O V E R V I E W
Kicking things off, Ch39 talks to University of Otago Associate Professor Janine Hayward, head of the Department of Politics.
Thu, 1 Sep 2016
Interviews with the 11 Dunedin mayoral candidates
Conrad Stedman | Fri, 2 Sep 2016
Athol Bayne | Mon, 5 Sep 2016
Scout Barbour-Evans | Tue, 6 Sep 2016
Abe Gray | Wed, 7 Sep 2016
Aaron Hawkins | Thu, 8 Sep 2016
Jim O’Malley | Fri, 9 Sep 2016
Rachel Elder | Mon, 12 Sep 2016
Barry Timmings | Tue, 13 Sep 2016
██ Who’s left…………. Andrew Whiley, Lee Vandervis and Dave Cull
Lee Vandervis | Wed, 14 Sep 2016
Andrew Whiley | Thu, 15 Sep 2016
Dave Cull | Fri, 16 Sep 2016
Posted by Elizabeth Kerr
Election Year. This post is offered in the public interest.
126 responses to “Channel 39 : Mayoral Candidates #NightlyInterviews”
Barry Timmings makes the most sense, by a long long way. However, the DCC staff gerrymander and the lack of name recognition will torpedo him, unless he
1. Gets thrown out of the labour party
2. Has the green party and Avaaz behind him
3. Sits on the back of buses
4. Stuffs up every financial deal like the current bun
5. Says hes against the stadium and then votes $20 million to keep it running
In short, despite being one of probably only two qualified candidates which does not include Cull de Mayor, he will be buried by the system and disenchanted will walk away to pursue success in other fields.
Sad but true.
Incidentally, he won’t be appointed an SDHB commissioner, too honest, too smart and too efficient sounding, not at all what the government wants here.
Sadly the greenies really believe their own propaganda… Sigh!
They are, bless’em, the least cynical supporters, party members and candidates. They’re also a tad below the sense of proportion line on the irony graph.
Barry Timmings has all the hallmarks of a good, business like mayor. If he was standing on the double ticket he’d have my vote for council no doubt. I just don’t believe that with the DCC in the turmoil it is on all fronts, that a new, untried person is the sort of gamble we can take. It’s not the chair of Rotary or parent teachers assoc we are talking about. It is the future and welfare of the citizens and as such inexperience (no matter the potential) is a risk too far. If ever there was a time for insight and understanding the people within the organisation then this is it. Barry would be a quick learner I’m sure and an asset on council. Still, I can understand his reluctance to sit at that table with the sort of deadbeats we generally have had in recent times.
Calvin, I agree. A likeable and talented man is Barry Timmings – and with eyes opened by overseas experience of Vancouver – one of the best cities to gauge opportunity.
Brief comments received from Waikouaiti this morning following the candidate forum last night.
All candidates got 3 minutes.
David Benson-Pope was probably the worst; used maybe two of his three minutes; said he was opposed to asset sales and sat down.
Silliest was Aaron Hawkins – climate change dominated; demonstrated his total unsuitability and stupidity with “Two pumps won’t fix climate change”.
Dave Cull was big on debt reduction and Chinese connections. He acknowledged some mistakes including cycleways. [so many DCC compound failures to account for under his reign, and inherited…]
Of the mayoral candidates, Cull possibly “spoke” the best; unfortunately it was 97% BS.
Lee Vandervis said more, but responded to Hawkins that pumps aren’t intended to fix climate change.
“Two pumps won’t fix climate change”. Just as well it will be fixed by Dunedin not investing in fossil fuels, and building cycle lanes.
How large were the carbon emissions created to generate over a million dollars of rates, in order to change Portobello Rd.
It started off as a place that was very safe for cycles, but very few cycles used.
After several redesigns and a million dollars, it has ended up being a place that is very safe for cycles, but very few cycles use.
Two pumps. Not a bad nickname for Aaron (Two Pumps) Hawkins.
All pump and no ceremony.
### channel39.co.nz Wed, 14 Sep 2016
Dunedin candidates debate economy
Dunedin residents have also been engaging with mayoral and councillor candidates at a forum in the city this afternoon. The debate was hosted by the Otago Daily Times and Otago Chamber of Commerce. Candidates introduced themselves and their ideas before a small crowd of about 70 people. The focus was on clarifying what each is hoping to achieve for business and economic development in the city and wider region. A question and answer session towards the end of the debate involved discussion about gigatown and how to entice more people to live in Dunedin.
Some of us had no idea it was on….
Lee Vandervis Ch39 interview added to post at top of thread.
70 listeners, 11 candidates! It’s clear the organisers want to restrict the public to the known devils. Lee choosing Cull was tactical. He already knows he’s got Cull de Mayor beaten, and no point in aggrandising any other potential rival.
Barry Timmings is obviously a threat to Cull, but the lack of opportunities to become a household name thwarts him.
I watched the mayoral hopefuls on TV. One thing that struck me was that the ones with the least substance in their addresses got the most applause.
I have since wondered if it is because faced with a question like “What would you change about ___” the ones (Vandervis consistently, a couple of others too) who said what needed changing, why, and what changes they would make were *criticising* and *negative*.
We don’t like negative.
The ones who said something bland about essentially “same but more/even better” weren’t negative. They may have been talking through their bums – “getting more industry, getting more people to move here” without any hint of HOW this vital “getting” was to be achieved – were applauded.
Memo to self, before election stock up on strong liquor and antidepressants.
Reminds me of the old days when before the budget one raced out to invest accessible money including the car, dog and broadcasting license fund in cases of whisky and gin and cartons of cigarettes. At least one had a small victory, then. Council elections, if the councillor wannabes are in the same league as the mayoral ones and “positivity” is rewarded ahead of having a clue, nobody’s winning. No Dunedin ratepayers, that is.
If the incumbents get in Hype, buy shares in Fulton Hogan, Anngow motors, Trade me, Traffic light suppliers and bike shops.
If we get Lee Vandervis, Wayne Idour and Paul Pope look for one way tickets, stocks and more car parks.
If we get Aaron Hawkins, look for mung bean suppliers, no cars in the CBD, managed retreat from South Dunedin.
If we get Cull, look for airlines, bus companies, holiday companies, Valium suppliers and priests. We’ll need all of these just to get through.
Thu, 15 Sep 2016
Mayoral choice causes surprise
Regular clashes in council and defamation action were put aside for a moment yesterday when Cr Lee Vandervis made a surprise pronouncement he would pick Dave Cull to be mayor if he did not win the post. […] Before an audience of about 60 people, and a surprised “Thank you” from Mr Cull, Cr Vandervis said Mr Cull was an excellent speaker, a “natural front man” and a hard worker, though he said he wondered what the mayor did during “all that time he spends in China”.
No doubt about it, Cull is great with the mouthworks. Projects sincerity, sound judgement, a safe pair of hands.
It’s only after the election that voters find out what they’ve voted for, and then it’s too late to change, stuck for 3 years.
Vandervis is THE man! What a solid performance on Ch39. He knows the details, he knows the system inside out, he knows where the levers are and has one hand on the spanner and and eye in the microscope. Nine-year apprenticeship = nine-year advantage and our gain.
Lee Vandervis has it all ‘sussed’. He knows how Cull’s mind works (witness the ‘glad handing’ in front of the audience.) Put Cull right on the back foot in view of the treatment he was dealt over the years. He covers the South Dunedin Floods succinctly, a comfort for those affected. He is not a ‘Greenie!’ following blindly a ‘dogma’ uncorroborated by scientific data. He understands the ‘Citifleet’ coverup and can see the subterfuge behind the disgraceful happenings by DELTA in land speculation. and to cap it off, wonders just what Cull spent all the time in China (on the DCC purse) doing. He is tough minded and won’t be smooth talked by the ‘minions’ in the building, nor the DCHL directorship. Brilliant!!!
It seems that we are not alone in the pursuit of a Vandervis mayor as this exerpt from a whaleoil spruik suggests
“Wherever you are in New Zealand, vote for councillors that represent reduced spending, lower rates, elimination of waste and sticking to the basics. Good luck finding even one. They are all too busy solving climate change, child poverty and providing a well funded conduit for the arts.”
– John Roughan, NZ Herald
Andrew Whiley Ch39 interview added to post at top of thread.
