Its a numbers game

As a campaigner, there were some interesting lessons.

One is that you have to wave banners on the side of the road. Every new candidate who did this, got elected. Major did this in the early 90′s, waving and smiling in front of a 6 meter portable bill board of his name, along the roadside in Haitatai, and got elected — without providing any clear policies. Its a cliche, but it works. I hate cliches, but people like to know you are real.

Bill boards don’t help, unless you don’t get media exposure – then they (and mail campaigns) do. You’d think incumbents would be known in their ward, so would not need bill boards? I hate bill boards as much as I hate cliches.

The incumbents got large articles about themselves in the newspapers (and various resident newsletters) and the new candidates got zip. Best to send media kits with pre-written articles to the papers written in the desired style (2 months in advance of the start, as it can take 2-3 weeks from interview to publication). Or do something cute or outlandish to get in the papers (although too outlandish will make you look like a fool).

You can’t say much in 3 mins – so best to pick one issue and hammer it home. Speeches are about sounding confident and friendly – not about what you stand for. If you are an incumbent, don’t mention any policies (unless you think you might lose), just say its really hard work and experience counts. People forget incumbents were once new (and had ideas).

Point to a single newspaper article that says you worked hard. Repeat it as many times as you are given the opportunity. If you say it enough, people will believe you. People will ignore what you actually voted for (or didn’t vote for). Especially if you do not disclose your voting record. If you do get asked a difficult question attack a regional councilor. Blame those who don’t have a mike – it will look strong (but don’t over do it – as people will see it as bullying).

Blogs and facebook pages are good – but if people don’t read them they will never know it was your idea. If someone raises an issue that makes you look bad, attack them on something trivial to undermine their credibility or to deflect attention away from the real issue.

If a candidate is looking to good – ignore them (ideally forget their name or don’t mention them). That way voters won’t know who they are – so they won’t get votes. However, work with candidates in your ward who will be cut in the first count, as STV might send their vote to you. Also work with candidates outside your ward to increase your exposure (eg, regional, mayoral, etc). If elected you may need to work with these people – so best to start building bridges early.

Its a number game, so utilise a political party brand or participate in clubs, associations, or protest groups, that will provide you a healthy network of people to support you. Voters like to know what they are getting.

Make outlandish promises, knowing that the impending debt will mean you will be able to resile from your earlier promises, and sound sensible. Boldness will get you in, not realism. If a protest group looks like they have a large group of supporters (eg, football) support them with outlandish promises. Don’t be put off by having nothing to do with the group or sport before the event (even if another candidate is actually involved in the sport and has voiced an earlier informed opinion). If you say it loudest, its your idea (remember to be bold – see above).

Write letters in the papers and on blogs (under other peoples names) that raises questions about the suitability of the new candidates for the job – or if they have all the right skills – denounce them over something trivial, or don’t mention them at all. God forbid if  a skilled candidate made it on council  – they might make the rest look stupid and lazy.

Finally, hold true to your beliefs – (something another councilor once confided to me), otherwise you look two faced and deceitful. If your deceit is exposed, attack the messenger or raise another issue to draw attention away (this is what they do in national politics).

Hope you enjoyed the journey, as much as I.

And it only cost me $182.20 plus a registration fee. Bargain!

The campaign is over

This post is to notify readers that the campaign is over.

Thank you for following the local body election campaign on his blog.

I hope to post results as soon as I am aware. Other results are being posted on NewsWire.

Updated (6:05 pm): Kerry leads Celia by 40 votes. I noticed a lot of specials being cast on Friday – so the final count has yet to be confirmed. Results for mayor and wards available from http://www.wellington.govt.nz/haveyoursay/elections/results/2010/2010prelim.html

http://www.newswire.co.nz/

Its Celia

Having looked at the numbers – its pretty clear that Celia will win the mayoralty, unless Jack Yan gets more “No 1″ votes to beat Celia in the “challengers cup”.  The winner of the challengers cup will clearly take all the votes on the left, and beat Kerry hands down.

