Shock! Horror! P addiction!
There was some relief at the weekend for Sunday Star-Times readers suffering their regular bout of Diva Dyspepsia as columnist Laws hit on the Hooters non-debate and the editors pulled out a suitably salacious photo to try to attract readers to this desperate piece of populist pap.
Turn the page and there’s Dennis Dutton quoting writer John Lukacs on populism:A loathsome marriage of mass culture and mass democracy, consummated by demagogues, has corroded public virtue, weakened belief in absolute truth, and sparked a steady increase in carnality, vulgarity and brutality.
And Lukacs, author of newly published "Democracy and Populism: Fear and Hatred", hasn’t even been to Divaville on the Whanganui.
Anyone at Monday’s strategy committee meeting (well, those with an IQ more than a little over 10) would have been thinking along those lines as Splash Czar John Unsworth reminded councillors of the glory days when Referendumb Fever gripped the populace and everyone, even Unsworth himself, hallucinated that they’d be whizzing down the water slide at the new $4.5 million-plus swimming pool by lunchtime.
Despite the Diva's best efforts to keep the populace, or at least those round the Council table, high on P (for populism, with a chaser of pools) it began to wear off and the Diva moved on to other headline-grabbing causes. Post-high depression set in among Unsworth and his splashers [we’ve been in a vacuum since …] to the extent that they hadn’t even managed to convince any possible funders to open their wallets.
Barbara Bullock, who has shown a laudable reluctance to smoke the P pipe pointed out that by doping the population by way of referenda and jumping the usual procedural steps for such a project, the council had brought its problems on itself.
Then, as if by magic, the next agenda item involved plans for the next big R party, scheduled for February 11 2006 in conjunction with the Big By-election party. The Diva’s shopping list was lit up and he invited all councilors to join him in getting off their faces on the prospect of citizens once again ticking boxes in an R-fuelled frenzy. Come with me on the big P trip, the Diva inveigled, pulling little packs from his pockets and waving them around enticingly: Soften the water? Fluoridate the water? Slash council numbers? Euthanise the rural ward? Let the people decide whether we want a Maori ward? Oh, and settle once and for all the H in Wanganui question.
But this time at least some of Michael’s party people (and of course Barbara) had some qualms about what might be in those little packs. They were, one could say, a bit picky about the substances to be offered to the people.
Sue Pepperell pointed out that putting questions about the H and the Maori ward to the overwhelmingly Pakeha voters at a city-wide R party would be a mockery, and would unnecessarily “fuel race-based feelings”. She even had misgivings about how much useful information voters could be given about fluoride at an R party.
Don McGregor and the rural dwellers had similar misgivings about handing the rural ward question to a bunch a R-addled urban dwellers to decide, and the Diva graciously agreed, after Nicky Higgie joined the rural doubters, that there could be a separate count of rural/urban votes to send to the Representation Commission.
The Diva even backed down on his plan to put the Maori ward to the vote, after Nicky pointed out that it just didn’t make sense to do it now, given the deadlines for decision-making required by legislation.
What followed was an apt reminder of the way dumbocracy works around a council table with Diva Devotees like Marty Lindsay present. The Diva won every item that went to the vote, often with the casting vote of his mate GK.
A working party will now go off and have little get-togethers to hear how its charwoman, Michael Laws, wants to run the R party. The Diva has invited Deputy Dotty, Muzza Hughes, Randhir Dahya and Don McGregor to come along to these gatherings. Notably left off the Diva’s invite list was Sue Westwood, absent for yesterday’s meeting, who was allowed into the 2005 R-party planning to help keep the buggers honest.
Comments on this post are now closed.
62 comments:
What a nice little novelette.
I am sure for those who would like to know what really happened the minutes will be posted on the Council web site or in the Chronicle.
Yeah, come on, guys, a few motions carried along with the editorial satire, eh?
Numbers each way?
as an aside-doesn`t the recent photo atop michaels` s.s.t.column make him look old-not a bit sexy!
have you seen it,michael?
