Bill Dalton

In my last blog posting, before I went overseas, I said that the silly season was upon us. And it is.

We have now had several meet the candidates meetings and the same old nonsense has been spouted by all.

One by one current councillors get to their feet and lay claim to have been the driving force behind the good and successful things we have done. One by one the aspiring councillors get to their feet and tell us about the things they feel the council should be doing (most are already being done and others have been looked at and found to be prohibitively expensive) despite the fact that they haven’t any idea how these things could be funded. One, in a display of particularly poor taste, is trying to buy his way onto council.

And everyone says they are passionate about Napier and want to keep the rates down.

The truth is that the role of a councillor is vastly different than the picture painted by those on the hustings. Sure councillors should be leaders of opinion but the primary role of a councillor is to gather information from all sources including the ratepayers, and to use that information to debate matters effectively around the council table.

In the past, Napier has often had councils containing real prima-donnas and the press has had a field day reporting the running battles. Frankly these self-promoting misfits have no place in a council chamber and I am very pleased to say that the current Napier council does not have any members who put their own image above that of the council.

Sure we disagree on matters. Sure things can get a little heated at times. Sure you win some arguments and lose others. But the important thing, and the thing that differentiates this council from some previous councils, is that we debate the issues without making it personal.

One thing that bugs me is that because we all behave in a business-like way, because we don’t indulge in personal attacks and therefore make the headlines, there is a perception that we do nothing and that perception is very wrong.

The Napier City Council is in better financial shape then it has been for over 50 years. And that doesn’t happen by accident. That position has been arrived at because good decisions have been made at council level and a lot of very hard work has been done by our senior officers and staff.

So Napier ratepayers have a very good team working for them and the city reflects that fact.

I have been saying for some time that the silly season of local politics is upon us, but the real nonsense is about to begin.

Nominations opened last Friday and close August the 20th. Some, like me, who don’t like playing games, have already lodged their nomination forms. Others will play the tired old game of saying they are unsure or not going to stand only to put their nomination in near the end because they have “come under enormous pressure to do so”. Frankly if they need someone else to make up their mind for them then they should find something else to do.

But the worst part of any election year is the plethora of ugly electioneering signs that will soon desecrate our city. Some of these signs are in deplorable condition having been used in many elections. Some of them will show us what the candidate looked like 3-6-9 years ago. Some are bound to have “Say no to water meters” plastered all over them. But all of them will be ugly.

Any overseas tourist arriving in our district between August and October in election year must think we live in the scruffiest country in the world.

Why don’t we ban election boardings? Why don’t we say to candidates they must use the established media or flyers delivered to letterboxes to get their message across? As long as everyone has to abide by the same rules, no one will be disadvantaged.

And our district would be a much better looking place for residents as well as visitors.

It strikes me as a bit of an insult to say to the voters, I want you vote for me because you saw my name on a billboard. Surely the 45% of the potential voters who bother to vote think more about the issues than that.

Frankly I find electioneering tiresome and non-productive. In 2007 the Hawkes Bay Today arranged a campaign meeting at the Municipal Theatre. There were about 6 people there who weren’t brothers, sisters, mothers etc of the candidates. There were 26 of us on the stage. A question was asked and we all in turn stepped forward to give our answers. Virtually every answer was the same.

I fail to see how that helped anyone decide who they were going to vote for.

One single issue group got all candidates to answer an extensive questionnaire then endorsed their own candidates anyway.

Hopefully, this time around, there will be less of that time wasting rubbish.

I am delighted that at today’s Napier City Council meeting we will be receiving a report from our Chief Executive, Neil Taylor, on progress he and his officers have made in working collaboratively with Ross McLeod and his officers in Hastings.

Delighted because I have been pushing for greater collaboration and co-operation between the two authorities for the last three years, just as Wayne Bradshaw has done at the Hastings District Council. I have to say that my job has been easier than Wayne’s because there is a consensus amongst Napier City Councillors that we should extract every efficiency possible from the administration of the whole district. It appears Wayne has had to do a lot more pushing and prodding in Hastings but real progress is being made.

Now there is real momentum and we are seeing tangible results on the co-operation front. Long may it continue.

