Bill Dalton

I had a call from an old mate of mine on Sunday Morning – one Dudley Payne. Now Dudley is no spring chicken and he’s one of those guys who has always put his heart and soul into everything he’s done. He’s an ex dairy farmer, an ex motelier, an ex aviator, an ex veteran car restorer and owner, and he has retained an interest in all of those fields. And despite having slowed up physically in the years following his 80th birthday, his mind is as sharp as a tack. So Dudley rang on Sunday morning and said “stand by – I’m coming to pick you up and I’m going to show you how to sort this city out”. That’s not exactly what he said because Dudley’s language can get somewhat colourful when he’s in full flight – but you get the drift.

Dudley arrived dead on time and off we went. Many of his suggestions were great in theory but in practice simply could not work. Like many people, Dudley was not aware of the amount of land in and around Napier that has been set aside for the settlement of Maori land claims. I am sure that once these claims are settled we will be able to move forward because the Maori owners will want to get a return on their assets once they are in their hands. But in the mean time, until clear ownership is achieved, planning for the use of this land is difficult if not impossible.

But we drove to Ahuriri to look at the rail yards and to the site where Dudley believes they should be shifted to. We drove to Park Island, to the Airport, to Westshore – we covered a lot of ground. And all the time the ideas were simply bubbling out of my old mate Dudley. We discussed parking in the city, the Marine Parade, Hawkes Bay governance – you name it and we discussed it. In fact it would be fair to say that given an unlimited budget, we could have cured all the city’s ills.

Isn’t it encouraging to know that we have still got citizens in our midst who have maintained their excitement for, and commitment to, the future of our city. So many these days either don’t care or if they do care, they are not prepared to make the effort to contribute. Others of course have become disenchanted with the Bay because Lawrence Yule constantly tells them how bad it is – and that’s sad.

Hawkes Bay could do with a whole lot more Dudley Paynes. People who are committed to the future well-being of the province rather than to building an empire within it.

There is no doubt that wage increases are not keeping pace with the rising cost of basic food items. I am told that those with young families are finding it particularly difficult and I can understand that. But I wonder how much effort some people put in to producing healthy low cost meals for their families. Lately I have taken particular note of the contents of supermarket trollies being pushed by young parents and I am often appalled at the amount of pre-prepared, pre-packaged foodstuffs in the trollies. And don’t even get me started on the amount of money that must be being spent on cat and dog food.

I am also amazed at the frequency with which many of these families have takeaways. That must really stretch the budget.

So I thought I would try an experiment.

I went to the wholesalers and bought a huge piece of Chuck Steak. It cost $53. I then went to the cheap vegetable place and bought $6 worth of vegetables. I came home and cut all the good bits out of the meat, putting anything even slightly fatty to one side. I then browned the big chunks of meat in a pan out on the BBQ, and put some in a casserole dish, some in the croc-pot and some aside to be frozen ready for a good stew sometime in the future. There was enough meat for 20 generous servings and no doubt enough left over for a bit of lunch the next day. So I peeled the swede, the carrots and plenty of onions and biffed them into the casserole dish and croc-pot together with some water, pepper and salt, some Worcester sauce and a bit of beef stock.

The end result of all this was a croc-pot of beautiful meat and vegetable stew that will serve at least 8 which we will freeze, a casserole that will serve 4 for now and enough meat for another casserole which will serve at least 8 in the freezer – and I’m a big eater – with kids the meat would go much further.

I then minced the rest of the meat for the cat and the dog and Shirl tells me – that amount of meat in the pet food department of the supermarket would have cost $20 to $30.

So, if you deduct the value of the pet food from the total cost of $60, we have ended up with at least 20 very generous servings of meat and vegetables for $40 or $2 per head per meal. And I scored a few brownie points as well. Surely that can’t be bad.

But I’m not spending all my retirement hours trying to save a buck in the kitchen. This week, Napier City Councillors and Senior Officers have got two full days of strategic planning as we begin the review of our Long Term Plan. This is a really important undertaking, not made any easier by some of the rubbish that is being bandied about regarding the immediate future governance of our city.

