Tag Archives: Freedom of expression

DCC meeting and apology NOT Enough— #SouthDunedinFlood

Election Year : The following post is offered in the public interest. -Eds

Received today.

android-email-app [carleton.ca]From: Hilary Calvert
To: Dave Cull
Cc: Golds [Godfrey Dodd], All Elected Members, Vaughan Elder [ODT]
Subject: Re: Flooding

Thanks for copying us in.

May we know when you requested that the mudtanks were cleaned thoroughly?

I had thought that it was an initiative from Ruth Stokes, as part of the looking into and reporting back on the flood.

I am also interested in your “fact” that the stormwater system is not capable even at optimal condition and performance……. Do you mean that it was not then, or that it would not be even if we made adjustments and sorted out the mudtanks and fixed the screen/pump and made changes which we have signalled to the general stormwater system which flows through South Dunedin?

If council modelling showed the extent of the flooding would be precisely as it was in the event of that magnitude, what relevance had the problems with the screen/pump and the mudtanks? I guess all the problems in South Dunedin during the flood were localised problems and many of them as a result of water lying about, so did our modelling show that as well?

I understood that there was still more work to be done to understand what we could best do particularly about the interconnection between the water from various sources and what we could afford of the options available.

Do you see the governance part of the Council completely blameless in this process?
Since you have apparently arranged for the mudtanks to be cleared, surely you/we could have done something sooner.

Do we have a role at all in your view, apart from advising people they are wrong when it turns out we may have incomplete information?

As seems true for all of the information surrounding this horrible flood, the more information we receive the more questions we have.

Kind regards,

Hilary

_______________________________

On 26/04/2016, at 5:30 AM, Dave Cull wrote:

Dear Mr Dodd,
Thank you for your email. I am puzzled by the apparent assertion that I have blamed the 2015 June flooding on Climate Change. While that may be the root cause I don’t recall saying that. The cause of the flooding, as has finally been comprehensively reported (for a meeting today) was the fact that the stormwater system in South Dunedin is not capable, even at optimum condition and performance, of coping with the amount of rain that fell over that period. That is a simple calculation given the capacity of the system in both volume and pumping terms, and the severity of the event. The mudbank maintenance failure was reprehensible from both a contractor and staff oversight perspective, especially as exactly the same issue had been raised some four years ago and assurances given that it would not happen again. The fact that some mudbanks were not up to scratch may have caused some localised problems and perhaps prolonged the water lying, but they did not cause the extent of the flooding. That was exactly as Council’s modelling showed it would be in an event of that magnitude.
Six years ago Council received reports stating (among other conclusions) two things. First that more frequent and severe rain events were likely. Second that the stormwater system in South Dunedin was not capable of handling those. So flooding was very likely. Last year the Parliamentary Commissioner for the Environment issued a report showing that rising ground water, pushed up by sea level rise will increasingly afflict South Dunedin.
It’s most important to recognise that while stormwater and groundwater can each affect the other, they are different and have different causes.
The failure was operational and managerial as Council was repeatedly assured that maintenance was up to scratch.
Council’s challenge now is to address both stormwater and groundwater issues. We have already, at my request, ensured that the stormwater system is in the best shape possible as winter approaches, by having all the mudbanks cleaned properly. Additionally the screen at the Portobello Rd pumping station, which was blocked by debris carried by the overwhelming amount of water, will be replaced by July.
Council will consider that report which has taken such a frustratingly long time to get to us, and determine the next necessary steps.
At your request I have copied this to all elected members.