And the only thing stopping it will be if Kerry Pendergast voters (who have yet to vote) realise they can’t win – and vote Jack Yan “No 1″.

Of course its not yet a done deal and I’m aware that there are many people looking to vote for Jack Yan -  but if people care about their city – they need to get voting.

Change is coming.

Breaking news! Jack Yan and Sir Michael on tv Prime News tonight at 5:30pm.

Mouse or lion? Time to speak up

Its about listening.

Its about sensible decision making (intelligent leadership).

I’ve said this from the start. It’s why I stood.

I stood up, so you could speak up.

Some people have invalidated their votes in opposition. Others have already given up on our council and have decided not to vote. That speaks volumes about the existing council. But it won’t bring about positive change. It will just keep the status quo.

Apathy to vote will only incite this council to continue to not listen.

According to a recent survey:

“Only a third of respondents believe territorial authorities listen to residents and barely one in four voters have confidence in their council’s leadership.”

So, 66% believe council don’t listen, and more than 75% want new leadership.

Well, now is the time to stand up. Wellington needs to roar!

Council need to know the consequences of not listening. Because we can’t afford another 3 years, replayed over again on all the issues that have been kicked to touch, until after this election.

So ask your friends, colleagues, and neighbours if they have voted . And challenge them to roar.

Make your voice heard!

http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/4196605/Financial-issues-push-environmental-concerns-down-list-of-voters-priorities, http://wellington.scoop.co.nz/?p=28241, http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/opinion/editorials/4190044/Editorial-Top-of-the-to-do-list-decide-who-runs-your-city

Breaking news! Jack Yan endorsed by Sir Michael Fowler. Wade-Brown considers Jack Yan “intelligent, positive and friendly” and asks all Wade-Brown supporters to vote Yan “2″ on the ballot.

Business questions answered

Another survey have been published. This time from the Wellington Employer’s Chamber of Commerce.

The Chamber’s 16 questions and my responses are outlined below.

In the Chamber’s words:

“The Wellington Employers’ Chamber of Commerce believes the calibre of the candidates is an important issue in the coming local government elections.  We want to identify candidates who support and acknowledge actions and policies which will enhance Wellington as a good city to do business in.”

Other candidates were also surveyed and there responses are located at: http://www.wecc.org.nz/news-and-info/wellington-local-elections

1. Please outline your vision for Wellington city in 2015?

A city that listens and cares about all our communities and works together to make our city a better place to live, work and play.

2. Outline the specific initiatives you will support to ensure that Wellington has a business friendly environment.

(1) Investing in infrastructure (increasing water supply, free Wi-Fi, better public transport)
(2) Investing in existing council resources to maximise their potential (eg local libraries, sports facilities, local events)
(3) Facilitating support, collaboration, and partnership with central agencies and business
(4) Improving administrative efficiencies within council
(5) Controlling expenditure and the constant need to raise revenue from ratepayers

3. Name five key priorities you see for infrastructural investment in Wellington over the next five years.

(1) Water supply (eg leakage, upgrades, reservoirs, dam)
(2) IT (Wi-Fi, digitising council processes online)
(3) Public transport (eg, basin reserve road works, buses)
(4) Waste management (eg, sewerage)
(5) Community facilities (eg, local libraries, sports fields)

4. Please identify three courses of action you would want to promote to ensure a vibrant inner central city.

(1) Improve our public transport system (improve bus system and introduce bike hire scheme adopted in London and Paris)
(2) Support the introduction of free Wi-Fi. Facilitating a larger IT industry in the city.
(3) Investing in our existing resources to maximise their potential (eg investing in public utilities like libraries is known to improve foot traffic for local businesses). I think we should be investing in all our communities, not centralising them to 3 hubs. Why can’t smaller communities (eg Brooklyn) be incubator hubs for smaller businesses? A vibrant central city needs spawning grounds for new businesses to develop. Where are our future central city businesses?