And the following week looks like being a busy one as well. We’ve got a workshop with the Hastings District Council to discuss a Joint Alcohol Strategy, a Regional Events Strategy and the levels of service agreement with the Hawkes Bay Museums Trust. All this from a group of people who Lawrence Yule says can’t and won’t work together. Later in the week we’ve got an Officers presentation on Park Island and a Finance Audit and Risk committee meeting which I chair, followed by a Regulatory Services committee meeting.

So it’s all go for Councillors at the moment and that makes my wife very happy because it keeps me from getting under her feet in the kitchen.

I was shopping in Hastings the other day and the shopkeeper jokingly suggested that I was brave crossing the river – that Lawrence Yule might put his hit-squad onto me. I was delighted to tell him that just the previous evening Lawrence and I had sat in my workshop over a cold beer and had a good yarn about the whole situation. You see – we both want the same thing – the best outcome for Hawkes Bay. We just have different views on how to achieve that outcome.

The Deputy Chair of the Hawkes Bay Regional Council Ewan McGregor, in his recent newsletter, suggests that Hawkes Bay people may well be tired of the debate on the pros and cons of amalgamation.

For once Ewan has got something right.

Unlike some others, my position on amalgamation has not changed since the debate began. I have constantly said that at some time in the future it might make sense to have one governance team in Hawkes Bay. But throwing everyone together in a rushed shotgun marriage would be ridiculously disruptive and expensive. It simply makes no sense. I have long advocated an aggressive move to align all regulatory processes and contract dates to enable the region to extract all the efficiencies possible out of the system. Once all systems and processes are aligned we can then ask these simple questions: Now we are working so closely together does it make sense to complete the process and fully amalgamate? Or have we extracted all the efficiencies possible and there is no need to alter the governance system that gives our two quite different cities a great degree of self determination?

It is my view that trying to thrust Napier, Hastings and the Regional Council together without doing the preparatory work first would be an absolute disaster for Hawkes Bay. In fact it is interesting to hear some local politicians saying they have been advocating amalgamation for many years. Ewan, for example, claims he has been on the case for 10 years. And what have these people been doing about it? Nothing. What effort have they put into ensuring that the various local bodies they serve have aligned regulatory processes and shared services so that a discussion could take place about what the next sensible move might be? None.

Many of the comments supporting amalgamation centre on the need for “One Voice for the Bay”. Frankly, many of those making that call are either ignorant of the facts or are being disingenuous. Much progress has been made in this area and where it counts we have one voice for Hawkes Bay. We have got rid of the hopelessly inefficient tourism and economic development organization and we now have a separate Hawkes Bay Tourism organization and a Hawkes Bay Business organization. We have a Hawkes Bay Chamber of Commerce, a Regional Transport group, a Heretaunga Plains Urban Design group, a joint waste minimization group and the HB Airport Company that both the Napier and Hastings councils are involved in. And of course the Omarunui Landfill – that is the perfect example of how the region can work together. And the list goes on. And when did you last drink Hastings or Napier wine. You, of course proudly drink Hawkes Bay wines. Where it matters we already speak with one voice.

Enormous progress has been made in the last three or four years towards a more co-operative and collaborative environment for Local Body Hawkes Bay but there is still much to be done. Only when that work is done should we even think about what the next step might be.

Now it’s not very often I agree with comments made by Willie Jackson. But the other day he made a very perceptive comment. It was during a wide ranging discussion on politics and the interviewer raised the subject of recent political polls. John Key was bolting away as preferred Prime Minister and Phil Goff was continuing to languish – down to single figures.

And Willie Jackson quite clearly pointed out how difficult it was to be in opposition, trying to unseat a Prime Minister who is the darling of the media. Just that week, Phil Goff and his unfortunate choice of shadow finance minister Cunliffe, had announced Labour’s capital tax policy. But rather then a serious discussion of the pros and cons of that policy filling our newspapers, there were photos of John Key – or was it John Keys – sitting in the oval office with the most powerful politician in the world. It was impressive stuff and no-one took much notice of poor old Phil’s ideas of capital gains tax. Perhaps for Labour, it was just as well.