Dave Cull

_______________________________

From: Golds [Godfrey Dodd]
Sent: Monday, April 25, 2016 7:07 PM
To: mayor @dcc.govt.nz
Subject: FW: Flooding

Dear Mayor
I am sending you this email in that it may make you understand how one ratepayer views your complete failure in the flooding in South Dunedin
WE all know that climate warming is a fact but your glib PR spin and articles in the paper does nothing for your credibility and your lack apology shows that you and the council do not except responsibility for this lack of governance
It is sad that only one of the council appears to have enough bottle to ask you to do in an old fashion way the decent thing
My wish is that you pass this email as part of an agenda item a the next council meeting on how one ratepayer views your lack of understanding in the way a Mayor should carry out his role
I would interested in your reply

Regards
Godfrey Dodd

_______________________________

From: Golds [Godfrey Dodd]
Sent: Friday, April 22, 2016 10:00 AM
To: Andrew Whiley [DCC]
Subject: Flooding

Hi Andrew
It is with disappointment reading the failure of governance by the council I was a chairman in those days that was the title of a high school board If the school had a problem which effected the community you had to stand up and take the blame
I do not expect the council elected members to clean mud tanks but when there is failure of this size then the expectation of the community that something is seriously wrong with the governance of the council The glib excuses as regards rise in sea level is the catch cry of the council which you as a member are part of
In my view the council members should of put on gumboots and gone out with the CEO and inspected the mud tanks instead of waiting a year for a report It saddens me to find that people in South Dunedin were not accorded this Instead we had articles written that showed how out of touch the council members were These articles were part of the green PR spin which now blights any decision that this particular council makes All that was needed was clean mud tanks and clear governance by the members of the council not excuses I hope that this is a lesson that you as a council member takes on board when making decisions in the future
Kindest Regards

Godfrey Dodd

ODT 25.4.16 (letter to the editor)

ODT 25.4.16  Letter to editor Vandervis p10

Tue, 26 Apr 2016
ODT: Vandervis forcing mud-tank issue [+ Letters]
A series of emails released by Dunedin city councillor Lee Vandervis show he was raising concerns about the state of Dunedin’s mud-tanks as long ago as 2011. Cr Vandervis said he released the emails because only publicity forced the council to change its ways. “This publicity is going to make sure it really is sorted once and for all this time.” The release of the emails follows a report released by the Dunedin City Council last week into last June’s flood, which found 75% of mud-tanks in South Dunedin were not properly maintained.

Tue, 26 Apr 2016
ODT: Staff apology for mud-tank failure
Council staff were responsible for not properly overseeing mud-tank maintenance in South Dunedin, not councillors or the mayor, a senior staff member says. Council infrastructure and networks general manager Ruth Stokes started today’s council infrastructure services committee meeting by apologising on behalf of council staff for the failings identified in a report on last June’s flood. Dunedin Mayor Dave Cull and Crs David Benson-Pope and Lee Vandervis were among those who had raised mud-tank performance prior to the South Dunedin floods, and been given incorrect information by staff. “For that I would like to, on behalf of the executive, apologise,” Ms Stokes. The failure was a management failure and not governance one, she said.

lee pushing head in mudtank words [Douglas Field 26.4.16] detailDouglas Field 26.4.16 (detail)

Comment at ODT Online:

Mayor Dave Cull outraged
Submitted by JimmyJones on Tue, 26/04/2016 – 1:49pm.

Mayor Cull says he is outraged at the failure of Fulton Hogan and council staff to adequately ensure that the mudtanks were in working condition. He should also be outraged at his own poor leadership and failure to respond to developing problems. Under his leadership the city continued to build up a backlog of worn-out stormwater pipes and equipment waiting for funding to be allocated. With this lack of funding we have seen the inevitable result of a deteriorating stormwater system. The poor state of the stormwater system was the primary cause of the severity of the flooding at Kaikorai, Mosgiel and South Dunedin last year.

This under-funding of the stormwater renewals is not an accident. Every year the DCC Mayor and councillors decide and vote on this spending – and every year they vote to under-fund the stormwater renewals because they think that a new stadium and a new swimming pool and more bicycle lanes are more important than a functioning stormwater system. The Annual Plan shows that the under-funding will continue next year. Expect the deterioration to continue.

