prudent borrowing levels - with a
possible sale of airport shares if money gets too tight. But there are
plenty around that know that a sell-off of state or Council -owned
assets is a good way to get wealthy - even better than being a
landlord! But power is far more important; hence the turn-around -
they can always do the sell-off under a Nat-led Council if they can
get that . . .
So there are no answers to why an Observer is being appointed - its
not clear who will pay for that, but it is ideal for a recently
retired Nat politician - will they get Andrew Bayly to ''retire'' and
take up an appointment?
Meanwhile there are Councils without assets they can sell, who are up
against borrowing limits and face higher rates increases than
Wellington due to government decisions - can the appointment distract
voters from the real depth of the government over-reach into local
government?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 498 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 55:34:35 |
| Calls: | 9,811 |
| Calls today: | 13 |
| Files: | 13,754 |
| Messages: | 6,190,817 |