Lining up for the trifecta?
The plan for the mother of all referenda has been unveiled.
Representation has been added to the wishlist. It'll be areal stocking stuffer with much accompanying hype as the Diva tells people which boxes they should check.
One would think election papers should go out on their own, rather than bundled with the Diva's choice of burning issues, as it's obvious that in this climate the referendum will be a great chance for him to whip up support for the candidate of his choice who will undoubtedly (but purely coincidentally) be backing the same positions.
The Diva has said he "expect[s] Council to play the role of collecting information and dispassionately spelling out the 'pros' and 'cons'". So we'll be watching with interest just how much "dispassionate information" is given to voters on the arguments which oppose the personal preferences of the Mayor on the various isues.
But back to the by-election. The poll on your choice of candidate is still running - please cast a vote if you haven't already.
Apparently the Diva, Marty Lindsay, Sue Pepperell and Bob Walker were seen "in conference" at Council. What were Marty and Sue doing in a huddle with the diVision chair, the person rumoured to have whacked them all back into line a few months back?
Could this have been a tete-a-tete over the coming by-election, ahead of the Mayor's diVision-only caucus he called yesterday to strategise?
If anyone's ready to walk the plank and make it a trifecta by-election it's these two. If you're wavering, Marty and Sue, now would be a good time to escape and get on with your busy lives without getting the sole blame from the Diva and others for costing the ratepayers all that by-election money.
Comments on this post are now closed.
15 comments:
Marty & Sue should stay on Council, ditch Vision unless Vision ditches Michael. Damage where it's due.
Their support in the community would go through the roof. Even better if Bob Walker went with them: he's been a Labour man; surely he can't have been comfortable with the way things have gone.
Stuffing ballot envelopes with party political messages is certainly illegal. Michael loves his loopholes, but.
Are you people morons? (don't answer that - it's obvious).
After ten months there have been ruumours, conjecture, fantasies about Vision splits.
Then you go to a council meeting or a social function and they are TIGHT.
All I ask is to contrast the wish that many of us may have, with the practicable and demonstrable reality.
Oh yes, they're so tight. The ink was barely dry on their signatures when Joan Street split, then Sue P. apologised for the SGTB vandalism and Laws responded by implying that stress had clouded her judgement. GK's "gone by lunchtime", and refuses to confirm or deny his leader's version of his plans. Even Nicki Higgie "wishes things had been done differently". Marty barely turns up to Council meetings.
So tight.
Joan Street was a flake - the miracle was that she lasted until election day. Oh that's right - she didn't.
Why did Michael think "a flake" was such a good idea for the team? Couldn't he get his first choices?
Such analysis is seriously astray. The Vision team are very "tight" indeed. They disagree on occasion like most adults do but EVERY council they've voted as a bloc on the issues they consider important. Sue Pep hasn't wavered once and the only time a Vision councillor broke ranks so to speak was deputy Dot over Cooks.
So, since you don't believe they have any cracks we can exploit, the other gap we can open is between Vision and the electorate. Any thoughts, or are they "tight" too?
I'd say they could be vulnerable on the 6% rates increase, service levels, the lack of funds for the Splash Centre, the inevitable River Queen trainwreck, and of course the daily madness from bigmouth.
Please note that I used the word "could". If you are unsure of its meaning, please use a dictionary before going straight to insult mode.
You plonker. Castlecliff gave an ave 6% increase for having their house prices lift 60%. The rest of us got rate decreases. Michael Laws - you're our hero.
You plonker. Castlecliff gave an ave 6% increase for having their house prices lift 60%. The rest of us got rate decreases. Michael Laws - you're our hero.
Can you read? 6% for the 'cliff could hurt Vision. Are you that afraid of debate you can't even address the issue?
Joan, I called you a flake, girl.
I love flakes. Chocolate, especially. Hate those chocolate coated ones though. No crumble.
The Man told you what? And you believed him? Have you not been with the real world?
All voices have gone quiet here
No one wants to have a go
There's a pregnant pause about this thread
but don't you want to know?
How Joan's trip to Malaysia went
And what's with her and Mike?
And why anonymous won't bite
When his mouth's around Joan's head?
TAPLOL
Wise, intelligent woman = Joan Street.
Spot the flaw in that equation. Who stood for diVision again?
Who had their campaign paid for by diVision?
Who agreed to their policy on the Sarjeant Gallery extension?
Three strikes & you're out, Joan.
Post a Comment