...the minutes will be posted on the Council web site or in the Chronicle
Don't hold your breath. The Council website is reserved for spin and the Chron couldn't even make it to the meeting.
We didn't take a verbatim transcript, but FYI, numbers to approve the referendum questions were:
Fluoridation 5/5 (carried on GK's casting vote)
The H 5/5 (also carried on GK's casting vote)
Softening 6/4
Councillor numbers 6/4
Oh yes, the Committee unanimously resolved to recommend to full Council that the date of the by-election be Saturday 11 February 2006, as we predicted.
Does anybody know who that older woman was sitting next to Carol at the meeting yesterday?
She hasn't been at any previous meetings, but maybe she's an undercover member of LawsMob.
Anonymous said...
as an aside-doesn`t the recent photo atop michaels` s.s.t.column make him look old-not a bit sexy!
Give the guy a brake, he's looking great for 50 !!! You sad people, try and be a bit more positive, please.....
Looks good running too. Nice buns.
You missed one, Carol. The vote on replacing the rural ward with a district-wide ward. Carried 9-1.
Absent were 3 councillors, I'm told - Westwood but also Hughes & McKinnon.
Anonymous said...
Does anybody know who that older woman was sitting next to Carol at the meeting yesterday?
I wasn't there at that meeting, but I believe a lot of council staff have to attend, Perhaps it was ML's PR ... Helen Lawrence?.
Good one. Helen L is years younger than Carol W.
Can we have another councilor's report card on Coucil Watch? Maybe an inderpendent for light relief?
And the unshaven guy next to Carol who looked like he needed a shave, a bath & a hot meal?? Artists sure starve for their trade don't they?
"Give the guy a brake, he's looking great for 50 !!! "
Since you're back with us, Michael, and keen to set the record straight on voting numbers, why don't you set the record straight on this piece of fiction (and I don't mean the unfortunate typo).
I was at a well-attended after-work gathering last week when the word went around that the mayor had just scarpered past down the Quay on his nightly jog. Cue sniggers and jokes for Africa, and enough tales of scandals to make the Whanganui blush. And much talk of what a great job LawsWatch is doing.
He might be quick on his feet, but he's not quick enough to keep ahead of the Watchers!
Funny, isn't it, Michael? Someone who was at that meeting was talking downtown today about how you were showing distinct signs of the strain of keeping ahead of the inevitable outski.
At times like that, they said, the tatooed eye-liner only adds to the tragi-comic sense of desperation and failure.
They just said 'older women next to' ...... all just depends from where you looking from, To me, Helen does look like a nice older civil servant.
"Perhaps it was ML's PR ... Helen Lawrence?."
And what does PR stand for, exactly? Answers in a plain brown envelope please.
Our mothers told us it was impolite to ask, or comment upon, a lady's age - be it Ms Webb, Ms Lawrence, or Ms Diva. So please refrain from further speculation.
As for "jokes for Africa", you surely can't be implying the Mayor has been "discussing the Ugandan situation"!
"maybe she's an undercover member of LawsMob."
Maybe she's an undercover member of the Audit Office, more likely.
Yet again, you wankers can't get basic facts right. Laws is 48 not 50 (check out his website), was chortling into his beer on Sat night at how much he was enjoying being mayor & is thinking of running again "just to piss the arties off", and he runs at midday every day because he jogs past me while I'm having my lunch.
"Maybe she's an undercover member of the Audit Office, more likely."
As one of those who protested about Laws' disgraceful hijacking of the council website to slag off his political opponents, I'd like to know what happened to the Audit Office investigation of that particular shameful chapter in WDC history.
Perhaps Colin Whitlock, who was so quick to defend the Diva on National Radio, might like to tell us about that.
Can LawsWatch follow up on that please?
You missed the standing ovation he got at the recvent bowling club opening. The oldies (who aren't into arts) love him. Theyll re-elect him.
To the question of the Audit Office report. They came back & said there was no case to answer.
Just Carol getting her knickers in a knot again. Did you know she wrote to the Ruapehu District Council in April complaining about our mayor & they told her to piss off.
You shouldnt believe everything Rob Vinsen tells you - the guy is a three time loser.