5. Name three actions that you will take to ensure Wellington delivers better service and value to rate payers and residents.

(1) Listening to citizens: The $11 million Manners Mall re-vamp would not have proceeded if council had listened to submissions (74% of 722 submissions opposed the project).
(2) Ensuring greater transparency and more sensible decision making.
(3) Holding council accountable. Which is why I am standing. If we do not hold councillors accountable, they will continue not to listen. Can we afford any more of the same?

6. Would you support a rates target so that council’s rates income does not exceed the combined rate of inflation and population growth per year?

I think that such a target would certainly make for more focused planning and expenditure decision making. However, there would need to be a mechanism that acknowledges that in some circumstances, expenditure may need to go above agreed levels. For example, a dam to ensure the ongoing security of our cities water supply.

7. Do you support the use of differential rates whereby business rate payers pay more than residential rate payers per dollar of rateable land? If so, why?

Yes I do. For business, rates are really a cash flow issue (and this can be managed in a fair and sensible manner with council). Business (unlike residents) are in a better position to claim rates as a deductible business expense (effectively a central government subsidy of local rates) and\or pass costs onto its consumers (and residents). Some businesses do this effectively, and some struggle. We want our businesses to succeed and council have to be prepared to work with those businesses that struggle.

8. What are your views on Council ownership of non-core assets including trading enterprises of Council i.e. those assets that are not essential to run local government? What do you define as core or strategic assets and why?

It’s really a question of control. If you have control over an asset, ownership is irrelevant. The question for council is what does it want control over and why? Generally, I would define core or strategic assets as those assets the council requires to achieve its strategic goals, and without control over such assets it could not achieve its strategic goals.

9. What are your views on the council’s use of debt to fund projects? Do you think the council has an appropriate level of debt?

The current debt level would seem appropriate given we are still holding an AA rating. The problem is that the debt we have incurred has not always been spent on appropriate infrastructure. This means we are severely constrained in making important future infrastructural investments (eg, increasing our water supply, fixing water leakage, public transport, etc). Unfortunately, money has been wasted on unnecessary expenditure. Why are we spending $11 million on Manner Mall, $1 million on re-vamping a park outside the design school in Vivian St (which was an adequate green space), or proposing to spend $2.4 million on a tent next to Te papa, or $400k on a designer toilets, or $350k on a rugby monument, or $5 million on a Chinese garden in Frank Kitts park. Surely, a Chinese garden could be part of the Transit NZ revamp of the roading around the Basin (eg, perhaps in front of the Carillion). I do not believe we have seen very sensible spending decisions being made. It’s about priorities.

10. What are your views on council use of fees and charges?

Council do not appear to be applying charges and fees consistently with their strategic vision or in support of stated goals. There are a lot of mixed messages. For example, the council wants to preserve our architectural heritage (which I endorse), but then sends the wrong messages, by imposing resource charges on those residents who are burdened with heritage orders. Such charges result in residents resisting such orders. Ideally, any resident burdened with a heritage order should not have to pay for related resource consents. This might also provide council an incentive to be more efficient in its administration of heritage orders. Another example is library fines. The objective is to ensure books are returned. Why not offer a choice to book borrowers: (1) pay a fine to enable another book to be issued; or (2) return the overdue book before another can be issued – with a maximum period before replacement charges are imposed on over due books.

11. Do you think the community should pay for its own water on a user pays basis?
Yes | No | Comment

No, residential water consumption does not need to be user pays. Unlike Australia, we have ample water. The problem is we are not storing enough. Council appear to be deferring investment in water infrastructure so they can spend money on other less important things. I believe, NZ’s ample water resources will be a major economic advantage over Australia in years to come, provided we invest in adequate water infrastructure now. Council need to be investing more in critical infrastructure that benefits all of the community.

12. What role should the council take on climate change and do you support the goal of carbon neutrality?

I think not supporting a carbon neutral goal would be irresponsible. All businesses realise they need to be more green thinking. The real issue is over how that goal can be achieved.