Related Post and Comments:
20.4.16 DCC Politics : Release of Infrastructure Report #SouthDunedinFlood

█ For more, enter the term *flood* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Email image: carleton.ca – android-email-app

53 Comments

Filed under Business, Climate change, DCC, Democracy, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Events, Finance, Geography, Heritage, Hot air, Housing, Infrastructure, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Pet projects, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin, Town planning, Transportation, Urban design, What stadium

DCC Politics : Release of Infrastructure Report #SouthDunedinFlood

Election Year : The following post is offered in the public interest. -Eds

Flooding South Dunedin June 2015 photo by Paul Allen [listener.co.nz]Photo: Paul Allen

New Report [excerpt]—
DCC Flood Report 2 (2016) excerpt

Next meeting of the Infrastructure Services Committee will be held on Tuesday, 26 April 2016 at 1:30 pm or at the conclusion of the Planning and Regulatory Committee meeting (whichever is later) – Edinburgh Room, Municipal Chambers

PUBLIC AGENDA
1 Public Forum (page 4)
2 Apologies (4)
3 Confirmation of Agenda (4)
4 Declaration of Interest (5)
PART A REPORTS (Committee has power to decide these matters)
●● 5 South Dunedin Public Infrastructure Performance during June 2015 Flood Event Follow up (6-27)
6 Recycling Markets and Bin Contamination (28)
7 Northern Wastewater Schemes’ Options (34)
PART B REPORTS (Committee has power to recommend only on these items
8 Resolution to Stop a Portion of Peel Street, Allanton (44)
9 Road Name – Three Hills Subdivision (54)
PART A REPORTS (Committee has power to decide these matters)
10 Notification of Agenda Items for Consideration by the Chair

Agenda – ISC – 26/04/2016 (PDF, 6.3 MB)
The agenda and reports are located together in this file.

Dunedin City Council – Media Release
Report on South Dunedin infrastructure performance during June 2015 flood released

This item was published on 20 Apr 2016

The report on the South Dunedin infrastructure performance during the June 2015 flood event was released today as part of the agenda for the Infrastructure and Services Committee meeting next week.

The report concludes that while a number of factors contributed, the main factor was the highest 24-hour rainfall total in Musselburgh since 1923.

General Manager Infrastructure and Networks Ruth Stokes says the report outlines the known challenges with managing the South Dunedin catchment and highlights concerns about the performance of mudtanks and the Portobello Road pumping station during the event.

“Changes in the South Dunedin catchment since the stormwater network was designed, combined with operational challenges and high ground water levels, all contributed to the effects of the extreme rainfall event that occurred in June 2015.”

Mrs Stokes says the report shows that mudtanks weren’t maintained as required. As a result, a number of steps, including a full review and retendering of road maintenance contracts have been adopted. Other measures include accurately capturing data on the status of the mudtanks, a redesign of the Portobello Pumping station screen and the development of a communications plan to inform the community of the local infrastructure challenges and how to best plan for future events.

“However, given the volume of rainfall and the system at capacity during the June event, the water would have been unable to enter the network even if all mudtanks were clear.”

She says the DCC must now look at what measures can be taken to mitigate such events in future.

The DCC will soon be engaging with the community about these issues and what the long term responses might be.

Contact Ruth Stokes, General Manager Infrastructure and Networks on 477 4000.

DCC Link

Otago Daily Times Published on Jun 4, 2015
Raw aerial video of Dunedin Flooding
Video courtesy One News.

█ For more, enter the term *flood* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

94 Comments

Filed under Business, Construction, DCC, Democracy, Design, District Plan, Dunedin, Economics, Events, Finance, Geography, Heritage, Infrastructure, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Proposed 2GP, Public interest, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin, Tourism, Town planning, Transportation, Travesty, Urban design, What stadium

‘I Find That Offensive!’ – recommended by Patrik Schumacher · Mar 25

Book by Claire Fox - 'I Find That Offensive!' - front cover [bitebackpublishing.com]BOOK PROMO [by tweet]

‘I Find That Offensive!’ (Provocations Series)
By Claire Fox

When you hear that now ubiquitous phrase ‘I find that offensive’, you know you’re being told to shut up. While the terrible murder of the Charlie Hebdo cartoonists demonstrated that those who offend can face the most brutal form of censorship, it also served only to intensify the pre-existing climate that dictates we all have to walk on eggshells to avoid saying anything offensive – or else.