But the fact remains that an incumbent politician has all the aces in their pack when it comes to promoting themselves and more importantly, getting the attention of the media.

We see it on a local basis too. Some of the most frequent questions I get asked are: What do you councillors do? Does Barbara totally rule the roost? Does she make all the decisions? And the answers are that no, she doesn’t rule the roost and no she doesn’t make all the decisions. And the councillors are actively involved in the debating and decision making process within council. Sure Barbara is a clever politician and she wants her name out front. And why wouldn’t she – she is the Mayor. But the media have a big part to play in this as well. Naturally they want comment from the Mayor rather than any individual councillor’s comment. And they know that Barbara is usually keen to oblige.

So clearly, in political promotion terms, the incumbent politician has the cards stacked in their favour.

But that’s the way it has always been – nothing has changed. It just demonstrates how important the media are in our otherwise boring lives.

I would like to take this opportunity to wish my wife Shirley a very happy birthday for yesterday – a birthday which has quite a big number in front of it. And in respect of such an auspicious occasion, I have promised not to mention the dreaded “A” word.

But I just have to mount one of my real hobby horses again – the ridiculous electoral system we call MMP.

The latest Horizon poll shows that the National Party is more than 10% ahead of the Labour Party. Now that would suggest that National as the party with most support, should be able to form a government in November. But that’s not the case. By the time Labour cobbles up support from it’s minor parties and assuming National does the same, the two coalitions are basically level pegging. And because the minor parties don’t have to align themselves to one coalition team or the other before we vote, the likelihood is that a minor party, perhaps with some radical agenda, could hold us all to ransom again. How stupid is that.

So what are the two major parties doing to shore up support for their coalitions. National needs ACT and United Future and perhaps the Maori Party. Both ACT and the United Future party are polling so low that at this stage they may not win sufficient votes to gain seats unless they win an electorate seat. So in Peter Dunne’s electorate, National is going to contest the party vote only. They have got a good candidate who they are instructing not to erode Peter Dunne’s vote. The reward for the candidate in this appalling situation is that she will no doubt be promised a safe position on National’s list. And it looks like the Green candidate in Ohariu is going to support the Labour candidate. I thought that in a democracy, the best person was supposed to win. Clearly not. It seems that the party that is prepared to get up to the most skullduggery is more likely to win.

They look like doing the same thing in Epsom to ensure John Banks returns to parliament. This is the John Banks who is only standing for ACT because he disagrees totally with the economic direction his old mates in the National government are taking. This is the John Banks who will probably only get back into parliament with the support of the people he opposes. And it gets worse. The whole reason for John Banks standing in Epsom, is to get Don Brash in on the ACT list. And not only do the National Party not want their former leader back in parliament, but the ACT party themselves clearly don’t think Brash can win Epsom. Am I the only one who finds this whole situation absolutely bizarre?

Labour needs the Greens and will no doubt be up to the same tricks – and that’s what MMP elections are all about – tricks.

I just hate what MMP has done to this country. It has created divisions and provided a platform from which radicals like Harawira can be heard. It has driven young people away from this country because they don’t want to live in the sort of country that allows such nonsense.

We simply need to remember that, taking a world view, our population merely represents a village – 4.2 million people. In the past we have always fought above our weight in business, in sports and in the arts. MMP is providing us with hamstrung coalition governments that will ensure those glory days are gone.

I went to listen to visiting Australian academic Professor Graham Sansom the other night. He is a specialist in local body reform and he certainly presented an interesting point of view.

And I must congratulate the Hawkes Bay Chamber of Commerce for providing a forum to enable us to hear Lawrence Yule’s invitee. The more information we have the better decision we will eventually make.