13. What are your views on combining local authority service delivery, and amalgamations with neighbouring authorities? Should we have a super city in Wellington?

Fortunately, Wellington has the opportunity to watch and assess the strengths and weaknesses of a Super City. I suspect it will provide some interesting case studies. From experience, there is always a trade off between efficiency and control when combining or amalgamating delivery functions between different entities\authorities. It’s a question of what is more important, and that will largely depend on timing, circumstances, and desired outcomes – and the criteria being weighed.

14. Do you think Councillors should be paid in proportion to the number of meetings they attend, or through a fixed annual fee, or in some other way?

It should be fixed. No extras for chair appointments or council representative directorships. Payment for attendance does not ensure quality. Elections should be a council’s performance review. I am standing to give something back to the city as part of my civic duty and to allow the public the opportunity to hold the council accountable for the decisions made (or not made). I am standing to put some sensible decision making back into local government. I’m a tax lawyer and this is my career. Local government is not a career and shouldn’t be. I’d like to see tenure fixed (like the USA presidency – 2 terms maximum). If you have not achieved something in 6 years, then you probably are not going too. Every organisation needs refreshment.

15. Do you think Wellington City Council should open a trade office in China?

No. We already have the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and an Embassy in China. Why do we need to fund another? Council should be facilitating and advocating support for our businesses through these central government agencies. As well as leveraging our existing relationships with sister cities more effectively.

16. List five keys issues that you consider need addressing by the Council in the next three-years

(1) Council’s spending priorities
(2) A clear agenda and path. What was council aiming to do over its last 3 years?
(3) A more efficient council (a little more inward looking, can technology help?)
(4) Infrastructural investment (back to some basics)
(5) Youth engagement. Graffiti has become an epidemic.

***

I’d add to question 15, that if the business community did want to send a mayor to China, they should send one who can speak Chinese – for better engagement. And of all the mayoral candidates, only one can speak Chinese (and 3 other languages as well) – Jack Yan.

Now VOTE – and make it happen.

Our community housing

The Wellington Housing Trust sent a survey on housing affordability to all candidates.

48 candidates were asked 2 questions. But only 30 candidates replied. And some replies were rather short – which is disappointing when they are from incumbent councilors.

Below are the 2 questions and my answers. I’ve also summarised the other candidates positions.

Other candidates answers can be found on http://www.wht.org.nz/pdf/WHT%20Housing%20Affordability%20Survey.pdf

1. Do you believe housing affordability is an issue in Wellington City ?

Yes. Especially for those on low incomes, or those who are single, or solo parents. A point I thought Bernard O’Shaughnessy made very strongly at the Problem Gambling Foundation’s Mayoral Candidates meeting, that I attended. I also rent, so I know how hard it is to get quality affordable housing that isn’t damp and in a location that is safe, convenient, and enjoyable.

2. If so what do you think should be done to address this issue?

(1) Rent. Why are we benchmarking council rents against private buildings that are not the same in condition or purpose. If council are offering discounting of rents based on income, why don’t they just make it less complex and fairer by charging rents based on average income. Using the same criteria and methodology for setting benefit levels. Some council housing tenants rents are about to go up 15-20%, yet their benefits only increased 3%. This type of increase makes housing unaffordable. Any increases should be capped so they do not put undue stress on tenants.

(2) Stock. Council need to ensure there is sufficient social housing stock – particularly for single people or solo parents – which is where demand is increasing and where stock levels have reduced the most. This includes ensuring housing is safe and healthy. Pictures on my blog have illustrated the poor state that housing stock is in. And I have seen first hand much worse (rotten floors where lino sags on the floor). A lot of housing isn’t healthy (ie mould, leaking or damp), or is sitting empty (a number of flats in Arlington are empty – hopefully as part of ongoing maintenance schedule). We also need to keep Wellington’s social housing stock in council hands so our communities have a direct say in their future. Generally, better planning and management is required to ensure stock levels meet demand. We also need to ensure new housing stock is widely dispersed across the city.