"You missed the standing ovation he got at the recvent bowling club opening. The oldies (who aren't into arts) love him. Theyll re-elect him."
Yes, Micheal, just as they love your role model Don (lolly scramble) Brash. I heard you promised the bowlers $5000. Now that WILL be a surprise to your council. Or are you taking personal control of the discretionary community contracts spend?
The mayor under pressure??
Are you guys dreaming - he gets everything he wants as even this thread highlights. God, I wish he was! I feel like we're being run over by a juggernaut - would hate to see what he's like when he's relaxed.
It's strange that Laws is claiming the Audit Office found no case to answer in respect to his abuse of the website yet about that time he seemed to be muzzled by someone.
I hear there was a lot of fancy footwork between the council and the Audit Office in order to save his (and the Spin Fairy's) butts.
Actually I wrote that about the bowling club. My mum told me because she was there.
"I feel like we're being run over by a juggernaut ..."
Yeah right. The wheels are falling off your juggernaut so fast, Michael, that you will soon be off the road.
"My mum told me because she was there. "
That's the great thing about LawsWatch. Everyone's Mum's a watcher too.
Can LawsWatch follow up on that please?
Will do. We've activated the secret LawsWatch cave DivaLight and flashed a message to Matt Dutton, who'll add such an inquiry to his next batch of LGOIMA requests (because we sure won't be told any other way).
You missed the standing ovation he got at the recvent bowling club opening.
Now we know that's spin... standing at the Bowling Club? Possibly, with advance notice, but in unison?
*sits back to await torrent of 'ageist' abuse* :-D
That's the nice thing about the older generation. They're so polite. So they give Michael a nice clap and as soon as his back is turned they start talking about what a vile little shite he is.
While laughing all the way to the bank with the $5,000 pressie, of course.
So what will you do when Laws wins the next election too? Leave?
I was of the understanding that Laws has made it plain to everyone and even before the election that he was going to do only one term. I was at a Rotary breakfast meeting where he said he hoped that he would achieve everything in 3 years and that he didn't need the money or the status.
Looking at this past year, I'd say that was about right because he doesn't give a stuff about what others think and clearly has a plan in action.
He's a lot more dangerous than even we give him credit if he has no intention of standing next time. That means he has no external control like trying to win votes.
I heard that too. I attended a Vision meeting at Gonville and he was asked that question directly and he said that he thought it would take 5 years to turn Wanganui around but he would prefer to do it in one term.
I'd ask Joan Street on that because I know another Vision candidate told me that the mayor and a couple of others had only signed up for 3 years.
He's already contradicted himself by saying that one term "may not be enough".
"He's a lot more dangerous than even we give him credit if he has no intention of standing next time. That means he has no external control like trying to win votes."
Well, if he were competent he'd be dangerous. Some of our (Watchers and Mobsters) assumptions about his remaining popularity will be answered by the by-election. I talked to an "oldie" today who hates the man, but I'm sure there are some who feel the reverse. We hear from some of them here from time to time ;)
I think he's up to his neck in shit, and Ray Stevens is making waves. Sue P. maybe also. Nicki Higgie didn't buy up to destroying the Sarjeant collection. Don can barely keep his temper with the Diva at times. The question is, can councillors prevent the mayor's half-bright dogma from doing further damage. We've lost $2.25M in govt. funding, a film festival, and our desire to extend the Splash Centre seems likely to run onto the rocks with Mickey on speed to stay awake at the helm (metaphorically speaking).
Time for councillors to start getting uppity.
Yes I agree. At the end of this slow-motion trainwreck the councillors will be called to account. It must already be impacting on their business and personal/social lives.
Now we know what really happened at the meeting, thanks to the Chron, "statements issued" and lashings of spin from the Diva, Taylor et al.
Yeah right!
It's not surprising that Taylor wants to see the council underwrite the splash centre. After all, he will be safely out of here when the shit hits the fan.
The Chron. is being pretty cynical with the "Big Splash" headline. When the $57.50 rates rise to pay for operations costs, and the true extent of Council's borrowing/undewriting chickens come home to roost, they can bring out another thundering banner. It's not quite the same as keeping people informed, but...
