Bad news bares all

Watchers thinking of attending tomorrow's Strategy Committee meeting had best take along hearing aids, ear trumpets and perhaps request the Council flash subtitles on a TV monitor because it'll be very difficult to hear, such will be the deafening flapping of pigeons coming home to roost.

Before we get to the meaty parts of the agenda (or the gristly bits, from Michael Laws' perspective) it's worth noting that the document highlights the functional illiteracy of one of Mickey's hand-picked flunkies, Senior Policy Advisor Stu Hylton.

Not only is there reference to "the amount of 'events'" but also this little gem: "The council’s officers who are currently trying the 'reign back' the types and frequency of events"...

Isn’t it cute, the way he puts quotes around his grammatical clangers? We wonder if he puts in hours colouring in title pages for the original reports, like some Watchers used to do in the hope that their teacher wouldn't notice the fact they couldn't spell. Or form a coherent recommendation. But then we went on to graduate from primary school...

Anyway, aside from lamenting just how hard it is to find good help nowadays, Mickey must be fuming at the performance of those other hand-picked lackeys, WINC.

Right there in what should be an innocuous introduction, Chairman Ron Janes drops a clanger:

This report will discuss the activities of Wanganui Inc (WINC) for the 17 weeks since my last report to the Strategy Committee dated 3 November 2006…

Seventeen weeks?! At the time of WINC’s "birth" concerns from Councillor Westwood et al that it would lack accountability were met with an assurance that it was perfectly accountable because it would report six weekly. And my what a lot of dirty smelly water has stagnated under the bridge in the last 17 weeks.

Of course the "discussion" isn't meant to include the mugs in the public gallery who actually pay for the Michael Laws Memorial Events Orgy. The proposal is to kick the public out at the end of the meeting but to let Ron stay to discuss "Wanganui Inc structure: Staff and commercial matters" which no doubt is about Mickey deciding to yank his bastard offspring back into the Vision family.

The remainder of the report is riddled with some quotes from Razor Gang Ron which we'll bet won't see the light of day in the Chronic (unless Mickey decides to turn on WINC and blame them for his shortcomings, in which case of course they will be published, well marinated in Guyton Street Spin Potion):

WINC continues working with a low year-end profit expectation but stable cashflow. The year-end predicted profit/loss is $5,000 profit versus a budget of $20,000 profit.

WINC has met with a number of the top 30 companies in Wanganui … feedback from companies has included: ...A view that events are getting all the attention and local business growth is being overlooked.

Yikes Ron, that sounds spookily like what John Martin said when he launched his campaign. Positioning to keep your nose in the trough under a new administration, are we?

But the comedy of errors doesn't end there Watchers. Ron goes on to say:

Branding: A successful launch of the new ... branding ... comment has been very positive and the brand family provides excellent leverage for Wanganui.

Of course the fact is, this is a joke. There have been numerous letters to the Chronic saying it’s dated, boring, stupid etc., and much derision around town, including from visitors. And most notably from mad Rana Waitai, who thought he was leaping in to help Mickey attack the tourism MRI but muddled it up with WINC's Mickey-inspired "branding" and called it a "wet dish cloth".

But wait, as the best snake oil salesmen say (and Razor Ron has sold his fair share of that particular ungent in his time), there's more:

BOXING DAY CONCERT:

Income $123,069; expenditure $220,321; loss $97,251... Facility costs – less due to some efficiency gains and a favourable rate from Cooks.

Yep, $97,251 of ratepayers' cash down the failing sewer and that's despite Mickey’s other tame lackeys at Cooks Gardens giving them mate’s rates so the venue cost came in at $16,640.89 versus a budgeted $25,000. If it wasn't for that, losses from that one event would have topped the $105,000 mark.

They even managed to drop a set of speakers during set-up which "likely will be covered by the crane’s insurer". And on it goes:

Security – $18,113 cf budget $10,000 – More due to WINC initially assessing we could make efficiencies with this but subsequently deciding in conjunction with the police and facility management that robust and quality security was important.

Attendance/sales: 2100 paying attendees, plus corporate box holders at approximately 200, and comps of 200.

So the ratepayer subsidy for each paying person was $46.31.

And it looks like Antoinette Beck was called in to survey the bikers at the cemetery circuit (what can she have been up to?!):

There was a 93% awareness of the concert at Bikes. Of those at the Bikes 28% 'needed to get home or were tired'. 14% thought 'it was too expensive'. 7% said 'the performers didn’t appeal'.

So what did Antoinette do with the other 51 percent we ask, and did it have anything to do with all those hay bales?

Never fear though, Watchers. This wasn't an example of yet more gross wastage of public money in the name of Making Michael Laws Look Good. Because we can all benefit from what Antoinnete calls "learnings". (We presume this is something she learned from Borat (renowned author of "Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan") during the time Mickey sent her into exile.

The learning from this includes:

• An international act should be sought if cost structured in this manner.
• A lack of exclusivity likely had a negative impact.
• The Bike racing does not necessarily bring a crowd that attends a concert and accommodation is already stretched.

Gee, who'd have thunk it. But now we've spent all that money on proving what good common sense ought to have told us in the first place, the bad news for Mickey must surely be over, right?

Wrong.

A year ago there was a ludicrous spin job done on the BERL report on Wanganui’s economic performance wherein the Chron helpfully confused absolute and relative rankings, to the benefit of Mickey of course.

The Wanganui district economy has come third on the BERL (Business and Economic Research Limited) local authority rankings in 2005, skyrocketing from just 56th place the previous year... Mayor Michael Laws said the result was a stunning achievement for the district.

Now BERL (in the person of Jiani Wu and Dr Ganesh Nana) are delivering the unvarnished bad news. And even John Quisling... sorry, Maslin and Kirsty Macnicol won't be able to spin this as something it's not, though we're sure they'll try:

Executive summary

All Key Performance Indicators except business units growth, had negative growth in 2006. It includes resident population growth, real value added growth, GDP per capita growth, employment growth, productivity growth and business size growth.

GDP decreased by 3.2 percent compared to a 2.2 percent increase nationally and employment growth, at -0.1 percent compared to a 2.2 percent increase nationally... These outcomes resulted in the decrease of GDP per capita at the rate of 3.2 percent. Productivity growth, at -3.9 percent, was still worse below the national decline of 1.0 percent.

Absolute rankings

Overall rank 2005: 28; 2006: 57. All indicators are down (Ed: they even use a filled-in black downward pointing arrow, just so the Chron don't try to substitute another phrase like, say, "up") except for resident population growth.

Nero had his fiddle... Mickey has his cha cha.

Meanwhile, the proposed Gang Bill has been mugged again, this time by the editorial writers in Mickey's old stamping ground. Hawkes Bay Today (sister paper of the Chron) asks:

...more importantly what practical benefit will it bring? The "patch" is a manifestation of tribal, gang behaviour. It's not the other way around. It will be simple enough to circumvent such a ban using other common symbols, from hairstyles to body piercing and tattoos. And if they are to be banned, who is to choose what skin adornments or haircuts are acceptable?

It would be tempting to put any such law to a simple, if expensive, test: If Mongrel Mob members were identified by their Gucci loafers (as members of Britain's hoodlum "Chav" subculture are by their beige-checked Burberry caps) then luxury designer footwear would have to be barred from treading inner-city streets.

Such a ban is little more than a gesture. It satisfies the need to be seen to be doing something but is unlikely to curb boorish and criminal behaviour, which ought to be the real targets

A gesture? Ah yes, of course. That's one of the few things Mickey's good at.

Comments on this post are now closed.