Zap!! PoW!!
Re: Port of Wanganui
We know that statement has the okay from none other than Executive Chairman of Macquarie New Zealand Limited, Jim McLay, because he hasn't quite figured out how to use his Blackberry (fancy email / mobile phone thingo) correctly and sent us a copy of his okay as well as sending one to Mr Anderson.
Dear Sir/Madam
Macquarie as a matter of policy does not confirm or deny discussions with clients or possible clients.
However, as you have asked about the possible involvement of Macquarie itself in this [Port of Wanganui] project, we can confirm that we are not an investor in any aspect, nor do we plan any investment, nor have we ever indicated an interest in any such investment.
Kind regards
Hamish Anderson
Marketing Manager
Financial Services Group
Macquarie New Zealand Limited
This seems to tally with what the Diva told the Chron on March 3, namely that "criticism that he... forced the withdrawal of Macquarie New Zealand Ltd from supporting Port of Wanganui's proposal is... factually incorrect..."
But if that's the case, where did the $250,000 for the feasibility study come from?
The Chronicle reported that same day that "[Macquarie Capital associate director Tim Symons] visited Wanganui last Wednesday and had discussions with PoW. He had planned to visit again on the weekend of March 12-13". Very odd for an organisation that has never indicated an interest in any such proposal.
And in a document headed "Brief to the Wanganui Chronicle" dated March 1, Port of Wanganui Limited contend: "Last week representatives of Macquarie NZ Ltd, a division of Macquarie Bank Group of Australia, visited Wanganui to review Port Of Wanganui’s proposal. The banks (sic) interest was confirmed and a return visit was scheduled for 11-14 March..."
There's an increasingly piscine aroma about all of this. There seems to be only four possible conclusions to be drawn:
- Either Port of Wanganui has blatantly lied about Macquarie's interest, and managed to completely dupe the Chron in the process. Possible but unlikely, since the Chron would surely have independently confirmed the visit of Mr Symons to Wanganui; or
- Macquarie were initially interested, but didn't like what they saw and withdrew. But they must do that sort of thing every day, so surely have no reason to flatly deny it; or
- Macquarie were initially interested, but were shocked to get an unsolicited call from the Diva pouring scorn on the proposal, and are so appalled by the way business is done in Wanganui nowadays that they feel they'd look silly admitting to having had anything to do with the whole mess; or
- A combination of 2 and 3 - they were scared off by the Diva but probably wouldn't have proceeded anyway.
Comments on this post are now closed.
46 comments:
Macquerie only say they are not an investor and dont plan to be NOT that they havent discussed it or looked into it. They indicate no interest in an investment again not that they havent researched it.
But look at the facts POW said Council supported them too, but Councils (this is the old Council remember) recommendation had so many provisos and qualifiers it was obviously just a letter to get POW off their back. POW couldnt get support from anyone else either.
However this new letter does seem pretty damming about POWs claims and I tend to favour option one with a dollop of option two. The chron isnt exactly famous for researching the facts (unless you are a rooster!) and a firm like Macquarie isnt about to be affected by petty local politics if they can make a dollar. This site gives ML too much power if he can start affecting the decisions of multinational companies
Besides, how many here have actually met Churton et al. What first impression do they make? Do they even exist and why dont they promote themselves better?
The polls are starting to shape up, everyone have a vote .... it's free and fun, and not costing us 40 thousand a pop!
Ahem. $50,000, but I take your point.
And Lawswatch polls would be as accurate. And they'd be no substitute for doing your job as a councillor, but then neither are the referendoh. Postal ballots and everyone's name on each voting form. It has electoral fraud written all over it. Not our Diva though, he wouldn't do that to us, now would he?
here are the facts lwatch - a brief what happened - starting in late 2003
1.churton proposes a port in wanganui
2. solicits assitance from the council - support in principle conditionally
3. pow told to get business plan and money
4. busines feasibility completed by a marine specialist in south island.(around $40k)
5.using business plan gets maquarie to wanganui to start talks. mcquarie makes it clear to churton that wdc need to be involved and supportive and that at this stage they(mcq) are media averse.
6.pow goes to wdc (officers) and tells them what mcq said.2 or 3 days later diva (upon finding out that people were talking ((& thinking)) without his permission) calls mcq. mcq (being media averse at this stage) run away.(not sure of the conversation but ML couldnt wait to tell the chronic(the media that mcq are averse to!!) about it!)
sad thing is mcq invest in infrastructure in regions in nz & aust and can build things like infrastructure in what are called private / public partnerships...ie no debt....hopefully when his holiness realises that there are other ways to develop cities without going into debt through schemes like public / pvt partnerships there will be another mcq bank out there...unfortunately your mayor really is a spoon...so id say option 3 is pretty spot on LW
Thank you, 3 legged donkey. A plausible, rational, and easily understood explanation.