Professor Sansom began his address by saying that doing nothing was not an option – that the status quo was unacceptable. He then went on to explain that the metropolitan area of Sydney has over 40 councils, Melbourne has more than 30 and Adelaide more than 20. He is adamant that change must take place and frankly without knowing the slightest thing about it, over 40 councils in metropolitan Sydney does sound ridiculous. I wonder however, how the fact that Australia’s metropolitan areas have too many councils is relevant to the debate we are having about the governance of two distinctly different cities 20 kilometres apart.

During the course of his address, which was very well presented, Professor Sansom told us that the Brisbane City Council was one of the most successful councils in Australia and it has had the same structure for 80 years. A very perceptive Napier City Councillor, Maxine Boag, raised this apparent contradiction with the Prof in question time. “If doing nothing was not an option in terms of possible reform – if the status quo was unacceptable, how come Brisbane, one of the most successful councils in Australia, has had the same structure for 80 years and there was no pressure to change it?” I have to say the Prof handled the question well and he admitted that it really was a contradiction. Eventually he said that Brisbane hadn’t changed because it had an electoral system that suited the city. Interesting isn’t it!

To his credit, considering he was in Hawkes Bay at the request of Lawrence Yule, Professor Sansom did point out that if amalgamation did take place it would be extremely disruptive and extremely expensive. He of course, believes that disruption and expense will be worth it in the long term. He also said that amalgamation was unlikely to result in any reductions in rates as any savings would be retained by the council to fund further services.

Because Professor Sansom claims that amalgamating councils is generally a successful process, I was alarmed to find that when checking to gauge this success, they didn’t bother to ask the ratepayers what they thought. Surely councils are simply servant organizations of the people and the peoples opinion is the one that really counts. Certainly the polls I have seen reported in the press in Queensland suggest that the ratepayers are very dissatisfied with the process.

So in summary I found the lecture informative and interesting but frankly it just reinforced my view that rushing in to amalgamation is absolutely the wrong thing to do. As this discussion continues, I hope that all councils will continue to work to align all regulatory and contract matters so that any impediment to economic growth, whether real or imagined is removed.

Several things have happened lately that reinforces my view that we live in the best spot in the world.

Yesterday Shirl took me to lunch and then we walked the Rotary Pathway from the Port to the fishing club and back. It was just glorious. There was no wind, the summer sun was shining off the water and the place looked a picture. Kids were playing in the sand and people were enjoying ice creams – yes and this is late July.

Then last night we rugged up and after a delightful meal at the rugby as a guest of my old firm Somerset Smith Partners, we enjoyed seeing Hawke’s Bay beat Southland. It’s funny how a win always makes you feel good about things. When we got home we had a good chat over a cup of coffee and discussed just how fortunate we are. The only downside being that so many of our young ones have to head out of the Bay for education or career opportunities.

Then just this morning I stepped out of the shower to hear Shirley talking to my daughter Jane on skype. It was a perfect picture, the sound was excellent – Jane could have been in the room not thousands of miles away in London. And it made me realise that even though they are a long way away, modern communications allow these youngsters to keep in touch. Our generation is so lucky. Often, when our kids start having kids, they head home again so they can have built in baby sitters and the whole process starts again.

Modern communications have changed the way we think about where we want to live. And that’s why the ultra-high-speed broadband that’s being reticulated through Hawke’s Bay is one of the most important economic opportunities we have seen for generations. It opens up all sorts of opportunities for families to return to the Bay when previously they would be stuck in the big cities.

High speed broadband and the water storage system the HB Regional Council is looking at are likely to provide the economic impetus that Hawke’s Bay has been lacking since sheep numbers were cut so drastically.

I commend those who are taking these initiatives and look forward to increasing prospects in the Bay.

I promised myself that I wasn’t going to mention amalgamation this week but Rodney Hide talked me into it.