Indeed, competitive offence-claiming is ratcheting up well beyond religious sensibilities. So, while Islamists and feminists may seem to have little in common, they are both united in demanding retribution in the form of bans, penalties and censorship of those who hurt their feelings.

But how did we become so thin-skinned? In ‘I Find That Offensive!’ Claire Fox addresses the possible causes of what is fast becoming known as ‘Generation Snowflake’ head-on (no ‘safe spaces’ here) in a call to toughen up, become more robust and make a virtue of the right to be offensive.

PROVOCATIONS is a groundbreaking new series of short polemics composed by some of the most intriguing voices in contemporary culture and edited by Yasmin Alibhai-Brown. Sharp, intelligent and controversial, Provocations provides insightful contributions to the most vital discussions in society today.

“An ambitious new series that tackles the controversy of the topics explored with a mixture of intelligence and forthright argument from some excellent writers.” — The Observer

Bitebackpublishing.com

Related Posts and Comments:
26.3.16 New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 —Section 14

█ Enter the terms *post removed*, *removed*, *rephrased* or *video animation removed* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

23 Comments

Filed under Business, Climate change, Construction, Corruption, Crime, Democracy, Design, Dunedin, Economics, Events, Geography, Hot air, Inspiration, Leading edge, Media, Name, New Zealand, OAG, Ombudsman, People, Perversion, Politics, Travesty

“O Oysters, come and walk with us!” #SouthDunedinFlood

Douglas Field Published Mar 31, 2016 | Republished Aug 17, 2016
The walrus and the carpenter

THE TIME HAS COME!!!!
We’re cabbages
And kings!!!!

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

█ For more, enter the term *flood* in the search box at right.

5 Comments

Filed under Business, Democracy, Dunedin, Economics, Infrastructure, Name, New Zealand, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin

DCC: Infrastructure report 2 pending —Mudtanks & stormwater drainage #SouthDunedinFlood

Douglas Field Published on Mar 30, 2016 | Updated Jul 30, 2016
busy doin’ nonth’

Comments from Lyndon Weggery:

2016/03/31 at 11:12 am
Newsflash!!! – According to my DCC source the long awaited MudTank report will be tabled on Tuesday 26 April 2016 to the Infrastructure Services Committee. That’s nearly 11 months after the infamous event.

2016/03/31 at 3:34 pm
Elizabeth – aside from our patient waiting for the Mudtank report we are also waiting for any progress on a Council formal resolution dated 30 November 2015 requesting staff to implement a work programme etc to alleviate the flooding dangers to South Dunedin. So far nothing has happened and in the course of a polite discussion with Councillor Aaron Hawkins on Facebook on related matters I have asked him to check on progress. To his credit he has agreed to do so.

● ODT 5.3.16 New contractor for mud tanks
● ODT 25.1.16 April date for report on flooding

Council meeting 30 Nov 2015

Minutes – Council – 30/11/2015 (PDF, 121.8 KB)

Report – Council – 30/11/2015 (PDF, 553.9 KB)
Infrastructure Performance During June 2015 Flood Event [report 1]

17
INFRASTRUCTURE PERFORMANCE DURING JUNE 2015 FLOOD EVENT

A report from Water and Waste Services provided an overview of the extreme rain event of 3 June 2015, its impacts and the performance of the drainage infrastructure. It focused primarily on the impact of the events that were experienced in South Dunedin, as that had been an area of particular public interest.