### channel39.co.nz Thu, 15 Sep 2016
Voting papers set for delivery
Voting papers for the local body elections will start being delivered to mailboxes from tomorrow. Thousands of papers are ready and waiting at the New Zealand Post centre in Strathallan Street, Dunedin. Staff will be delivering them throughout the wider city area from tomorrow. They must be mailed back in time to be received by noon on election day, which is Saturday the 8th of October. Those who haven’t received voting papers by the 22nd of September can cast a special vote. All councils around the region are subject to election.
Channel 39 Published on Sep 14, 2016
Observations from the Mosgiel Council Candidates’ Forum
An interesting night. 30+ candidates on the stage (plus Vandervis, Staynes & Hall in the audience for some reason – Vandervis left at the beginning of the meeting).
Candidates got four minutes each. Chaired by Peter Chin who mumbled the names to the stage as he drew them out of the hat to come forward, so you didn’t have a clue who was who when they were talking. This means that unless the ballot paper has “The short bloke with no hair who was wearing a rumply sports coat and a bad lilac tie at the Mosgiel Forum”, then most attendees will be stuffed.
I had one criteria for candidate selection. Do they have the gumption and attitude to actually stick their fins out if stuff they don’t like/understand/have adequate and timely information on is going down?
Beyond the current and prior incumbents who spoke, and who are in my view a known (failed) entity in this regard, only two passed the test – a bloke called Wayne Idour from South Dunedin, and Paul Pope. Paul Pope particularly impressed, having the balls to say to a Mosgiel meeting: two pools only, a capped budget and even then it’s unfair to the immersed of South Dunedin to spend their rates on it.
It took over two hours to get through the lot. Peter Chin did not take questions at the end as he said with so many candidates the process would be unmanageable, and I think he was right.
The process of having a single ward with so many seats and candidates is shown to be the democratic absurdity that it is. Even as an elector with above average education and engagement, and with just the one assessment criteria I was struggling. There is absolutely no chance of an assessment of any higher quality, and this is the best information that I am going to get.
The fact that it is a democratic absurdity does not make it a political one. This process mega ward/mob of candidate process favours those candidates with name recognition, which favours those with incumbency, resources (their own and those of other interested ‘stakeholders’) or both.
Recognition, the process that many electors will have to fall back on, is the lowest form of selection process. It is based upon a single input decision heuristic. As a professional in low involvement fast moving consumer goods (FMCG) marketing it is a process that I am familiar with – Bog roll brands for instance. Cottonsoft have the bogroll market because people recognise the brand, and unless you have years and a massive budget to literally train people like dogs to recognize a new brand, then that’s the way that it will stay. See here for a very interesting article on how we make decisions when information is lacking:
Thus it is with the DCC, and thus, I suspect, the true powers that be in this town like it. So desirable might it be from certain ‘stakeholder’ perspectives that I doubt that we will never be allowed to reinstitute the smaller wards that make any informed and penetrating examination, evaluation and selection of Council candidates by the electorate possible. It may of course get worse with amalgamation on the horizon.
There are further similarities with the above FMCG example. Once the favoured brands of political bogroll are duly installed in the council chamber by a bemused electorate, one might suppose that the true powers that be will continue to wipe their fundaments with them – and those unfortunates that they represent. Hence my single criterion – Driven by a desire to slip a couple of stinging nettles into the pack!
It’s a shared issue. See here for a US example. it’s salutory reading for those who think that judges are incorruptible superhumans.
Pool well supported by candidates in Mosgiel
An election meeting in Mosgiel last night showed voters will get to choose from a surprising breadth of skills and approaches from candidates vying for election.
Were they equally enthusiastic about increased rates / decreased other services? Do they realise that in the absence of magic money that grows the more you spend, wanna haves are either/or?
Let’s face it the Mosgiel-Taieri Community can’t raise the money required for an expensive 4-pool project.
I’m quite sure Mosley thinks she can run to DCC cap in hand for the majority of the capital required.
NAH. NADA. NOPE.
“NAH. NADA. NOPE.”
You hope, Elizabeth!
Depends on who’s elected. A majority of popularity hungry financial ignoramuses and it’ll be another 3 years of same-same.
I think Rob’s analysis of the science of human behaviour re selection processes misses a vital point. It seems axiomatic that when would be and aspiring politicians are ‘strutting their stuff’ they are always compelled to say what it is they discern the audience want to hear. It does not necessarily have any relationship to the reality of the moment. Mayor Dave Cull is a master practitioner of this, witness his statements on the Town Hall Stage at the Stop the Stadium protest meeting. Net result; he became the Mayor. The fact is that he meant the exact opposite, as he went on to demonstrate. The message here is as the song goes; “Never smile at a crocodile, never tip your hat and ever stay a while. Never stop to talk or even share a grin, he’ll just be thinking how well you’ll fit inside his skin…………”
The next candidate meetings are these:
Sunday 18/9/16 Opoho Presbyterian Church pt1 7.00pm (Star) – Candidate Surnames M-Z
Monday 19/9/16 Opoho Presbyterian Church pt2 7.00pm (Star) – Candidate Surnames A-L
Tuesday 20/9/16 Uni Union, main common room 12.00 pm (Jinty)
Tuesday 20/9/16 Mayfair Theatre SDAG pt1 6.30pm (SDAG/Curran)
Wednesday 21/9/16 Mayfair Theatre SDAG pt2 6.30pm (SDAG/Curran)
Thursday 22/9/16 Uni Union, main common room 12.00 pm (Jinty)
Is there any more? I haven’t included the DCOSS+CPAG lobbyists Mayoral candidates meeting on Wednesday.
Dave Cull Ch39 interview added to post at top of thread.
Dave’s brainwashed claims about climate change Know No Bounds.
Brainwashed, you say?
ANOTHER Handy-Andy enema?
Hmm, when does the desire to appear pure turn into kinkiness?
Dunedin does not need this in local government.
Christchurch didn’t think so either.
Go Away Islay.
Islay McLeod is a DCC insider (as an ex DCC Events Manager). She has also been a professional spin doctor. The DCC currently relies on Spin-doctoring instead of good decision-making, so she would fit in well with the existing (dysfunctional) method of operation. An infestation of Spin-doctoring is one of the biggest problems we have with the DCC, so she is not the one to kill it. Also, Islay McLeod seems to have quite a shallow grasp of reality – after I heard her talk, the other day, the summary I wrote for myself was NUT-CASE.
Sadly, ‘Islay’ hasn’t aged gracefully. Her ad on Channel 39 was a revelation, not in a good way. People who used to work at DCC when she was there tell me they’re unlikely to promote her. That that was a ‘dark patch’ in their public service careers.
DON’T VOTE FOR ISLAY.
Sat, 17 Sep 2016
ODT: Just 6% needed to win seat
Council candidates who poll well in their immediate communities should be in with as good a chance as those who attract widespread support across Dunedin. University of Otago Associate Prof Janine Hayward said under the single transferable vote system candidates needed just 6.6% of the vote to win one of 14 council seats.
See Post 26.8.10 In defence of STV
ODT 17.9.16 (page 34)
*Image: channel39.co.nz – tweaked by whatifdunedin
What Jinty failed to realise and still does not understand is that the council has a number of inherent importances which must be attended to. Good potable Water supply is probably first. Sound sewage collection and treatment is second. Rubbish removal is an expectation of ratepayers. Good roading for the 90% who need, or wish to drive their cars safely.
Whilst the electorate may wish these things to be done in a wholesome feel good manner, it does not expect that those elected will give priority to pet projects like cycleways, managed retreats, car eradication, turning commercial areas into worm farms and other frankly insane projects.
The electorate does not wish in other words for those elected to forget their priorities.
ODT 20.9.16 (page 8)
Check out Andrew Whiley’s advert on p 14 of today’s ODT. He has used his family. This must be a first.
Aside from his ridiculous claims of what his mayoralty will bring ‘to make Dunedin the best city in NZ’ we are treated to a view of the next First Family of Dunedin…..you would think.
Where is the dignity?
Also takes up a page of this week’s The Star.
If you haven’t personal credibility you had better gain it vicariously.
Considering the utter toe-rags whose wives and families stand by them, putting forward one’s family as a demonstration of one’s personal excellence is not what it used to be.