...but then, what am I saying; it's Council's job to keep everyone "informed". The Chron is there to tell us what really happened. Uh huh.
Everyone wants a Splash Centre, but while Mickey flounders about in the shallow end, Council is revealing deep concerns about how Wanganui can afford it.
By my calculations the final cost will be significantly greater than the Sarjeant Extension. Which Council are still planning under the "Heart of Wanganui". Different appearance - same outcome.
Love the Chron. cheerleading for Michael's projects before the working party's even met.
Well it's OK for the mayor to look 50, he does have a heavy work load.
LawsWatch is biased.
Council is biased.
So I take my view from the Chronicle and yet again they contradict everythig LWatch says. Give it away, Carol Webb. You keep losing credibility.
The mayor's whole approach to criticism is to attack the messenger. Who cares what he writes: he says lying is acceptable too.
I'm sure the Watchers will be happy to accept free advertising.
Like hundreds of people read Michael's column.
lol
If Mickey is going to write the blog up in his weekly drivel, it's working. Keep up the good work guys. And stay anonymous. Laws will look increasingly desperate attacking people who don't even acknowledge they're listening.
So I take my view from the Chronicle and yet again they contradict everythig LWatch says
Show one contradiction. They just take a different viewpoint. Opinion is not fact, and the statement "the Splash Centre will become a reality with the help of ratepayers' dollars raised by the sale of non-performing assets" is an opinion at best.
Your statement that "Council is biased" is interesting, though. Would you say their bias has resulted in misleading information being presented to the ratepayers?
Perhaps Bob (credibility) Walker would care to give us the full unexpurgated story on where Laws is getting the $5000 that he rolled out for the bowlers on Saturday.
Where do YOU think he's going to get it from??
Seen Mickey's letter to the DomPost on his Website: default Mickey: confronted by the DomPost editorial, which pointed out how he's seen abroad, he attacks the messenger.
The poor dumb bastard doesn't even understand what the implications of attempting the sale of donated work are.
"Where do YOU think he's going to get it from?"
I'm not the original poster, but I think he'll make a cak-handed attempt to grab it from some other budget. Incompetence revealed, he'll then attack the LGA, or otherwise try to undermine volunteer workers in some way.
Either way, I bet it's a mythic $5k. Or will he make it up out of his salary?
Anon said:
The poor dumb bastard doesn't even understand what the implications of attempting the sale of donated work are.
11:40 AM, September 14, 2005
Looks like the pot calling the kettle black. How come no one here was objecting when SGTB tried to sell works for the extension? The existing policy already allows works to be sold to protect other works.
How come no one here was objecting when SGTB tried to sell works for the extension?
Here? Lawswatch didn't exist then. The existing policy make NO reference to selling works to protect others. There are three criteria: A donor wants the work back, a donor's family wants the work back, a work is beyond repair, or a work cannot be cared for any more.
The only ethical use for funds donated for the sale of artworks is the purchase of more artworks. Anything else is theft.
er, that's four criteria :)
" confronted by the DomPost editorial, which pointed out how he's seen abroad, he attacks the messenger. "
And he continues his deliberate undermining of Nicki Higgie, Jodie and the rest by pointedly ignoring their fundraising message.
There'll never be a better time to tell him where to stick is diVision, Nicki.
Go Nicki! You're too good for him
Why don't Vision kick Laws out? His pre-election promise to "support & encourage the arts" has been revealed for the lie it is. They'd be better off without him, not the other way 'round.
Go on, Dot, Sue, Nicki, Marty: ditch the divisive dickhead.
i see the chron has a morgs supporter today
shame it is michaels gnome - morg would be better off with nothing probably
The one common thread these past 6 months is that the Vision team - and yes that includes Sue Pep and Nicki - stick together on council votes that matter. We now know & that's the regular caucus meetings they hold. They don't buckle and posting anon comments here is not pressure. We have only one chance & that's the byelection, so whose our leading candidate(s)?
Post a Comment