It makes me laugh to see Councillors from around the region, Councillors who have been around for a long time, jumping on populist band wagons in this an election year. And they say things like “this matter needs looking into”, “something needs to be done”, “requires some attention”. What they are really saying is that despite them having been an elected member of one Council or another for years they have done nothing to solve some of these problems we face. They know electors want the problems solved so they make wishy washy statements that lead electors to believe they will deal with the issue. They haven’t so far so what’s going to change?

If you can believe the rumours swirling around the town, some of our most successful businessmen are putting substantial resources behind getting their people elected to the local councils, especially the regional council.

That worries me. I admire success – it takes skill and hard work – the very attributes we want in Councillors. If the rumours are true and there is dissatisfaction with the performance of elected members, why don’t these business people have the guts to stand themselves? Why train puppets?

My advice to experienced business people who feel the job could be done better – put your name in the hat.

I for one would welcome the sort of skills many of these people have, being utilised for the good of the region as a whole.

There is no doubt politics is a tough playground to play in. Gordon Brown, the British Prime Minister was one of the strongest and most decisive leaders during the economic meltdown that struck the world in 2008 and 2009. He acted whilst others dithered. But it appears the British public have given him no credit for that international leadership.

And now Britain has got a ridiculous government that is bound to fail. No coalition government has run full term in Britain other than in war time, and this one will be no different. How can a party on the right of the political spectrum, work successfully with a party that is radically left of the Labour Party. It beggars belief.

It is almost as stupid as the situation we have here in New Zealand. How any one party can produce Don Brash and his Orewa speech and John Key and his pandering to all things Maori, I don’t know. How does a government made up of a steady as you go – don’t upset the voters party, a redneck right wing party and a what’s in it for us racist party, govern New Zealand? And the answer to that is not very well. Clearly the New Zealand economy is being as well managed as possible in these extremely difficult times but the degradation in the social fabric of our country is alarming.

We will never compete with Australia economically but we can be a nicer place to live. Right now we are not.

A client said to me yesterday that all the bright kids are heading overseas and New Zealand is becoming a nation of dumbos and slick-willy financial conmen. A bit radical I thought but I know where he is coming from.

We seem to have our priorities all wrong. We have armies of policemen doing booze checkpoints at 4.30 in the afternoon in Waipukurau and yet violent crime is out of control on our streets. We are told by the police hierarchy that they are having a war on speeding and if necessary they will sit policemen up trees to catch speeding motorists.

How bloody silly is that? Don’t waste the time of police personnel by sitting them up trees to catch some poor sod doing a few clicks over the limit – put them on the streets in our cities and let’s get rid of the scumbags that are increasingly giving New Zealand a poor reputation.

Our Government needs to know that there is more to running a country than fiddling with the figures and pandering to their junior coalition partners.

It is now abundantly clear that the election year silly season is upon us.

In Hastings, Lawrence Yule has decided that 2010 is the year to very publicly call for a ban on dangerous dogs and dear old Henare O’Keefe has taken the opportunity to tell us in the press, how much he loves his wife.

In Napier, Mayor Barbara has had her picture taken with a bike stand and a statue or two and a couple of her councillors have had their picture taken with the new roadside welcome signs.

The Napier City Council Corporate Business committee made the first stupid decision I have seen made since I’ve been a councillor when it voted against the Remuneration Authority’s recommendation to increase Councillor’s wages. I’ve argued for and against things and lost, but this was plain silly. To go against the very strong recommendation of the Authority suggests election year political posturing and a lack of understanding of the Authority’s role. The Remuneration Authority said they were concerned that remuneration would become a matter of political contention at election time. And guess what – it has.

And the nutters are re-surfacing too. One emailed me with the number of times I had posted to my blog and the number of responses my postings had evoked. What this poor demented soul doesn’t realise, is that it is the number of hits that is important to me – not responses. He should realise by now that none of his vitriolic rubbish gets through the system and on to my blog. To have a blog such as mine costs money, requires something intelligent to say and needs a reasonable understanding of the English language with which to convey the message.

All of these attributes would be foreign to my correspondent.

There is no way I’m going to spend my money and energy to provide a forum for the fruit loops of our society.