Whiley is the landlord to a student flat in Dunedin, like Cull and Turner before him, who have a few. What a conflict of interests this represents when it comes to addressing the growing troubles associated with our dangerous binge drinking culture! Investments in student flats or liquor outlets is huge business in this town, involving many people of influence. The obvious bias on show protecting these interests, will never see the issue taken seriously.
It’s the main reason I won’t be voting for anyone presently serving on Council with such a conflict. I want to see Candidates be made to divulge ALL interests involving the great student spend before voting – not find out afterwards! We still have 3 weeks. Come on ODT! This is worthy of a report, so people can make an informed decision before voting.
Hello E Palmer. I think you raise a very good point and for the record my wife and I own our home and are directors in my consultancy business. Other than that I do not own rental or retail property and I do not have investments in businesses in Dunedin.
Hey Paul – Thanks for your prompt response. You were one of the only 4 I could vote for without feeling sick to my stomach. You deserve my vote. Seriously, I can’t in good conscience grace any more with a number ranking. It only does them a favour. I predict we’ll have some Councillors bolt in with numbers out-stripping the Mayoralty vote and others scraping through with the lowest ever elected.
Student Flat landlord! we’ve had one of them, cannot we get someone who hasn’t figured out that a student flat ownership is a passport to happiness? Aren’t there any genuine business people who can read a balance sheet and stop spendthrift carpetbaggers?
ODT 17.9.16 (page 34)
Cr Whiley has clearly been asked to put himself up for the Mayoralty to split the vote in favour of Cull. Watch the lollies get handed out after the election if Dave makes it back in.
It seems Cr Lord is trying very hard to stay in favour after the performance at Opoho last night. In favour with his ex Greater Dunedin buddies who aren’t Jinters – that is, with Staynes and Co who are pet project boys, weak and ineffectual with very little performance to show and, we suspect, hosting a little band of preferred suppliers under their wings… curtailing the fair practice of competitive tendering on council contracts. Think the various projects run by the Grow Dunedin Partnership (the people responsible for the sainted Economic Development Strategy 2013-2023).
Yes, at Opoho the mutual back slapping between the majority of standing councillors was nauseating. In the club, are we!?
Opoho seemed to be “blind Dave land”. So we keep pumping in $20M plus to the stadium each year “to make it work’. Does the moronic comfortable retired public have any idea what that does to spending on pipe renewals worth a billion dollars or more across Dunedin ? Who is being served. Perhaps the privileged of Opoho need a freaking shake up.
“I went to the political meeting last night – wondered what made you think there was much support expressed for Cull other than among the candidates themselves.
It was interesting that in today’s ODT it was reported, in answer to the question, ‘who were the two best sitting councillors?’ Jinty McT was given as the popular choice. Her name did come up quite a few times, but it seemed to me that a name given at least as often (if not more) was Andrew Noone.”
Well that’s a relief. Cr Noone is not the horrid flake that Jinters is, that’s for sure.
Maybe Opoho voters (of course!) are more mixed than the turnout last night…. perhaps the suburb will do better at tonight’s meeting.
Turkeys, self interest, irony, or taking the piss?
Later, off-camera: “Bwaahahaha, did you see Dave’s face? He thought I meant it!”
Hype, you mean he admitted that he was a l… in public?
Rob Hamlin said:
“Beyond the current and prior incumbents who spoke, and who are in my view a known (failed) entity in this regard, only two passed the test – a bloke called Wayne Idour from South Dunedin, and Paul Pope. Paul Pope particularly impressed, having the balls to say to a Mosgiel meeting: two pools only, a capped budget and even then it’s unfair to the immersed of South Dunedin to spend their rates on it.”
Wayne Idour for Dunedin City Council
My Priorities: https://idourforcouncil.wordpress.com/my-priorities/
Paul Pope for Dunedin City Council
Dunedin-the Affordable City? https://paul-pope.co.nz/2016/09/17/dunedin-the-affordable-city/
Just checked out Wayne Idour’s site and at last we have a Candidate with the balls prepared to talk about the elephant in the room – The pathetic level of Policing in this village! Safer streets gets my number 1 vote mate, but me thinks you’ll be up against it as the lone voice, unless you bolt in with a landslide. Let the bastards ignore you then eh?
Last night at the Opoho candidate meeting, there were “silly segments” including a question about each candidate’s Favourite book and movie.
Neil Johnstone’s choice was Grand Auto Theft and its “sequel” The Silence of the Lambs. He estimated that about 20% of the audience got it.
Mon, 19 Sep 2016
Big turnout for election meeting
Dunedin City Council candidates entertained and informed a capacity audience which packed the Opoho Presbyterian Church last night. There are so many candidates the election forum has been split into two parts; the second session will be held tonight. [starts at 7pm]
I notice in the Minutes of meeting (held Thu, 11 Aug 2016) for the Otago Peninsula Community Board the following was recorded:
Item 9 – Chief Executive Officer
“….Dr Bidrose also noted that the Council was entering a period of looking at how to make the city a more exciting place to live.”
God forbid, with that kind of messaging expect another Poorly Run Poorly Budgeted Spendthrift gamut of pet projects.
I’m going to suggest “leadership that has a clue” as #1 on list of “how to make the city a more exciting place”
Sue is right, Dunedin is a more exciting place to live thanks to her decisions. Dunedin is an exciting place every time there is a big flood or heavy rain. It isn’t the type of excitement that we want, however. A fully functioning stormwater system is what is needed for Mosgiel, South Dunedin etc.
In explaining why she doesn’t want to fix the low level of service of the stormwater system, Bidrose told councillors in April, that this is “an austerity time” and “we are fiscally constrained”. She explained the competing priorities, which include “new and innovative stuff”, ie vote-buying for the sitting councillors and mayor and fripperies for the stakeholders.
The loosing priorities have been the huge pipe renewals backlog and the non-existent stormwater performance upgrades. It seems like the mayor and CEO make the decisions on these priorities and the councillors get to rubber-stamp the end result. It seems like the average councillor is too stupid to understand that a new South Dunedin hub is a big backwards step towards South Dunedin being a safe, flood resistant suburb. The councillors can plead ignorance, but the CEO and mayor can’t.
There’s no need, Dr Bidrose, to “make the city a more exciting place to live”. It’s already exciting. We never know from one day to the next what new piece of villainy (cars), stupidity (Sth Dunedin cycleways), or ineptitude in any one of a thrilling variety of what should be necessary competences will be revealed.
Watching this council candidate:
Posted 19/9/16 as a Testimonial for Wayne Idour on idourforcouncil.wordpress.com
“We met Wayne in his professional capacity last year, when he provided assistance to our family. Due to the sensitive nature of his work, we cannot provide our personal details but are, nonetheless, determined that we can provide a testimonial in support of Wayne. Throughout the process of working with Wayne, he showed consistently that he was committed to the following:
Establishing the facts
Finding the truth
Supporting his clients
Wayne is an honest and reliable person, who demonstrates clearly that he conducts his professional work and measures his outcomes on the belief that it is “the right thing to do”. For this reason alone, Wayne would be a valuable asset for the rate payers of Dunedin to have representing them on council, as he will ask the hard questions, if things are not right he will investigate, and he will do everything within his ability to ensure that there is accountability apportioned where it is needed. What more could we ask of a councillor?
All too often today we see evidence whereby elected officials have compromised themselves, and sacrificed the personal traits of honesty, integrity, respect and loyalty in order to fit within the “machine” that is local council. The qualities that Wayne Idour possesses, which he will bring to council are traits that are not up for negotiation, and this has enabled a seamless transition for our family whereby Wayne has gone from a professional assisting his clients, to a very dear personal friend to all of us.
All the very best Wayne. Anyone who knows you, will be eagerly anticipating the changes you will bring to council.”
I like Wayne Idour. He has common sense. This is a big contrast to Marie Laufiso (Green Party NZ) who started her speech the other day by acknowledging the Sky Mother and the Earth Father. Wayne understands the city’s stormwater problems, whereas Marie seems to be more familiar with the supernatural.
Yep, agree re Wayne Idour.
I understand Marie Laufiso brought that to Opoho Church – a lost never to be found lamb.