On Monday of this week the Hon Rodney Hide addressed the Local Government Annual Conference. Now I’m sure you all know that Rodney is the Minister for Local Government and was responsible for creating the super council for Auckland. Clearly he knows a great deal about local body amalgamations. He is absolutely convinced that the Auckland local body set-up was shambolic at best and needed radical reform. However during his address, when talking about amalgamation in the rest of the country, he had this to say:

“Amalgamation is risky. It’s too easy to end up with councils even more remote and more bureaucratic – losing the local in local decision making.
So looking ahead I see benefits in shared services and councils working together, on both projects and plans, for the wider regions of which their communities are a part. I believe in that way we can enjoy the benefits of amalgamation while keeping the local in local government and avoiding the risks of amalgamation”.

Interesting isn’t it. The Minister of Local Government telling us that amalgamation is risky. The Minister of Local Government telling us that amalgamated councils can end up more remote and more bureaucratic – that the local could be lost from local decision making. The Minister of Local Government telling us we should look to working together and sharing our services so that we get the benefits of amalgamation without the risks.

I’m sure that would have taken the smile of Lawrence’s face even if it didn’t change his mind. And that’s what worries me. Lawrence and his silent few are so convinced that amalgamation is the answer to all our ills, both perceived and real, that they are not looking for an open well researched debate, they are looking to justify their entrenched position.

Three years ago, the Queensland State Government imposed amalgamation on their local bodies. It has been an unmitigated disaster. On the 10th April the Sunday Mail published the results of a survey they had undertaken and they were astonishing. Rates have risen 30% since amalgamation and council debt levels have trebled. On the Sunshine Coast 71% of residents said they would now vote for de-amalgamation and that figure rises to 97% in Noosa town. An amazing 95% of those polled said they were either worse off or no better off. Almost 50% said that the service they received from their council is worse and only 3% claimed overall satisfaction. Six regions in Queensland were surveyed and in those amalgamated areas, 6 out of 10 said they were getting less value for their rates.

Perhaps Rodney Hide is right. Amalgamation is too risky to undertake and we should be looking to simply work together, share services and retain local representation.

My position on amalgamation has not altered. All the evidence I have gathered supports my original view despite the fact that I have endeavoured to retain an open mind. And for those I haven’t already bored to death it is this:

A shotgun amalgamation is not in the best interests of Hawkes Bay as a whole. We should share services, align regulations and contract dates and extract all the efficiencies possible. Only then, at an appropriate time in the future we can say either (a) We are now working so closely together that the next sensible step is amalgamation or (b) we are extracting all the efficiencies and have retained our local representation, why would we change things.

So that’s how I see it. And I promise you that next week I will prattle on about something else. The amalgamation debate is an important one but my dear wife for one, is sick of hearing about it.

In October 2010 Lawrence Yule was elected Mayor of the Hastings District following a campaign largely funded by anonymous donations. And that’s OK – I’m not suggesting any wrongdoing on Lawrence’s part.

However he now appears to be representing the “Secret Squirrel Society” who are hell bent on amalgamating our districts local bodies. The members of this secret band who, unlike Lawrence’s campaign supporters are known to him, seem determined to keep their identities secret. Why? Many of us already know who they are – why don’t they just front up and openly add their opinions to the debate. Presumably they have put together a good case for amalgamation – why don’t they simply share it with us? In fact why don’t they share it with Lawrence because he obviously has no idea how amalgamation is going to magically make us better off. If he did, I am sure, in his open and honest manner, he would be telling us about it. Instead we are being told what is wrong, that we should amalgamate and that all will be better. Simply not good enough.

In the absence of reasoned arguments from proponents of amalgamation, we are getting letters to the press full of ill-informed nonsense like the one published on the 4th July from Mark Annand. Let me make a few points for Mr Annand.

1) As stated, twelve years ago the Local Government Commission decided Napier and Hastings constituted a single community of interest. The people of Hawkes Bay did not agree.
2) His suggestion that the Napier Council will ultimately be irrelevant says everything about where he believes the powerbase of Hawkes Bay should be.
3) His suggestion that things like resource management planning, regional transport planning and public transport planning are managed in a piecemeal fashion is complete garbage. All these matters together with the landfill and many other services are now considered and/or administered on a regional basis.
4) His comment on Mayor Barbara’s supposed opposition to the airport runway extension is pathetic. Once a sound business plan supporting the runway extension was put to us by the Airport Company, the Mayor and most of the Napier City councillors supported the project.
5) His suggestion that we could have all been enjoying the benefit of jet services and freedom from Air New Zealand’s monopoly much sooner is equally pathetic. I invite Mr Annand to ring Nigel Sutton, the Chief Executive of the airport company, and ask him when Air New Zealand or any other airline for that matter intend scheduling jet services into Hawkes Bay.