The analysis presented in the report was based on a flow balance model that had been developed for the purposes of assessing the impact of pumping station performance. The flow balance model had also been used to assess the relative impacts of the high groundwater levels in South Dunedin that significantly increased the amount of runoff generated by the rainfall.

The rain event significantly exceeded the capacity of the stormwater system in South Dunedin. The post event analysis had identified some opportunities to improve the performance of the existing infrastructure in large scale rain events, but would not prevent serious flooding in a similar future rain event.

Work was already underway to redesign the screens at the Portobello Road pumping station to make it easier to keep them clear during large events and was expected to be completed during the current financial year.

The planned infrastructure improvements would slightly reduce the impact of future flooding. However extensive flooding of low lying areas in large scale rain events or long duration rain events remained highly likely, particularly if the rain event coincided with high groundwater conditions.

The General Manager Infrastructure and Networks and Group Manager Water and Waste commented on various aspects of the report and responded to questions from Councillors.

Councillor Thomson left the meeting from 3.52 pm to 3.55 pm and Councillor Staynes left the meeting from 3.54 pm to 4.35 pm during the course of questions. Councillor Vandervis left the meeting from 4.36 pm to 4.38 pm and Councillor Peat left the meeting at 4.38 pm.

Following questions it was moved (The Mayor/Wilson):

“That the Council:

a) Notes the report on Infrastructure Performance during the June 2015 Flood Event.”

b) Notes the serious implications and consequences of rising ground water levels in parts of Dunedin.

c) That staff investigate and report back on a work programme to address the issues caused by rising ground water levels in South Dunedin and other parts of the city.

d) Notes that the report should include:
i) Possible responses to a range of sea level and climate change scenarios.
ii) Budgetary, infrastructural and community implications of both scenarios and responses.
iii) Catchment wide stormwater systems, ownership and effective management.

e) Notes that Council’s long term aims, as much as possible, are:
i) that the environment of affected parts of Dunedin is improved to an acceptable level.
ii) that no Dunedin citizen, ratepayer or householder is seriously disadvantaged as a result of any measures taken to deal with the challenges of ground water and rising sea levels.”

Councillor Peat returned to the meeting at 4.42 pm.

During discussion the work of staff was acknowledged during the time of the flooding.

Following discussion Motion (a) was put and carried on a division 14:0 with one abstention.
For: Councillors Benson-Pope, Bezett, Calvert, Hall, Hawkins, Lord, MacTavish, Noone, Peat, Staynes, Thomson, Whiley, Wilson, The Mayor
Council minutes – 30 November and 14 December 2015 7
Abstention: Councillor Vandervis, on the grounds that the motion did not identify the major flood causes as he understood them

Motions (b) – (d) were put and carried on a division 13:1 with one abstention.
For: Councillors Benson-Pope, Bezett, Calvert, Hall, Hawkins, Lord, MacTavish, Noone, Peat, Staynes, Thomson, Wilson, The Mayor Against: Councillor Whiley Abstention: Councillor Vandervis

Motion (e) was put and carried on a division 12:2 with one abstention.
For: Councillors Benson-Pope, Bezett, Hall, Hawkins, Lord, MacTavish, Noone, Peat, Staynes, Thomson, Wilson, The Mayor Against: Councillors Calvert, Whiley Abstention: Councillor Vandervis

It was moved (The Mayor/Staynes):
“That the meeting adjourns for ten minutes.”
Motion carried

The meeting adjourned from 5.35 pm to 5.47 pm.
[Item 17 ends]

Dunedin City Council Published on Dec 7, 2015
Dunedin City Council – Council Meeting – November 30 2015
Agenda Item 17 from 1:09:50

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

16 Comments

Filed under Business, Democracy, Dunedin, Economics, Infrastructure, Media, Name, New Zealand, Ombudsman, People, Politics, Project management, Property, Resource management, Site, South Dunedin

New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 —Section 14

█ The Act (government legislation): http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1990/0109/latest/DLM224792.html

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
About the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 (Guidelines) Link

The New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 [NZBORA] was enacted to affirm, protect and promote human rights and fundamental freedoms in New Zealand. The Act also affirms New Zealand’s commitment to the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) on which the rights and freedoms it contains are based.