Jim O’Malley for Mayor of Dunedin has been a standout this past couple of weeks. And Barry Timmings is described by a colleague as “refreshing” – I agree, a good thinker. Both men would serve Dunedin well.
The problem with the Mosgiel and Opoho candidate meetings has been a lack of time for audience questions – none with Peter Chin and only a few questions with Phil Somerville (ODT). The South Dunedin Action Group is holding public meetings at the Mayfair Theatre tomorrow (Tuesday 20/9/16) and Wednesday at 6.30pm-9pm. According to the press release, there will be 90 minutes of audience question time.
South Dunedin to grill election candidates this week and follow the link to South Dunedin Action Group candidate survey (pdfs).
“An electronic survey sent out to the candidates before the forums has drawn responses from 34 of the 44 candidates standing for the Dunedin City Council. We believe the large number of responses is a recognition that issues concerning the future of South Dunedin are high on their list of priorities.”
I wonder which 10 candidates did not respond, and why they decided not to.
Aaron Hawkins, “Council this year increased our staff capacity to support ‘place based groups’ suburbs or neighbourhoods but more could be done in this area. We also started a Neighbourhood Matching Fund, which is aimed at a more informal/street level, where council will match the money/in kind support for social events aimed at neighbours getting together/getting to know each other.
Hype – this is the crap spending that stems from Jinters after local wards were demo’d. Slush funds and ill-conceived staff positions created. I hear a broom coming.
█ Quick reference:
Note: Just click on the link, registration for Dropbox is easy!
I hear that someone has organised ‘Don’t Vote Cull or Benson-Pope’ flyers to be distributed around South Dunedin.
Now we’re in proper campaign mode. Go for it Dunedin !!
NBR 16.9.16 (page 12) – detail
From the same article:
A number of the candidates come with political baggage which could motivate them to pursue goals that don’t help the City. Jinty is an example of this – her goal was always her greeny/sustainable development agenda which has been harmful and will need to be purged from all the various plans, strategies, 2GP etc. Dave Cull and Kate Wilson are also crusaders for the same cause and they should be purged also.
There are others such as Aaron Hawkins, Marie Laufiso and Benson-Pope that have obvious political affiliations, but there are some that are less obvious with their politics/idealism. Candidate Liesel Mitchell speaks well but has studied at the National Centre for Peace & Conflict Studies (UoO) and Paul Gourlie is Chair of the Dunedin Multi Ethnic Council, member of the Interfaith Council, and President of the NZ World Peace Bell Chapter. Scout Barbour-Evans is a professional protestor.
These associations don’t guarantee that these candidates are political activists or obsessive crusaders for their causes, but it is a good indication. The University Of Otago has some notable centres of officially sanctioned ideological extremism such as the National Centre for Peace & Conflict Studies and the Centre for Sustainability. These three candidates and the others I mentioned should be avoided because, as councillors, they will have the opportunity to promote their various causes, like Jinty did, for example. The city must come first.
Ann Galloway should be included also. Ann is a dedicated unionist and belongs with the other extremists, activists and political crusaders.
Jimmy. Being a dedicated unionist is not a crime nor an indication of extremism. Unions….now weakened by neo liberalism… are there for a purpose to help protect workers. They provide a counterbalance to those elements who are rapacious and exploit people.
You’re right, Peter. The neo-liberals who damn near demolished unions did a bad service to society. OTOH there were “dedicated unionists” who were as extreme on one side as the neo-libs were on theirs, both did a disservice to NZ. Personally I’d rather the union side had won and reduced the neo-libs to raspberry jelly with a social conscience, then given up extreme positions themselves.
Peter: I think there is a place for unionists, at least the ones that genuinely work in the interest of their members – not the ones using their position promote Marxism. In a similar way, unionists and others with a barrow to push have no place as a DCC mayor/councillor. Their job is to serve the city and not use their position to promote their political/ideological causes.
An elegant round-up of loons, Jimmy, reminiscent of dog trials. Efficiently cut out of the mob, cleanly herded into the Woolly Thinkers Pen.
Well stated by council candidate Neil Johnstone at the SDAG dropbox:
Question: What is your position regarding The Second Generation Plan for Dunedin? (Regards to managing natural and physical resources of South Dunedin to meet the needs of current and future generations and to provide for their social, economic and cultural well being.)
Answer: The Second Generation District Plan (2GP) epitomises the degree to which planners, bureaucrats and hazard catastrophists have carved a niche for themselves, to the detriment of residents across the city. Ideally, the process would be stopped in its tracks and restarted, but that is realistically unlikely to happen. We need a rational approach to issues, not one driven by dogma. The current approach threatens to destroy social and economic well being, despite its lofty stated goals. Individuals and groups who are unaware of the Plan’s content (or who have not submitted in opposition) do still have opportunities to be heard. If you need assistance, please contact me.
Educationally and persuasively Paul Pope’s dropbox replies are worth a read. Like his take on how to make DCC accountable [AT LAST – listen up CE Bidrose !!!!] …..via (briefly paraphrasing here) sound contract management practices, public access to terms of contract, performance measures, service delivery etc, as well as returning engineering expertise to DCC.
[which Harland insanely removed, in favour of external consultants and the Multitude of freaking problems caused to this council and this community – I feel a revolution in the wind that Cull & Co are just Not capable of achieving]
ODT 19.9.16 (page 8)
STV stands for “Don’t Rank The Idiots”
…and David Benson-Pope went further, chiding the council’s online critics, “people who think when they are blogging that the normal rules of human decency no longer apply“.
That’s a position just begging for a Tui slogan.
I can’t think of anyone better qualified to chide others about “the normal rules of human decency” than David Benson-Pope.
It would appear that some of us ‘whingers and negative’ persons are looming large in the nighttime thinking of Cull de Mayor and Benson-Pope and other sitting councillors who have led the city into the mire, including the financial and ideological mess of cycleways and climate change causing floods.
I say Whatiffers, the task is not yet completed. Keep the pressure on.
We need Vandervis, Idour, Pope and Johnstone as a minimum to get some rational fiscal and service management into the council. We need no fripperies, ideologues, kermits or drop kicks.
Paul Pope hits the nail on the head when he says ‘engineering expertise should be brought back in house as of old. I’ve been banging on about this for years, saying that the city went seriously astray after Sukhi Turner appointed Jim Harland as CEO. He single handedly took the city’s debt from $36million in 2001 to $360million in 2011. In the process he disestablished the city’s chief engineer’s position and closed down and sold off (gave away in a self described ‘fiscally neutral’ deal) to Montgomery Watson Harza the remnants of the engineering resource. Ever since, the city has been in the hands of ‘consultants’ whose first priority was to enhance their own status. Result: The St Clair Sea Wall fiasco, the Stadium…not a penny more than $188million… robbery, the cycleways botch up and of course the South Dunedin Floods. Those are just the few. Of course, every ‘consultant’ in every discipline has ever since been latched onto the ‘hind teat’ of the city, bamboozling both elected councillors and the mesmerised bureaucrats into accepting substandard design works plus shoddy processing of contracts. All of course at the ratepayers’ expense.
Lee Vandervis for mayor, Paul Pope, Wayne Idour, Neil Johnstone, Doug Hall, Andrew Whiley, Tony Johnston and Mike Lord for council. A mayor and seven councillors is any amount for this city.
Eradicate all remnants of the ‘Greater Dunedin faction plus Benson-Pope. Their influence has been a huge detriment to the city.
Calvin, I seriously can’t vote for “Doug Hall, Andrew Whiley, Tony Johnston and Mike Lord”.
More research, please – before not ranking them in your voting papers.
From what I’ve heard Doug Hall who is non-existent in the media, is a sensible contributor to discussions with a wealth of practical knowhow, just not a confident public speaker. Quite the opposite of Dave in that regard.
I’m prepared to consider evidence supporting your p.o.v. though.
Likewise evidence against Tony Johnston and Mike Lord.
Whiley is of current councillors pretty well OK. I think having some with previous experience – but NOT members of the toxic team – is likely to be an advantage.
Tactically, present councillors have name recognition > good chance of re-election compared with newcomers. There are a few excellent new names and a hell of a lot of “fingers crossed that they can’t actually be worse than the previous bunch”.
While I’d like to see people vote for only the ones generally regarded at WhatIf as Excellent, I’d rather they vote for proven non-Graters than new flakes.