You're not from round here, are you? ;-)
Wow, good blogging, it's great when it's so imforative. Thanks Laws Watch for this blog.
"Nor have we indicated any such investment in this project"
Who does that make liars?
1. Tuffy Churton
2. William Pearce
3. Tim Hungerford-Morgan.
So the mayor did save us from these charlatans after all.
LawsWatch, you've done council proud. Keep up the good work!
Holy Crap! Laws is right ...
LawsWatch - you're losing your touch!
It's partly the strident aggression that made me decide to get involved. The constant stream of abuse that passes for mayoral comment around here. The message is loud and clear. Laws and his gang will not succeed in browbeating and intimidating. Keep on making abusive late night phone-calls - carry on sending the hate mail - and we'll carry on exposing your lies. It's funny, you know, when I first decided to get involved a senior Beehive civil servant told me: "You do realise that if you go up against Michael Laws you're up for hate mail and all that?" I wondered how he knew, now I think that's just how Michael operates. As I said to him, this is the main reason to oppose the man. I agree with some of his policies, but I will not stand for the bullying way they are shoved at us. It's not just the bullying, though - the subtler forms of manipulation masquerading as democracy are equally destructive. Lawswatch is an excellent resource: Laws and his bullies will do everything they can to destroy it, because they can't control it, and people can debate here without fear of attack. What's even more heartening is that the bullies have failed: Laws supporters are starting to come hewre with argument. They must not be part of the inner circle.
"We now know Carol lied"
No she didn't. Carol Webb has no administrative rights here. She does not have a say in what gets published. But if she had, what we've got here is Michael Laws or one of his supporters complaining about lies. What a hypocrite.
Anon said:
"This site gives ML too much power if he can start affecting the decisions of multinational companies"
Politicsalways affects the decisions of multinational companies. Given that there's money to be made everywhere, why not pick the places where local politicians welcome you?
This site is a good open venue for free speech in Wanganui, AND boy do we need it right now.
I see the next referendum is indicated in the Chron today.
Does anyone know how they come up with the questions ?
whoever the Watchers are, they're doing a great job here.
So the mayor's right again, eh?
Tuffy Churton's profile in the Wang Chron today and a brilliant job by Judith Lacy. Criminal convictions, bankruptcy but more important is the confession that he lied about Macquarie's involvement. Wonder if William Pearce would be man enough to apologise to the mayor? No, you're right. No wonder Bob Moodie looked so uncomfortable in the council chambers.
That's simple stuff about the brief to the Wanganui Chronicle.
It was sent by Tuffy Churton and his POW mates. We now know - courtesy of both Macquarie & Churton - that it was "a tissue of lies" to quote a dead but famous jurist.
Not ANOTHER time the Mayor has been proven right. This is becoming infuriatingly common.
Interesting in the Chronicle that Tuffy admits to 2 terms inside prison and the bankruptcy. Bt he has a number of other past convictions too, including receiving and such. What stupid saps ended up getting involved with him in POW - no wonder those two Marton directors (Gibson/Heath) bailed in the first few weeks.
There's another question here. Who is going to step into the breach? One thing Tuffy and Michael have done between them is make us look like a bad risk. Westgate seem to want to negotiate with someone about an inland port poject. They have to be looking elsewhere by now.
Don't be silly. Laws can't be held accountable for any of this - in fact, he set out to prove (and did) how untrustworthy Churton was/is. And it's Westgate who approached cuncil, not the other way round. Whichever way you spin this, Laws saved Wanganui from the charlatan POW mob. I'm happy my ratepayers money is no longer at risk.
And where's the apology from Pearce??
What ratepayers money? Ratepayers money was never at risk. Address the substansive issue instead of making up red herrings. Wanganui needs investors.
If everyone agrees the concept is good, then why cant Council, Westgate and Mr Billington (the money man identified in the chron) meet and say look we all want it to happen, but not with Tuffys involvement. Also isnt this something Wanganui Inc should be doing?
Surely a meeting isnt too hard to arrange, even a conference call would do it.
Just like this blog everything seems to operate by chinese whispers and insults. Doesnt anyone just talk directly and resolve things with each other any more!!!!!!!!
Hear hear.