(3) Engagement. Getting councilors to visit housing estates (or work in nearby community centres) will ensure councillors are more aware of the issues for residents (and are more easily available). A point that was exposed at the recent Arlington Candidates meeting, when existing councilors were not aware of a number of safety incidents or tenancy grumbles – even after council had been advised by police.

(4) Funding. Great to see the $220 million from central government for earthquake protection and general refurbishment. But what happens after this funding is used up? Council need to collaborate more with central government agencies and housing trusts to secure ongoing funding and supply. While ring fencing funds for social housing might ensure an ability to have funds available, it should not act as a constraint if additional funding is required. Why are council spending money on the trivial things (eg, $350k monuments and $2.4 million tents to name a few of the trivial things), rather than investing it in the homes and communities of those who need it?

***

Summary of Lambton Ward Candidates

Bishop: Central govt problem not council, unenthusiastic about ratepayers subsidising tenants, or of the council investing capital in housing projects. [So not interest in council being involved in community housing. I wonder if he'd consider selling our council housing stock? Probably.]

McKinnon: Pleased that Central Government is funding the Social Housing refurbishment. [Lost of suggestions, but no commitment to anything. What does he stand for? Appears to associate ethnic diversity with affordable housing??]

Pannet: 10,000 households struggling in terms of housing. Won’t change current housing rental policy. Supports offering surplus land to community housing, but no land to give. Not keen on easing rules so developers provide low cost housing. [So income related rents won't happen with the Greens. On the upside - the longest response from an incumbent councilor].

Cook: Integrate low cost or publically owned housing into new housing developments. [That was it? Does she not know the issues? I expected much more for 15 years of funding from ratepayers. Disappointing really.]

Ganley: Wellingtonians are spending more than 30% of their income on housing [30%? I think its much higher! I spoke with a Mt Vic resident who was spending 33% of her income on rates alone, add mortgage and insurance payments and it gets much higher. Surprisingly, silent on how community housing rents will be calculated if elected!!].

Price: 100,000 new residents coming to the city over the next few decades. One option, require new developments to provide proportion of affordable housing. Council should take a more direct role in developments. [Again silent about rents - given it was about "affordability". Numbers at odds with the current mayor?? For someone interested in urban development - it was a disappointingly brief response, given endorsement from eye of fish friends. Perhaps I expected to much. But he did endorsed Jack Yan on WCCwatch as the best mayoral candidate at the Back Bencher Debate - so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.]

Mayors

Kerry Prendergast: There will be 44,000 more people living in Wellington by 2031. Income from these apartments is to be ring-fenced. Rents and house prices will need to rise. [Will there be a surplus from ring fencing  or will costs get inflated? Any funds available from outside the fence for improvements - probably not. Rent increases!!]

Celia Wade-Brown: ….. [No reply. So silence on everything, including rents].

Al Mansell: ….. [No reply. Still recovering from the Back Bencher after party. Clearly won the "best witty comeback" debate. A tv career beckons.]

Bryan Pepperell: Low cost housing is a serious issue and needs addressing. [That was it??]

Bernard O’Shaughnessy: We have an urgent need NOW to house 10000 people and yet the WCC
has embarked of a housing upgrade plan that reduces there per bed count (unit) from 2377 down
to 2100. I live at Newtown Park flats. [The facts from someone who lives the issues].

Jack Yan: Everyone deserves to be housed. We need to examine income-related rents and work with central government on revising the housing benefits’ system. [I agree. Now lets make it happen].

Time to step up. Make sure you vote – or you will see a candidate, you don’t agree with, on council.

My election form candidate profile

Mark GREENING (LLB, BA, Lawyer).

I stand as your independent advocate on council, not for a party or single agenda. You get to select 3 representatives for your community, but you only have one chance to make council accountable.