Anyone sidelined by Dave’s Grater Crew has IMO at least one star for NOT having been welcome in his cosy nest of vipers.
Good news, Calvin: Paul Pope is out of date with his information – the DCC announced in May (Laura, ISC) that a stormwater engineer will be employed and this has happened. Rob is the Stormwater Planning Engineer. In fact the job of the Water And Waste Manager has been that of an engineer. The problem hasn’t been a lack of engineering skills – it’s a level of funding so feeble that the $60 million renewals backlog has become worse in recent years. This has been a political/governance decision under the leadership of Dave Cull. The seriousness of the situation has been hidden by DCC and the ODT – even after the 2015 flood.
One point to consider, among others, when voting back existing councillors is whether you want a councillor back, who stripped another councillor of his voting rights, to punish him.
Hilary Calvert was the only councillor to support Lee Vandervis when Cull and All the other Spineless councillors voted to remove Lee’s voting rights.
There was a serious lack of courage, or oversupply of sheepy mob-think.
Or they had something they really cared about and feared their useful contribution to voters would be scuppered if they showed resistance to the vindictive wee twerp.
Just checking with What If that I wasn’t voting for any of the spineless councillors who removed my right to representation on council and noted Crs Calvert, Hall and Lord voted against removing a colleague’s voting rights. I’m not sure if I would vote for Cr Lord still but thank him for his consideration at the time.
By the way, there appears to be an oddity with the ODT site. The stories relevant to this immoral action by dave have the wrong publication dates. For example, “angry walkout” shows 7 May but was published 29 Apr. “Voting rights go” is published afterwards but has a date of 1 May. I do wonder sometimes if Allied Press takes some liberties with its content and search results, particularly around election time.
a rarely used but very expressive word and apt in this circumstance!
We know that Dave Cull and the DCC CEO have strongly denied that they have plans the Managed Retreat of South Dunedin, even though staff have been developing those plans, and may have already completed a range of options for councillors to make their decisions. We also know that there are no inherent difficulties with maintaining sea-walls and sand-dune sea-barriers. We hope that the DCC will not repeat their mistakes.
The only problem is an infestation of a Dark Green agenda among the DCC staff and probably some current councillors/mayor. Here is a quote to demonstrate the ideology:
Allowing coastal erosion to reclaim Kettle Park should be the start of a wider retreat from South Dunedin, a Dunedin City Council hearings committee has heard. The call came from Sustainable Dunedin City co-chairman Phillip Cole – a former civil engineer of 31 years’ experience~. Speaking yesterday, Mr Cole argued a managed retreat could be the start of a wider withdrawal from South Dunedin, at least as far inland as Hillside Rd, over the longer term. That would “let the sea decide what South Dunedin is,” he said. Engineer says let erosion take South Dunedin: ODT 2012. Sustainable Dunedin City is considered a stakeholder of the DCC and has received DCC funding.
The attitude is that nature takes precedence over human settlement. Managed retreat will never be a viable solution because there are no current threats except the unwillingness of the DCC to maintain the stormwater system to an acceptable standard. Sea-level rise is too slow to worry about: 384 years for a rise of 500mm (1.3mm per year). The other reason is that South Dunedin contains assets valued at several billion dollars and more importantly, people live there – people that have a vote in choosing their councillors. The way to get rid of stupid ideas is to get rid of the people that promote them.
Andrew Whiley has had a lone, family-focused billboard on a fence at the corner of Kaikorai Valley and Brockville roads for some time, and I had been considering including him in my councillor candidacy. David Benson-Pope has since stuck his profile up alongside Andrew’s, hinting at desperation and trying to ride the coat tails of others. But because of that poisonous presence I’ve just written off Andrew entirely. Clearly there is an association there and now consider it too dangerous to consider further. Hopefully others make the same connection.
Just to mention that last night DBP had new authorised election signs put up in non authorised areas.
Like any good politician Andrew Whiley says what he thinks will work, but listening carefully to what he says, there is a shallowness in his insights into the problems of the Dunedin. Not as dangerous as some of the others, but not on my top ten.
Like the tide going out prior to a tsunami!
Well, Phillip Cole has basically completely dissed Christchurch. The earthquake was a natural event.
The late Phillip Cole.
I have some concerns about Paul Pope who has in the past displayed some enviro-facist tendencies: in Paul’s DCC submission about the Ocean Beach Domain (2009, I think) he proposes the evacuation of big chunks of St Clair and Middle Beach as a way to restore the natural structures. These are his proposals:
● the entire sports-field area of Kettle Park and portions of Hancock Park be returned to the active dune zone
● replacing and reshaping of the flat sports-field area at Kettle Park with
imported sand to restore the natural dune shape
● negotiate the relinquishment of the occupations of the Dunedin Rugby
Football Club and the other ancillary occupations along Moana Rua Road.
● removal of the bowling club on the corner of Victoria Road and Moana Rua Road, St Clair Tennis Club and the Scout Hall for tree planting
● the Ice Rink, Badminton building and railway should also be removed by
negotiation in this period for similar restoration
● purchase of the private properties at the southeast end of the Domain between the St Clair Surf Club building and the entranceway to southern most to Kettle Park
● The car-park above the Marlow Park playground should be closed and
integrated back into the proposed dune structure
● negotiate the relinquishment of the occupations of the Pirates Rugby
Football Club and the Squash Club
● the flat sports-field area should be and reshaped with imported sand and
replanted in rear dune coastal forest
Paul seems like a worthy candidate apart from this disturbing tendency. Perhaps he has now changed his mind? I think Paul needs to acknowledge that the decision about where the boundary between the sea and the land is was made a long time ago and for very good reasons. He also needs to acknowledge that the sea boundary will not be changing and agree that he will not try to change it. Dave Cull, Kate Wilson, Aaron Hawkings and Chris Staynes should make the same pledge. The beach and sand-dunes and amenities should remain as they are. What do you say Paul?
It is worth noting that the general areas occupied by Dunedin Rugby Club, Netball courts, Badminton Hall, Ice Stadium etc was, until the mid-late 1950s, Dunedin’s main tip site. So perhaps Paul Pope is not aware of this for he should be careful what he wishes for. Let the sea back there and the detritus exposed would not be fitting for one of the ‘best little cities in the world’.
The situation at Ocean Beach Domain needs to be put into context with the natural physical shape of the existing dunes. Part of the issue is that there is not sufficient width in the beach or dunes to retain enough sand to ensure sustainable movement in the event of storms. Secondly, the lack of width is related to the lack of vegetation to trap sand and reduce wind sheer. Ocean Beach Domain is almost entirely a local purpose reserve under the Reserves Act 1977 for the purpose of coastal conservation. Therefore, any land related changes would not affect private property. What you don’t mention from the article are the proposals I make around relocating facilities or clubs as well as compensating those organisations should that need to happen. There is no guarantee in coastal management that the next storm isn’t like the 1888 one that inundated South Dunedin, that would be disastrous. These thoughts are things that if we can’t stabilise and repair the dunes and beach to sustain storms we may have to consider in the future. At the time of writing this the Council in 2008 were going into the so called holding pattern. These thoughts were designed to galvanise Council into beginning the realisation that action was required along with long term strategic thinking over sport, recreation, community. It was also for them to realise that the dune issues were bigger than just a localised response that we continue to see now. Some of these things may never be required, but we must at least acknowledge the thought processes and long term thinking requirement. I’ve learnt that from experience, I had to demolish the Middle Beach surf club before it fell into the sea. The dunes are not not and will never be a vacuum. They need constant maintenance and care otherwise we’ll all be a lot wetter.
I’m well aware of where the main tip site was and I’m also aware that there is a significant amount of asbestos in that area and in Middle Beach. I’m particularly aware of that as my son plays rugby there for the Dunedin club. If you look at the extent of erosion, the floodlights and electrical cable on Kettle Park have been severely undermined in the last 2 years. This has been caused by the clay cap placed along the top of the dunes from the eastern end of Kettle Park to nearly the beginning of the new sand sausages. If the Council don’t deal with this area it will continue to break down and fall into the sea. This has been the pattern since the early 1990s with the erosion of the old car park at the end of Moana Rua Road. Professor Bob Kirk, probably NZ’s best coastal expert advised the Council of this in 1972 and 1991, but his recommendations were never actioned.