When it was enacted, the Bill of Rights Act did not create any new rights but merely confirmed existing common law rights. The Act does not reflect all ICCPR rights; however, section 28 provides that, just because a right or freedom is not expressly provided for in the Act, that does not mean that the right or freedom does not exist or is otherwise restricted. The right or freedom is given effect by other legislation and by common law. For instance, while the ICCPR contains a right to privacy, the Bill of Rights does not. Nonetheless, the Privacy Act 1993, together with the common law tort of privacy, provides for rights of personal privacy.

The rights and freedoms
The Bill of Rights Act affirms the following rights and freedoms:
● the right not to be deprived of life (section 8)
● the right not to be subjected to torture or cruel treatment (section 9)
● the right not to be subjected to medical or scientific experimentation (section 10)
● the right to refuse to undergo medical treatment (section 11)
● electoral rights (section 12)
● the freedom of thought, conscience, and religion (section 13)
● the freedom of expression (section 14)
● the right to manifest religion and belief (section 15)
● the freedom of peaceful assembly (section 16)
● the freedom of association (section 17)
● the freedom of movement (section 18)
● the right to freedom from discrimination (section 19)
● rights of minorities (section 20)
● the right to be secure against unreasonable search and seizure (section 21)
● the right not to be arbitrarily arrested or detained (section 22)
● rights of persons arrested or detained (section 23)
● rights of persons charged with an offence (section 24)
● rights to minimum standards of criminal procedure (section 25)
● the right not to be liable to retroactive penalties or double jeopardy (section 26), and
● the right to natural justice (section 27).

Application
The Bill of Rights Act is designed to protect individuals (natural persons) and legal persons (such as corporations) from the actions of the State (section 29). The Act applies to any acts done by the legislative, executive or judicial branches of the government, or by any person or body performing a public function, power or duty conferred or imposed by or pursuant to law (section 3).

Limitations
The rights and freedoms contained in the Bill of Rights Act are not absolute but may only be subject to reasonable limits that are prescribed by law and can be “demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”. If a limitation does not satisfy this test then the legislative provision, policy or practice is inconsistent with the relevant section of the Bill of Rights Act.

The Bill of Rights Act does not have the status of supreme law. This means that the Courts cannot use the Act to repeal, revoke, or invalidate other legislation. In the event of an inconsistency between the Bill of Rights Act and another enactment, the other enactment must prevail (section 4). The Bill of Rights Act, however, includes two important safeguards to help protect human rights.
Cont/

Permission to speak [Douglas Field 25.3.16] 1Douglas Field 25.3.16

MINISTRY OF JUSTICE
The Guidelines on the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990: A Guide to the Rights and Freedoms in the Bill of Rights Act for the Public Sector

Introduction to sections 12 – 18: Democratic and Civil Rights Link
Sections 12 – 18 of the Bill of Rights Act concern the fundamental rights and freedoms that are essential to an individual’s effective representation and meaningful participation in the public life of a democratic society.

Section 12 Electoral Rights
Section 13 Freedom of Thought
Section 14 Freedom of expression*
Section 15 Manifestation of religion and belief
Section 16 Freedom of peaceful assembly
Section 17 Freedom of association
Section 18 Freedom of Movement

….

Section 14 – Freedom of expression Link
Everyone has the right to freedom of expression, including the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and opinions of any kind in any form.