If you are tired of councilors who fail to listen, or fail to persuade council to listen, then use your vote to be heard. Make council listen to you after this election by electing a fresh new voice.

I stand for:

(1) Sensible spending, no more rugby monuments or Manners Mall debacles;

(2) Improving our water supply, not metering it;

(3) Investing in all our libraries;

(4) A waterfront for people, not buildings;

(5) Protecting the Basin, no flyovers;

(6) Making Cuba Carnival happen, no excuses;

(7) A city bike−hire scheme;

(8) Supporting free Wi−Fi;

(9) Youth engagement, to banish graffiti;

(10) Listening to you.

If you want change, join me at: [this blog]

***

And I’d add my facebook page (greeningwellingtoncity) as well (but we only had 150 words).

I think it also shows I can cut to the chase and get to the point.

Transport questions

As I promised, I will be posting answers to questions that have been asked of me when they are published.

This time its on transport. The full report and answers from other candidates can be found on http://wellingtontransport.wordpress.com/2010/09/18/wellington-city-council-candidates-respond-to-our-transport-questionnaire/

Here’s what I said.

1. What proportion of the transport funding in the Long Term Council Community Plan (LTCCP) of the Council you are standing for would you want to see devoted to:
a. Public transport?
b. Walking (facilities and promotion)?
c. Cycling (facilities and promotion)?

Please explain these choices.

Without having received costings on a bike hire scheme (something I’d like to see put on the agenda) and the councils ability to influence the revised bus fares, as well as being able to rank projects already approved by council that could be suspended or deferred – this would seem hard to provide any meaningful answer to this question. However, what I think I can say is that the over-arching focus should be on improving public transport utilising all 3 mediums in the best possible mix, that reduces dependence on other transport mediums, for the dollars spent. For example, if lighting was provided through central park, how many more people would walk between Brooklyn and the city, rather than use other transport modes. Such a project would also improve public safety. So why hasn’t council already done it as part of the central parks recent revamp? I would like to see these type of initiatives explored and undertaken.

2. Do you support the following transport projects, where applicable:

Note: Options a-c are mutually exclusive. Each assumes that essential service vehicles would have limited access.

a. Turning the Golden Mile into a public transport corridor Y/N

b. Turning the Golden Mile into a pedestrian corridor Y/N

c. Turning the Golden Mile into a dedicated public transport/pedestrian space Yes/N.

d. Extending the rail system through the Wellington CBD, by developing modern trams as a priority for the short term Y/No – $140+ million is unaffordable in the short-term given the impending water supply crisis (we may need the $140 million for a dam) and the fact council have already incurred substantial debt – and now we have to accommodate the leaky homes bail-out. Water has to come before transport – and I’m not sure if the public want another rates increase. That said, there are other alternatives in the short-term that can be done to improve public transport – see below. Best we can do now is explore costings and implementation plan for rail extension – and put out to public for feedback with alternative options.

e. A Basin Reserve flyover Y/No. There are much better alternatives that also provide greener spaces and safer access to nearby schools. I’ve cited these on my blog. The recent use of the traffic warden camera cars would seem to suggest the council are also concerned over safety around schools? So a flyover should logically not get much support if any. However, voting history on transport issues would suggest otherwise.

f. Doubling the Terrace Tunnel Y/No – Not in the short term. Poor decision making by existing councilors in locating the new indoor stadium in Cobham Drive will put pressure on this tunnel to be expanded. An outcome every councilor who voted for it knew would happen. Make sure you publish the names of those councilors who voted for it. And make sure they do not get in again. They had their chance to show their support for reducing unsustainable transport systems – and failed. Unfortunately we have more pressing short term pressure on the public fund – our water supply. We cannot afford to fund a $176 million dollar tunnel expansion project until we have sorted out our water supply.

g. Doubling the Mt Victoria Tunnel Y/No – Not in the short term. See comments above.

h. The Kapiti Expressway Y/NA – Not a city or ward issue. But it does appear to divide that region in two. Is that desirable? What are the alternatives?