Most things that the likes of Mr Annand are suggesting could be better done under an amalgamated council are currently either being done on a regional basis or could easily be done in that manner. That doesn’t require our region to loose our significantly advantageous “Twin Cities” status.

As I have said – until the proponents of amalgamation are prepared to share their business plan and vision with us all, we will get all sorts of irrelevant and erroneous information being bandied about.

I have no doubt that the Napier City Council will come under attack for, at this stage at least, refusing to contribute $50,000 towards a feasibility study on amalgamation. Frankly we are simply being prudent with our ratepayers money. Lawrence’s covert poll shows there is no clear majority supporting amalgamation in Napier at the moment and besides, no one has determined the terms of reference for the study. We are being asked to toss $50,000 in to fund a project we have had no input into.

There is one question I would like answered and it’s this:

We as ratepayers pay our rates to the Napier City Council where our councillors are paid to act in our best interests – in the best interests of Napier. How will paying our rates to a council, which by sheer weight of numbers will be dominated by Hastings councillors, improve the lot of Napier ratepayers and Napier as a city?

It’s a simple question isn’t it!

I am somewhat heartened by the result in the Tai Tokerau bi-election. Heartened because more people voted for someone other than Hone Harawira than voted for him. That suggests to me that even in the Far North, people are starting to see Harawira in a different light. I only hope that trend continues into the election in November and Harawira gets tossed out of our House of Representatives altogether. He is a racist rabble rouser and a disgrace to our parliament. If you are in any doubt about that, have a look at the transcript of the comments he made about the Maori Party and its leaders after he had been advised of his win. No humility for Hone, he just launched into an attack on his former colleagues in language totally unbecoming a member of parliament. In fact it was nothing short of disgraceful and sets an appalling example for our youngsters.

It is now just two months until the election campaign proper begins. Whilst campaigning is certainly taking place right now, the 25th August is when counting the spending begins. And frankly the election is looking like being a shambles, as you could expect under MMP and with people like Harawira in the mix.

On the local scene I’m picking Stuart Nash to give Chris Tremain a run for his money. Chris has the majority and should win but he has made a very bad call by backing the amalgamation of the various local bodies. How can an intelligent fellow like Chris support amalgamation when the debate so far has been at such a pathetic level. What facts is he basing his support on? The answer of course is none. Costings have not been done, no business plan has been prepared and there is a total lack of substantiated facts in the debate. It is all emotional clap-trap.

Lawrence Yule is rushing around Hawkes Bay showing a powerpoint presentation wherever more than two people gather. Frankly it is an appalling presentation. It starts by showing all the negative statistics we are all well aware of – high unemployment – low wages – poor population growth – that sort of thing, and then makes a massive leap of logic and faith and talks about a Hawkes Bay that our children and grandchildren can enjoy. The only thing linking the two is amalgamation but nowhere does it tell us how amalgamation is going to create this wonderful prosperity. Is amalgamation suddenly going to provide us with an oil and gas industry like Taranaki? Is it suddenly going to provide us with a university and teachers college like Manawatu? What can a combined or grouped governance situation do for economic growth that the current system can not? That is the sort of question that needs to be answered.

Rather than funding covert polls of Napier residents, the anonymous financial group who are using Lawrence as their spokesperson, should fund a proper financial investigation and produce a detailed business plan. Then we could start discussing facts not fallacies.

There are many in Hawkes Bay who would support amalgamation if a compelling business plan was produced. And surely the onus is on those promoting the idea to produce that plan to support their argument.