Dunedin’s own historical record of coastal erosion is characterised by inundation, dune collapse, beach decline and the destruction of several sea walls since the 1870s. Our local dune morphology has been irrevocably altered through exotic plants, sand mining, poor land use and ill-advised protection structures. These factors have exacerbated erosion events on Dunedin’s dynamic coastline. Our coastline is a product of historic and recent unsustainable management. We should be advocating for long term dune restoration and management into healthy and sustainable ecosystems, which provide property protection and biodiversity services. If we bury our heads in the sand we will continue to repeat the same mistakes that have been ongoing in Dunedin for the last 150 years.
I see Andrew Whiley has made a bold announcement today that he wants to build a sea wall from the St Clair Pool to Lawyers Head to include a cycle way to protect the beach and dunes. He also suggests it can be done for $20 million, which is a big call but unfortunately not likely to be feasible. The replacement cost for the Oamaru breakwater is estimated as high as $27-$48 million, if you put that into context with the scale of Ocean Beach Domain the cost is significantly higher. The Oamaru breakwater is approximately 500 metres long and allowing for the curvature of the beach, Ocean Beach is 3.6 kilometres, seven times the distance. So you would be looking at an approximate cost of $189-$336 million dollars. Not to mention that we’ve already seen the current St Clair sea wall being undermined because of wave energy and the lowering of the beach. What would such a giant sea wall do the wave energy and just how long would it survive? Just these factors and the planning consequences under the NZ Coastal Policy Statement make it prohibitive an unsustainable for the marine environment and the poor ratepayer!
So Jimmy, planned restoration with planting, reshaping the dunes and removing fill, along with some changes to recreational access are by far the cheaper and more constructive options. We will need to accept in the medium term an engineering option at the eastern end of the sea wall to reduce the reflected energy erosion. This could involve a groyne, but we must have proper scientific data which we should have started collecting at the beginning of the holding period in 2008. Another thing we must consider is that we will need to be constantly maintaining the dunes and beach as a physical geographical asset in the same way we would look at a road, drain or mudtank. This has been part of the problem, we haven’t understood that these dunes are actually assets that must be maintained to function properly. I appreciate your candour and I hope this comment puts in perspective my thinking on Ocean Beach Domain.
“I see Andrew Whiley has made a bold announcement today that he wants to build a sea wall from the St Clair Pool to Lawyers Head to include a cycle way to protect the beach and dunes. He also suggests it can be done for $20 million, which is a big call but unfortunately not likely to be feasible. The replacement cost for the Oamaru breakwater is estimated as high as $27-$48 million, if you put that into context with the scale of Ocean Beach Domain the cost is significantly higher. The Oamaru breakwater is approximately 500 metres long and allowing for the curvature of the beach, Ocean Beach is 3.6 kilometres, seven times the distance. So you would be looking at an approximate cost of $189-$336 million dollars.”
I admit I don’t know the engineering of sand hill retention or rebuilding. But I know that the timber pole groyne which has all but disappeared stood for many decades and presumably did the business of controlling to a degree the movement of the sand along the beach in the tide.
Now we can see that there is a huge pole replacement going on in the city due in part to the installation of fibre for ‘Gigacity’. Now those old poles of Australian hardwood are generally sound above ground. As a low cost feature could they not be driven in groynes spaced along the beach from St Clair to as far as they can? That would be low cost as the poles cost nothing so wouldn’t that be worth a try? That and retention planting on the sand hills seem easy enough to try without breaking the bank. Too easy, too cheap, too not much glamour and profit? Unsightly? They wouldn’t have to project too high, just to high tide level I would have thought. If they were eventually covered then it would be job done, wouldn’t it?
It’s interesting that the stairs built on the 1913 wall were made of hardwood and they remained on the wall until it was replaced in the early 2000s. Now look after 16 years the concrete stairs have nearly all gone! I did the original estimates for vegetation when I worked for Council and developed the Coastal Conservation Strategy. You could make good headway with planting along with some reshaping, fencing and access development for $250-$300k per annum for say 5 years. You could drop that back to $150-$200k for the next 5 years after that. That would buy you some options should we get hammered in more storms. I’d be guessing about the end wall, but I’d tend towards a series of small scale groyne trials using smaller versions of the sand sausage. They could be moved into positions and monitored for effectiveness and tinkered with to see what worked best. It would stop the Council building a permanent structure too early that might fail and allow a good coastal engineer to see what were the best options. Sand sausages at the toe of the wall would also be worth exploring for safer access. Presently, the rock is being smashed against the wall which is not good. I’ll send Elizabeth a short history of the groynes I wrote for people to read.
Received from Paul [click to enlarge]
Paul Pope: thanks for explaining your thinking. What we do depends on what problems we are trying to fix. As far as I can see, the only two problems we have needed to deal with are the incompetently designed new St Clair seawall with insufficient depth into the sand and the DCC’s irresponsibly long delay in repairing the dune erosion which was threatening houses. There was also a lot of misinformation from the DCC and others that led people to believe that these two problems were somehow connected and the whole place was being destroyed by some type of generalised erosion catastrophe. This was useful for the DCC because it diverted the blame away from them and helped them with their Global Warming fearmongering campaign.
Anyway, you are wrong to say that Dunedin’s own historical record of coastal erosion is characterised by inundation, dune collapse, beach decline and the destruction of several sea walls since the 1870s</cite because this doesn't recognise that eventually the DCC learned how to build a durable seawall and it lasted about 100 years with no significant repairs needed over its lifetime (as far as I can tell). The old DCC has proven that a properly designed seawall should last 100 years.
You say that there is not sufficient width in the beach or dunes to retain enough sand to ensure sustainable movement in the event of storms and not enough vegetation. I disagree: while the dune shape and width may not be optimum (I’m relying on your judgement), it has proven to be sufficient. Around St Clair the beach sand level comes and goes, but mostly it is fine. For the other beaches, the sand levels have been without any problems – as far as I can tell. So the non-optimum width has been sufficient to retain beach sand over the last 100 years (approx). No action is required.
You mention that There is no guarantee in coastal management that the next storm isn’t like the 1888 one that inundated South Dunedin, that would be disastrous. It is important that the dunes and seawall remain durable and keep the sea away from the land. There have been improvements since 1888, as you describe in your submission, and the sand dunes in their present form have withstood all kinds of storms and big seas without needing much maintenance (according to my awareness). The St Clair seawall has had its design problem only partly fixed and more problems are expected and will be fixed at a high cost. When this happens the DCC will activate their Erosion Fear-mongering Communications Plan to add to the cost. There is no risk of a breach of the wall because the professionally designed old wall is still there (holding up the new wall). The dunes will keep the sea out as long as the DCC maintains them. The DCC staff have displayed a lack of will to do this promptly and they will need close monitoring in future.
I agree, Paul, that the DCC needs to maintain the dunes and other erosion as it happens – like Kettle park. There is no particular problem that requires Andrew Whiley to build an extended seawall and no problem that needs a groyne. Accept that sometimes St Clair will suffer from low sand levels. The only risks, as I see it, is that the DCC will fail to maintain the dunes/seawall and it could spend shit-loads of money on something really stupid and unnecessary (sound familiar?). Nothing needs to be re-located.
There’s a couple of things that we must recognise. Firstly, the walls are actually part of the problem. The historical record from the 1913 wall shows that the beach dropped nearly a metre. That trend is continuing and has not been helped by the new wall being built a further 5-6 metres seawards. There is a general rule of engineering that the erosion effect adjacent to a wall is two thirds of its length. When the DCC built the new wall they extended the rip rap rock around to the pool. This added to the erosion effect caused by reflected energy and we see this extending past the sand sausage area. It is imperative that the end wall effect is slowed. The other point is the resilience of beach and dunes to storms. The lack of beach and dune width is part of the lack of resilience. In the 1990s we went through a period of strong storms that saw significant erosion. One of the worst storms was in 1936 and this was actually worse than the 1968 Wahine storm. In the event of such a storm we would be very poorly prepared and it is highly likely to cause significant erosion. No matter what we must act for the welfare of people in St Clair and on the flat.
Paul, you note that the length of a wall is relative to the erosion effect.