[excerpt]
What every policy analyst needs to know about section 14:

● There are very few activities that will not be protected by the freedom of expression because most human activity has an expressive element (including political, artistic and commercial expression).
● Speech or an expression that is considered important to the ability of individuals to participate in core democratic processes, for example in elections, and political and social speech, is likely to enjoy a very high degree of protection.
● A fundamental aspect of the right to freedom of expression is that it extends to protecting all information and opinion, however unpopular, offensive or distasteful.
● The right generally protects all expression that conveys or attempts to convey meaning except expressive activity that takes the form of violence.
● Even though the right extends to all types of opinions, certain categories of expression (e.g., advertising, pornography or speech that incites racial violence) are more likely to be subject to reasonable limitations than others (e.g., political and social speech).
● The scope of section 14 means that as all forms of expression except those that take the form of violence are protected by the right, any restriction on expressive activity will be considered in the context of section 5 of the Bill of Rights Act.
● Freedom of expression includes the right to say nothing or the right not to say certain things.
● The opinions or views do not have to be held by that individual – the protection broadens out to include anyone else who subsequently communicates or disseminates those ideas or opinions.
● The right to seek and receive information may involve consideration of other statutory frameworks such as the Official Information Act 1982 or the Privacy Act 1993.

█ In Brief: Your rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act (PDF)
[click to enlarge]

Ministry of Justice Your rights under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act

█ Enter the terms *removed*, *post removed* or *video animation removed* in the search box at right.

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

4 Comments

Filed under Business, Coolness, Democracy, Design, Dunedin, Fun, Hot air, Inspiration, Leading edge, New Zealand, Ombudsman, People, Politics

Dunedin [video animation removed]

Updated post Thu, 24 Mar 2016 at 12:26 p.m. | Last updated at 8:19 p.m.

SITE NOTICE

The video animation by Douglas Field published at YouTube on 20 Mar 2016, entitled ‘The witless witch-hunt’, has been removed from this post where it was embedded; due to a complaint received from Dunedin City Council [voicemail received 10:19 a.m.; message cleared 12:07 p.m.].

The part text (after the break) was supplied by Mr Field to accompany the animation. The video can be viewed at the Douglas Field channel on YouTube (enter video title in the YT search box).

Reasonably, fairly, the text and video may be regarded as democratic political thought and free expression, a public commentary concerning well-documented events from world history. The text and video are not deemed to be upsetting or offensive to any local party.

Although some associated Comments at this thread have been moderated or removed as a caution and protection to the site owner, any attempts to unfairly ‘influence’, harass or threaten the site owner and contributors to What if? Dunedin will not be tolerated.

[Douglas Field]

The Spectator
The slow death of free speech
How the Left, here and abroad, is trying to shut down debate — from Islam and Israel to global warming and gay marriage
Mark Steyn 19 April 2014

The examples above are ever-shrinking Dantean circles of Tolerance:
At Galway, the dissenting opinion was silenced by grunting thugs screaming four-letter words. At Mozilla, the chairwoman is far more housetrained: she issued a nice press release all about (per Miss Alcorn) striking a balance between freedom of speech and ‘equality’, and how the best way to ‘support’ a ‘culture’ of ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusiveness’ is by firing anyone who dissents from the mandatory groupthink. At the House of Commons they’re moving to the next stage: in an ‘inclusive culture’ ever more comfortable with narrower bounds of public discourse, it seems entirely natural that the next step should be for dissenting voices to require state permission to speak.

Douglas Field's room with Easter Egg [liveinternet.ru]

[public domain]

Mon, 21 Dec 2015
ODT: Contract fraud call at DCC
Dunedin city councillor Lee Vandervis’ actions will form part of a fresh fraud investigation inside the Dunedin City Council, after he claimed to have paid a backhander to secure a council contract. […] The move came after Cr Vandervis, speaking at last Monday’s full council meeting, sparked a furious exchange after claiming he had given “personal evidence” of his backhander to Mayor Dave Cull.


Vandervis statement around the 1.25 mark

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

*Image: Douglas Field’s room with Easter Egg [liveinternet.ru] tweaked by whatifdunedin

24 Comments

Filed under Democracy, Media, People, Politics