So the media will not be short of material and invitations to events in 2010. It is sad but true, that often it is those who know how to play the “game” of politics that poll better, than very capable people who don’t.

All I hope is that people get involved in this election. It has always disappointed me that there is such a lack of interest in local body politics.

It is your town folks and your money we are spending so get involved. You might just find it interesting and enjoyable.

I am delighted that the government has announced that there will be a referendum on MMP although it appears to me that the long drawn out process is planned to fail.

No one likes change and the whole MMP process has been managed to give it time to be accepted before the question of its future as an electoral system is challenged.

But whilst I appear to be increasingly in the minority, I am still of the opinion that MMP is a ridiculous system.

Take the Napier electorate as an example – and I stress I am not critical of the people involved – I am strongly critical of the system.

We had an elected Labour MP – Russell Fairbrother. Along came the National candidate, Chris Tremain and he beat Russell fair and square. The people of Napier said “We want Chris Tremain to be our representative in the House of Representatives”. So off Chris went to Wellington but so did Russell. He was high enough on the list to get back in.

Then in to town on his big red charger rode Stuart Nash. He challenged Russell Fairbrother for the Labour nomination and lost. The Labour party said we don’t want you Stuart, we want Russell, so Stuart went off and began the restructure of the Art Deco Trust.

At the next election Chris Tremain trounced Russell Fairbrother and Russell went back to the private sector feeling like the lucky lion who had escaped from the zoo.

Then the odd Labour member decided to go and do something else and a vacancy occurred in Wellington. So they rang Stuart and said “How would you like a seat in the House of Representatives?”, and off Stuart went to Wellington.

Who is he representing? Chris Tremain is our elected representative – the Labour Party rejected Stuart – how can we possibly accept a system that has people sitting in our House of Representatives who represent no-one?

And what does an opposition list MP do all day? They’ve got no constituents, can achieve nothing in Wellington – frankly they are just a spare part – a spare part in an electoral machine that needs a full overhaul.

It is a matter of record that I have real concerns about the formation of an “Auckland Super-City”. The current situation is clearly untenable and therefore change is required. But to move from an extremely fragmented system to one where all the power is concentrated into so few hands, seems to me to be almost undemocratic. It is going from one extreme to another and generally that is anything but positive.

Regular listeners will have often heard me say, that if I led a political party, it would be the SMG – the sensible middle ground party. The party where common sense prevails. It is my view that there is not too much common sense or sensible middle ground in Rodney Hide’s proposals for Auckland’s governance.

And neither is there any sense in the attitude of the Maori Party. I watched Hone Harawira on Q&A on Sunday morning – the most inappropriately scheduled programme on New Zealand TV – and frankly I was disgusted. This fellow clearly has no interest in a united New Zealand where we are one people – albeit from different racial backgrounds.

Whilst I have very real reservations about the “Auckland Super City” – if it is to happen – I can see no justification for seats being allocated on a racial basis. Auckland is the largest Polynesian city in the world – many of those Polynesians are Maori. Surely the answer is for Maori to stand worthy candidates and to rally support behind those candidates to ensure they are elected.

That, Mr Harawira, is democracy.

I have long been a supporter of the sensible settlement of Maori grievances. Where land was illegally confiscated, Maori should be compensated. Where there has been injustice – justice must prevail

But surely we have moved beyond the situation where we have to reserve seats on a city council representing one of the most multi-racial cities in the world, for members of any one race.

We live in a time of incredible change.

Politically New Zealand has moved right, America left and Fiji down the toilet.

On the investment front, the share market has gone from the flavour of the month to last weeks sour taste which of course is when clever investors are accumulating stocks.

Finance companies have gone from the chosen investment vehicle of many because of promised high incomes – to a sector which become populated by so many rip-off merchants that it now only exists due to government guarantees.

Our climate is changing – ask the poor cockies who are suffering with drought. Hawke’s Bay has received just 60% of its normal autumn rains and that means going into the winter without enough grass.

But one thing never changes.  And that’s New Zealanders love of knocking those with the guts to express an opinion.

As you know I have suggested that our current local body electoral system – the way we elect our councillors – is wrong.  I have suggested that there is a better way.  I have made these suggestions because a).  I believe the current system is nothing short of stupid and b).  I want to start a debate on the matter.  I want ratepayers to have their say.