That in the St Clair case is shown clearly if one looks during stormy conditions. Weather mostly comes in at an angle into the rock wall at the pool end. The energy rebounds at an angle to that from whence it comes which would be straight onto Forbury Rd. The wall denies that and you then see the energy rushing along the face of the wall, wiping stairs, ramps and other impediments off it in the process. It can be very visual when the storms arise. At the end of the wall all this energy disperses around the end eroding sand and the very wall itself. Surely, wouldn’t it be possible to place a closely stacked hardwood forest of piles forming a groyne. This would quickly dissipate the energy, dropping its sand load in the process. The end result would be a rebuilding of the beach levels and ultimate replenishing of the hills if there was concerted marram grass planting to trap that sand. The sand sausages seem to me to be retainers of sand not dispersers of energy and as such do only what is intended. They would not seem suitable to place at right angles to the direction of the energy. A recipe for destruction I would have thought. It is the groyne (spacing) concept that is the secret to energy depletion and sand dropping. Seems simple enough to me. Too much for Duffill Watts and King to get their heads around obviously when they designed and constructed the wall.
Seems that John Blair Mason knew a thing or two. A simple practical engineer who I believe went on later in Auckland to form the company Mason and Porter Engineers and manufacturers. To this day the name lives on in ‘Masport’ lawn mowers among other things.
Bureaucracy of course don’t do simple. They prefer talking, meetings, reports and mutterings of ‘rhubarb rhubarb rhubarb’ from sunup to sunset. Meantime the problems simply get worse. There was no greater example of that when the storms threatened the wall and sandhills several years ago and Cr Paul Hudson was the man in charge of the dithering. As he and the bureaucrats procrastinated, Doug Hall of Hall Bros (now a councillor himself) said this is ‘bullshit’, took his fleet of trucks and on his own initiative brought sand in and dumped it over the hills. It could be said it saved the situation. So perhaps we should give some thought to the practicality of the man when voting.
Paul: The data I have seen shows that there is no significant long term declining trend in the St Clair sand level. We also know this because we can see sand there today. We know that the beach sand gets quite low at times, but it always comes back. From what you say it seems reasonable to believe that the DCC was careless in deciding to extend the new wall. What that means is that the conditions for the St Clair beach sand are not optimal; it doesn’t, however, mean that there is a significant problem. So far, there is no problem that justifies taking any action. One day, if there are serious shortages of sand which happen for too long and too frequently, then some action could be considered, but not before. Occasional low sand levels are to be expected. This is not a problem. Nothing needs to be fixed.
I agree that the resilience of beach and dunes to storms is important, however, there is no problem with this at St Clair. Citizens can feel very safe because they have a well proven old sea-wall as well as the top half of a new sea-wall to protect them.
For the other beaches, you observe that the lack of beach and dune width contributes to a lack of resilience against heavy seas. I expect that this is true, but as I said before, while the shape/size is not optimum, it is sufficient. We know that it is sufficient because there has been no breach since the sand-dunes and such have been as they are now. You mentioned a severe storm in 1936 which didn’t seem to cause a breach. Maintenance and repairs are always needed. We just need to make sure the DCC does its job. What seems to be the problem with the sand-dunes? Why would there be any risk of a breach with a properly maintained dune system?
Also, your idea of destroying playing fields and various other recreational facilities to stop the sea causing destruction is really dumb. We should aim to minimize destruction. Maintain the dunes and there is no need to destroy anything. There is no problem that needs to be fixed. I bet the Chinese have a saying like this: Man who tries to fix imaginary problem always causes real problem. Find some real problems to fix.
Sure you can currently see sand in front of the wall, but only at low tide. The rest of the time the sea is almost up against the toe of the wall. So if the level hasn’t changed why is the ramp from the surf club not open and why has the council had to shore up the toe of the wall with rock? Simply because the beach is continuing to become lower. The other point is if the level of the beach in front of the wall hasn’t changed, why was it that in the early 1970s you could sit in front of the wall on sand and still be a significant distance from the surf? The continued steepness, lack of vegetation, narrow dune, shortage of dry sand beach and extended wet sand are all indicators that Ocean Beach Domain has serious issues of resilience in the face of large storms. The 1936 storm didn’t breach the dunes but it took more than half of them away. I’m not planning on destroying sports fields but it may be that a serious storm will do. Why would we not strengthen the dunes as a physical asset in the same way as a drain or a road to protect infrastructure and property? You argue that the shape and size is sufficient but that relies on the thinking that storms will be as they have been in recent years and that we will not see a 1938 or a 1968 storm again. That’s impossible to predict.
Paul: I was at St Clair a few days ago and the sand went all the way up to the DCC’s ugly boulders at the wall. Have a look for yourself. The reason why the DCC had to shore up the toe of the wall with ugly boulders is they are idiots and ended up building only half a seawall – the bottom half that is meant to penetrate into the sand and protect the back-fill during times of low sand levels, isn’t there; it wasn’t designed, wasn’t built. I expect that the boulders reduce the gouging effect of the waves and provide some of the protection that the old wall used to. The boulders alongside the wall where the design defect has been repaired are completely redundant and should be removed. There is no funding to fix the rest of the wall, so it looks like the boulders will be there for a while.
As for the question of whether the sand level has an increasing or decreasing trend, the answer would have to be no. After 100 years of various cycles and/or random changes, the sand level has shown that there is no discernible rizing or falling trend. We know this because the sand level is roughly similar to what it was 100 years ago. Probably the level is currently a bit below average because it is still recovering from when it was low a year or two ago. This, however, isn’t the most important question.
The most important question about the St Clair sand levels is, is there enough sand on the beech to allow us to do what we want to do. The answer is YES, there is enough to sunbathe and make sand-castles and suchlike. Sometime there isn’t, but mostly there is. On the rare occasions when there isn’t, there has always been another 2 or 3km of good sandy beach right beside it. This is a non-problem.
As for the sand dunes, you are wrong to claim that Ocean Beach Domain has serious issues of resilience in the face of large storms. You are wrong because history has proven you wrong. The dunes have stood up to severe storms and there has not been a breach. You point out that some repairs have been needed over the last 100 years. Repairs and maintenance are things we should expect. My point is that it works and we have proved that it does. We don’t need Andrew Whiley’s silly wall and we don’t need your costly and destructive but ecologically perfect sand dune system.
You say that I’m not planning on destroying sports fields. Have you changed your mind? because your submission says that you want Kettle Park to be a big sand dune and the ejection of the Dunedin Rugby Football Club, the Pirates Rugby Football Club and the Squash Club etc. You want Hancock & Chisholm Park to also become big sand dunes with trees. Are you saying that the kids could still play soccer in the forest? Also, it looks like you want to demolish some peoples houses in St Clair (page 36).
Sigh. It seems one of the new candidates had sought advice from Lee Vandervis and not liked what he heard. Now Joshua Perry, along with Barry Timmings, have attacked Lee as part of the campaign, which of course the ODT would bust a press to get printed. I just don’t want this type of crap on council. I was going to vote for Barry but he’s now struck off. I was still considering Joshua because there was something about his profile that caught. But this attack, whether he started it or was having his strings pulled, indicates a character I’m no longer comfortable with.
If they had a bloody problem with the advice, the right thing would have been to meet with Lee and challenge his opinion before using it as cannon fodder in their own political campaigns.
You beat me to it, Anonymous – my reaction to the article, precisely.
My second thought was, I don’t want anyone with Cull Mk2 personal attack & manipulative tendencies.
Lee’s assessment was spot on in regard to the practicality of Mr Perry serving on Council. With all the best will in the world it would not be possible for him to cope. I have heard him speak and I could not understand him even though I had a Down’s Syndrome brother for more than 60 years who had limited speech. And he was hard enough even after all those years. Mr Timming’s motivation is to undermine Lee in the hope he can get through the middle and unfortunately he is prepared to use Mr Perry to do it. This effort to distract from his own appalling statement the previous day shows him to be a very slow learner and also demonstrates the willingness of the ODT to do what it can to influence voters by descending to the bottom of the manure pile.
Thank you for this clear explanation of the intertwined issues. The boundary between water and land is always complex and subject to rapid as well as gradual change – storms, earthquakes and at many times since “time” began, climate changes.