We kept getting someone posting "follow the money, follow the money" like scrooge's ghost. Would it have hurt that person to say what they meant? Not to mention the fact that council employs a spin fairy, for gods sake, to stifle debate even further.
The scoop from the inside...
I heard in the corridors of power that Bullock will join Wg Inc. She voted for POW and knows Tuffy personally so maybe she can get him the contract. If your mates are making the decisions it has to help.
That's a grotesque smear against Councillor Bullock. If you live in Wanganui for any length of time, as she has, you're going to meet people. Poxy conspiracy theories don't help.
Looks like gratuitous recreational trouble to me...
Whats "gratuitous recreational trouble"
See Jane Clifton's book on political animals. That's her assessment of what makes the Diva tick.
But Bullock replacing GK on Wg Inc.? That would be interesting...probably more rumour nonsense...
Anon said: That's a grotesque smear against Councillor Bullock. Poxy conspiracy theories don't help.
I thought this group was pro-POW and anti-Vision. The statement implies support for Bullock not a smear? Dont tell me we have switched sides on this issue!!!!!!!!!!
"The statement implies support for Bullock not a smear? "
I think any councillor who's prepared to listen, and not pre-judge anything or anyone on the basis of the Diva's character assassination and spin is an asset to the ratepayers, if not to diVision, in any area of council.
"This group" hasn't taken sides at all, except to note that ML's hype hasn't helped the situation. You may have interpreted that as being "pro POW", but perhaps you should go back and read what people actually said.
I hardly think suggesting that B.Bullock would use her position to help her mates conveys support.
Has anyone ever seen new Ratepayers Assn cheif Russell Fleming at a council or more to the point, at a committee meeting?
He's the one saying in today's Chron that "... in theory reduced points of view around the council table could lead to greater efficiencies."
Doesn't he realise that apart from the very occasional points raised by the independents there is already only one point of view and a singalong chorus.
No Russell, it's not a surfeit of points of view that this council suffers from, just a constant stream of crap from the Diva's point of view. It's that Dival Diahrroea that drives council staff to distraction and has them running around like headless chooks trying to keep up with the Diva's diktats du jour (which inevitably bear little resemblance to the diktats du hier).
Now that is inefficiency.
Name one diktat, dork.
Scuttlebutt. Herald on Sunday contacted by Lawswatch to do a story on censorship at RCP. Herald rings RCP. RCP says no censorship -didn't like the content. Oh dear.
Name yourself, coward.
I have no idea if the above poster had this diktat in mind, but how about having the dunny painted? Twice.
RCP says no censorship -didn't like the content. Oh dear.
I believe my friend who went to pay for the ad, and he told me they said council pressured them. You, on the other hand, are an anonymous liar.
If RCP "didn't like the content" of the Lawswatch ad, what will they make of its replacement?
They will laugh. Because having just seen it, no-one will get it. Sad that, Matt. (It was Matt who paid for the ad. A one-off. Cheapskate).
I have searched all council records and tenders over the past 12 onths. Nothing on the mayor's bathroom being made over. I think this must be a figment (like a lot of other things recently) of someone's imagination.
...It was Matt who paid for the ad. A one-off...
An obituary of sorts, the first of a series.
Minutes from WAG meeting with Nicki Higgie just in. A snippet.
"Funds Donated for the Sarjeant Gallery Extension
· It was asked where the funds for the extension were.
· Nicky said that a letter will be sent to all the people who donated work. This will be done when the direction of the new group (Freinds of the Sarjeant) is known. She said that she thought people would just trust the Council to do the right thing.
· Rita Wearn said that she thought that arrangements about financial matters need to be made very clear."
Sale of Artworks from the Sarjeant Collection.
· Jodie said that the arts community would not support the sale of artworks from the collection.
· Nicky admitted that there was some push from within Council to sell a little bit.
· The group asked where the money would go. Nicky said she thought it could go towards conservation. It was suggested that the funds for conservation could be raised from elsewhere.
· It was also asked what the criteria would be for selling artworks.
· Nicky said that the Friends could be proactive and raise funds for the conservation of the collection.
· Nicky asked how the collection could be kept and looked after.
· David Traub said that a public art collection can’t be equated to household contents.
· Rita Wearn said that we have a duty to future generations to hang on to these precious artworks.
· Liz said that trust means in trust for the larger community. The reputation of the collection maintains the reputation of the gallery.
· David Traub said that selling artworks often shuts off public access as they go into private collections.
Nice to hear the Laws-mob team again! Such a friendly group .....
Post a Comment