And what has been the result – personal abuse.

I am told that I’m a Prima Donna because I have questioned the need for Wards.  I am accused of slagging ward councillor Maxine Boag when I’m on record as saying she does a good job in her ward.

Don’t get me wrong – the abuse is like water off a ducks back but what is disappointing, is that people, rather than giving their opinion on the wards/no wards debate, simply choose to abuse someone who is keen to see the best electoral system possible for Napier.

I say to these people – abusing me is a waste of your breath and will do nothing for Napier.

If you have a considered opinion on the matter of how your councillors are elected – have your say.  Let’s debate the merits of your views and my views.  Let’s debate the message not waste our energies slagging the messenger.

Dare I even suggest it – let’s be positive and get the best outcome for Napier.

I am absolutely intrigued to find that supporters of Napier’s partial ward system, are now saying that the Napier City Council has failed to make it work.
 
Sorry – am I missing something here? The Napier City council is not making the system work? The Napier City Council never wanted the system in the first place. In the 2004/2007 council, only Robin Gwynn supported a ward system. Robin Gwynn was the only councillor to lose his seat.

A tiny but determined minority ended up putting enough pressure on the electoral commission to convince them, in Wellington, that wards would somehow benefit Napier. Surely if this determined minority wants to prove to the city that wards are good for Napier, it is up to them to prove it.

There is nothing at all stopping them from calling a meeting in their ward. I am sure their ward Councillors would attend as would most city wide Councillors.

To have a situation where a vocal minority inflicts a system on the majority who are against it – and then for that vocal minority to suggest it is someone elses job to make their system work beggars belief.

For similar reasons I believe the proposed system for local body governance in Auckland is fraught with difficulty.

The Lord Mayor of Auckland and his 20 Councillors will be governing – in a local body sense – 1.4 million people. That is one third of New Zealand’s population.
 
The 20 Councillors will, no doubt, be elected on a party vote basis. So a Mayor and a simple majority of say, 11 Councillors, could be running a city made up of one third of New Zealand’s population.

For my dough that’s  getting up  the pointy end of the democratic process.

Surely such a system opens up all sorts of doors we simply don’t want to go through. Just imagine the resources the Government of the day could pour into the Auckland City Council to try and court favour with one third of our population.

Do you ever feel we change things for changes sake?

During the 2007 Local Body election campaign, I thought that the unsuccessful candidate, Caroline Lampp, was one of the better performers. I didn’t necessarily agree with her politics, but I thought she presented well. However the comments attributed to her in the Hawkes Bay Today on Friday the 3rd April would now suggest to me, that she is at best naïve and frankly – well – I don’t want to go into the alternatives.

The Hawkes Bay Today quotes her as saying “When councillors are elected at large, they do not necessarily have any understanding of their local community and more importantly, have little knowledge of those communities they don’t live in”

How does this recent import to Napier dare to question my understanding of my local community?

My local community is Napier and I have lived here for well over half a century.

If we are going to take the petty view that you need to live in a street to represent that street, how come my good friend Maxine Boag – a staunch supporter of wards – lives on Napier’s hill, represents The Nelson Park ward – and represents them well.

Simply put – Caroline Lampp is talking garbage. I expected better of her.

When councillors are sworn in, they swear to represent the interests of the city. That is the whole city and all its constituents. I took that oath in total sincerity.

My family has been in this town since 1867, Members of my family have served countless organizations across the whole spectrum of community endeavours. There would be very few sporting codes, community or artistic organizations in the city that have not benefited from Dalton family support.

And Ms Lampp – dares to question my understanding of my community.

What next!

I have lived, been educated and worked in the fair city of Napier for

55 of my 57 years. I think I have as good a knowledge of the broader community of Napier as anyone in the city. And I don’t need to live next door to my friends in Maraenui or Marewa or Pirimai or Westshore or Taradale to understand their problems.

So the suggestion that councillors elected on a city wide basis do not represent a “community of interest” is simply bollocks.

What Napier needs is the best team possible to represent the interests of all its citizens.

To suggest anything else is just nonsense.