The timing of your dramatic suggestions is noted, and the reason for pointing out the possible extremes. When the current mood is see no issue and don’t worry, it’s necessary to administer a vigorous prod with a sharp stick.
Council candidate Joshua Perry
I refuse to have What if? Dunedin play ugly political football with disability.
The subject is now closed.
Joshua Perry has a voice. Give him respect.
Joshua Perry in his own words:
e.g. (Regards to managing the natural and physical resources of South Dunedin to meet the needs of current and future generations and to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing.)
Joshua Perry : “We should do everything we can to upgrade these areas by working with local community groups and residents, and putting their voices first rather than our own personal interests. We should also put surveys to the community as to what projects they would like to see invested in throughout South Dunedin.”
His viewpoint, his ideas, there’s nothing unworthy about them. Assisted communication is improving fast – who knows how far it will have progressed by next election. I hope he stays involved, the way people with various disabilities see the city and how well/badly it functions for them is helpful in keeping a focus on sensible planning. If signs can be read by people with poor sight, that doesn’t stop them being read by people with 20-20 vision. If buildings are accessible by people who use wheelchairs, then they are also accessible for people using walking sticks, and pushing rug-rats in strollers, and people with duff hips and knees, as well as those of us who are at present still nimble. Disability is a matter of degree, and for most of us most of our components are working OK most of the time, so dis-ability is a temporary state (broken limb, broken specs…) or a new one down to age-related illness/wearing out, or accident. A city which ordinary things are made such that as many people as possible can use them – that’s sensible. But most of us don’t know what’s difficult for other people until we break a leg, can’t see very well any longer, run out of breath and are slow crossing roads….
People who live with these and other challenges, and have problem-solving techniques as part of their daily equipment for life, can contribute useful info on making the city easier to live in for all and sundry. But that’s not all, they’re also paying for and using the same city as everyone else, so they are as likely as the next chap to be thinking about all the other city issues, not restricted to disability issues.
Assisted technology really is progressing fast. I hope the advice reported as being given by Lee will not, in a very few years, be relevant – and I hope Joshua Perry stays involved in politics, perhaps by contributing to this blog during the next 3 years :-)
Tue, 27 Sep 2016
Candidates divided on living wage, public holidays
Questions about the living wage and working on public holidays were posed at the Unions Otago Mayoral Candidates Forum in North Dunedin last night. An audience of about 70 listened to 10 of the 11 candidates – Scout Barbour-Evans, Athol Bayne, Rachel Elder, Abe Gray, Jim O’Malley, Barry Timmings, Mayor Dave Cull, and councillors Aaron Hawkins, Lee Vandervis and Andrew Whiley – answer questions posed by University of Otago department of politics Associate Prof Brian Roper. Candidate Conrad Stedman was absent.
The Living Wage is a scam promoted by unionists, socialists etc as a way to bypass the official process for setting the Minimum Wage. These DCC councillor candidate meetings can be a very good way of promoting various causes and Associate Prof Brian Roper, UoO Dept of Politics knows an opportunity when he sees one: Brian is the founder and leader of the International Socialist Organisation (ISO) (Headquarters- Dunedin; Marxist, Leninist, extreme left) and ISO has campaigned for the Living Wage in NZ for a while. Anyway:
The DCC already is a Living Wage employer but it seems to have kept this secret from the councillors – Hawkins and Barbour-Evans in particular seem to be unaware of this and they both hope to attract votes with this as their policy. It is concerning that councillors were not consulted about this foolish decision and puzzling why there was no media statement. This is the wording of a job description for a Moana Pool cleaner (Reference: 2895044) as at 1/7/16: The DCC has adopted the living wage where your starting hourly rate will be $18.65. Applicants must be physically fit and be~~.
The DCC CEO was asked about this in a radio interview (Hubbard+Bidrose, 5/7/16) and said that the union was very pleased with the Living Wage decision. The DCC has now stopped boasting about being a Living Wage employer in their recent job descriptions for some reason. It is quite fortunate for Hawkins and Barbour-Evans that the big announcement has been delayed. The Living Wage is now claimed to be $19.25 per hour. There is no particular reason for the increase.
“The Living Wage is now claimed to be $19.25 per hour. There is no particular reason for the increase.” How about housing costs, JimmyJones?
I support the Living Wage. What are we saying to other NZers when we say a sub-living wage is good enough for them? “You don’t deserve to live in dignity supporting yourself & family by your own labour because you work at a low-status job”?
The worst paid are mostly people whose work has to be done that day. If they’re off work it matters, and someone else has to be found to fill in for them. The higher up the ladder the less they are missed and don’t need to be replaced on sick days, until the point where Very Important Moneybags can be at a conference then take a few extra days and the place goes on without him/her.
Hype O’Thermia: the widespread adoption of the Living Wage would kill jobs and be harmful to low-skilled workers. Apart from the extra costs to businesses and ratepayers, the setting of their Living Wage is arbitrary and unpredictable. This is an unacceptable risk to any employers that are foolish enough to commit to this. Anyway, who are these Living Wage people? Why is it any business of ISO, or who-ever, to interfere in wage negotiations; who elected them to make decisions. They don’t represent anyone except themselves – not the workers and not the employers.
We already have ways to provide for the unemployed and low earners in the form of the minimum wage and various benefits. It seems to work. Show me a poverty-stricken mother of two and I’ll show you 1000 other mothers of two that have the same income and can afford to live adequately. The money isn’t the problem. The Living Wage isn’t the answer.
I mostly wanted to point out that DCC councillors have been poorly informed about a decision that they should have been involved in. Did you know that the ORC CEO earns $299,000 of total remuneration per year and only has 135½ staff.
The problem is not simply the province of (lowly???!) single parents but rather for any person at the bottom of the wage scale and their access to fair to reasonable roofing, food gathering, and mildly good health not subject to black mould or other nasties, and a sheet to cover them up in the main street to avoid arrest for nudity. When was the last time any of us survived on (after rent or mortgage payment) less than $100 a week for Everything ? (and that’s being generous numerically).
This is rhetorical. But was it sustainable.
JimmyJones, “the widespread adoption of the Living Wage would kill jobs and be harmful to low-skilled workers” – but these are the people whose work is necessary every day/shift. Employers don’t hire extra staff because they’re cheap, they hire them because they can’t squeeze any more productivity out of the ones already working for them.
These are not the ones hired to increase superiors’ rank by increasing the number reporting to them either. The immediate superiors of the “lowly ones” are themselves too low on the food chain to independently hire extra staff, or if they can their status doesn’t improve, the only advantage is that the work gets done.
The higher up the ladder, the stronger ability to resist cuts. So whose hours get cut and demands made on them to do even more work in the same or fewer hours? Who gets laid off? The non-living-waged. Oddly enough they don’t collect 6 months severance pay either!
Hype and Elizabeth: outside local government, the only jobs that exist are ones where workers produce more benefit to their employer than they cost. Every job has a pay level above which it becomes financially non-viable and doesn’t exist. A pay rate determined by the ISO and their Marxist friends without regard to this, will destroy jobs and harm the low-earners. Low-earners need jobs. The thing that’s worse than a low paid job is having no job.
Also remember the wise Chinese saying: man who tries to fix imaginary problem always creates real problem. Some people want you to believe in imaginary problems. Are you sure there is a problem with incomes being too low? Don’t tell me that it was on TV3, so it must be true.
It must be said, at the DCC I have no perception at all of jobs being too low paid.
Council staff aren’t in caregiver positions in resthomes.
DCC is already considered to be a good and generous employer.
If in the council’s very lowest paid jobs there’s a lack of relativity with the market then maybe that is easily sorted without resorting to the trendy audacity of “living wage” claims in council job ads.
There’s a rumour circulating that a councillor not standing for another term is being lined up for work at our rates funded institution. No names here.
Elizabeth: I hope it isn’t that Jinty girl. She’s caused enough harm already.
Tue, 27 Sep 2016
ODT: Environmental ratings controversial
The group behind a website that is ranking Dunedin mayoral candidates on their environmental stance says it was produced in part to get young people talking about the local government election. […] Generation Zero is a youth-led organisation founded to help provide solutions for New Zealand to cut carbon pollution through smarter transport, liveable cities and independence from fossil fuels. The group has ranked candidates nationally