3. Do you support the creation of an integrated public transport system across the region? If so, what changes would you propose making to bring this about?

Yes, an integrated system would be desirable. How? For a start, getting all the different parties and stakeholders together to agree on such a vision. And then making it happen through an agreed plan. Definitely part of a long term vision plan that the public are aware of – which is something we do not appear to have at present.

4. What do you consider should be the top transport priorities of the Council for which you are standing?

Short term – ensuring all council actions reinforce the message to use public transport. At present, council are sending mixed messages. Why are we increasing fares for public transport, if we want to reduce congestion? Why didn’t our council do something to prevent this before it went public? Why did our council support the indoor sports facility at Cobham Drive – knowing full well it would put pressure on traffic congestion. A tunnel expansion could have been avoided. We also need to improve our bus system, improve flow management and shift it to sustainable energy. Our buses can be made a more appealing option over the next 3 years. If light rail can have a dedicated corridor, why can’t buses? What other improvements can we make to our bus services to make them more appealing. Finally council need to clearly communicate a long term vision for public transport and be responsive to public feedback. Unfortunately, the council have not been very good in listening to its communities. Clearly there is support for light rail – so we need to sound this out and put in place costings and if this would be rolled out in an affordable manner – as well as offer alternatives (improved bus electrification and design). It might be more transport hubs are the way of the future (eg an integrated mixed solution)? We need to be re-examining all those reports comissioned by the council some time ago that are gathering dust.

5. What are your own top transport priorities for the region?

(1) Better decisions that do not put pressure on our existing transport system. The existing council have put unnecessary pressure on the Mt Vic tunnel and the wider basin area by locating the new Indoor Sports Facility in Cobham Drive. The facility should have been located next to the stadium to maximise the existing public transport hub and to enable broader use by the local business community. Any councilor who voted for Cobham Drive should be held accountable and not receive your vote if good transport systems are important to you.

(2) Improving our bus service through better flow management. Light rail proposals will require a dedicated corridor – why can’t we provide this for buses? There are a number of small improvements we could make to our bus system in the short-term.

(3) How are council incentivising car pooling? Not much action here either.

(4) I’d also like to see a bike-hire scheme (already in Paris and London) considered. This would require more consideration for providing space for cycle use in the city.

(5) Better co-ordinated infrastructural maintenance that reduces traffic congestion.

(6) We need to have a long-term plan, and be heading towards it. Something that has been seriously lacking.

(7) All my thoughts on transport issues can be found by clicking “transport” on the tag cloud of my blog.

A simple message

My message for you is a simple one.

If you want your council to listen to you, now and in the future – hold them accountable.

Show them the consequences of failing to listening to you, of failing to respond to you, of failing to prioritise spending sensibly, of failing to keep rates under control, of failing to protect the things you value.

If you show you are willing to vote people off council.

Council will listen.

Council will consult.

Now and in the future.

It’s a tough lesson. But its one our council needs if we want sensible decision making in the future.

Over this election you will hear from two types of candidates.

Those you are prepared to vote out.

And those you may want to vote in.

And remember, every incumbent councilor was once a new candidate.

Fortunately in this election there are a number of very capable new candidates – some even smarter than the incumbent councilors. And they come without any of the personal baggage or personal in-fighting that has derailed sensible decision making in this city over the last 3 years. They also come with fresh new ideas – and values that more closely reflect the aspirations of our city.

Its time for change. Because you and our city deserves better.

50 posts

This is post number 50.

I’ve written about a lot of issues over the last 4+ months – and these have been tagged with a topic theme.

As you can see in the tag cloud (to the right) some issues have received more discussion than others – which explains why some words are larger than others.

So if you want to see where I stand or my opinion on a particular topic – click the tag cloud to display everything I have said on that topic. For example, clicking “library” in the tag cloud will bring up articles about libraries, or have referred to libraries.

Enjoy and be informed.