Airborne bacon alert

We hope you're sitting comfortably, Watchers. A steadying cup of tea (or perhaps something stronger) in hand. For the easily discombobulated amongst you, maybe a defibrillator standing by. It's finally happened. Pigs are lining up awaiting take-off clearance. Because the subject of today's post is just how much we agree with the Diva.

Not about everything. Not even about most things. But when it comes to the by-election, and the standard of candidates therein, it's as though the Cave is writing his material. Or, heaven forfend, vice versa.

In his latest e-column, the Diva opines: "I can’t say that the campaigns of the by-election candidates have impressed me very much."

At that point Watchers started to get an uneasy feeling we were about to encounter the first Mayoral column with which we had no issue - but luckily the Diva comes to the rescue elsewhere in the same piece. But more on that later.

After mentioning Chandra Osborne, Allan Anderson, Margaret Campion and Rana Waitai as running campaigns that were at least noticeable, he concludes: "Although I’d like to know what they’re standing for … their actual policies. That’s still a mystery."

We share your confusion, Michael. Then cue a predictable party political broadcast on behalf of diVision’s Philippa Baker-Hogan, masquerading as a critque of her campaign for getting off to a late start. She would, he claims "certainly have the skills gap we currently lack around the council table".

Which is odd, because if there's one thing we notice about those presently sitting round the Council table, it's a positively huge skills gap.

Then it's back to true Diva form, dismissing Heather Marion Smith as a "single-issue campaigner" with a "message thirty years out of date". Another single issue nutter? Either Wanganui is positively chock full of such people, or the Diva's supply of poisonously abusive adjectives is running low after his effort of three weeks ago aimed at this blog, and he's having to recycle.

And clearly Mark Simmonds has got under the Diva's epidermis – he's scoffed at for having the temerity to suggest "that he will make a difference around the council table". The Diva has news for him: "Sorry mate, but you won't".

Perhaps. Perhaps not. But it'd make a change to see someone doing something other than cower, nod at the right times or, in the case of Dotty, "giggle like a schoolgirl".

Given the spread of candidates, he predicts the winner will receive a third of the vote at best. We'd second that also. He then backs Cleopatra's Nails owner Chandra Osborne "to surprise with her result if not actually win".

While you may initially wonder what sort of herbal tea he's drinking in order to be able to see that result in the leaves, don't forget this is politics, and that it's the Diva we're talking about.

If you're getting whispers that predict your candidate might lose, you don't go out there are talk them up. You talk them down. The theory being that by this stage everyone who has a burning desire to vote for one candidate or the other has already done so. Those that are left are wavering, and many won't vote at all on the assumption that the candidate whom everyone thinks is going to win will do so without their help.

So you pick a left-field candidate and point to them and predict victory. That motivates your "soft" support base to find that voting paper underneath that pile of bills and actually fill the thing in.

Just to be sure, he then predicts "some of the other candidates will come again in 2007 – Waitai, Campion, Simmonds and Osborne... and stand good chances under the anticipated 'at large' electoral system".

Purely coincidental that three of those candidates into whose minds he has such intimate access also happen to represent the greatest threats to Baker-Hogan.

The message? Vote for Phillipa now, and you can have Rana, Margaret, Mark and heck, even Chandra, next time.

It's a masterful piece of politics. It also happens to be entirely spurious. There's no guarantee any of those people would stand. There's no guarantee that if they did, they'd win. And more importantly, by 2007 it will be too late to reverse much of the Diva's agenda.

Most of the remainder of the column is stuffed with the usual Womens Daze family trivia and modest, self-effacing stories of how he gave up his tickets to the River Queen to "ordinary ratepayers" and humbly let Dotty take the credit for the premiere despite the fact that "it might have been my idea – and my first entreaty to the film’s producer Don Reynolds in late-2004 to stage the premiere".

Not a great reader of Scripture, our Diva, or he'd be familiar with this one: "For whoever exalts himself will be abased, and he who humbles himself will be exalted." (Lk 14:11)

He does confirm, however, that Council kept a cap on expenditure at $150,000 - so kudos where it's due.

If you can keep your afternoon sherry down while wading through that dross, you'll be rewarded with an interesting little snippet on the relationship between Guyton Street and the Chron.

Tueday's edition was "disgraceful", apparently, capping a holiday season in which the paper had been "dysfunctional", "to the point where they, literally, refused a media release from Cr Nicki Higgie". The paper "also printed headlines that were wrong and exhibited a palpable anti-Vision bias over the hoarding affair".

Let's just freeze-frame the spin for a moment. The paper made an editorial decision not to print a press release. Just like the River City Press made a commercial decision not to take a LawsWatch supporter's money to run our advertisng. Turning down news releases happens a hundred times a day in any newsroom in the country. Turning down money happens a tad less often, and for less-than-explicable reasons. But it's the newspaper's right to do as it sees fit. The Chron printed headlines that weren't fawningly pro-Council, and took an editorial stance that Vision was wrong. Fairly mildly, from what we saw.

If the government received that sort of treatment from most daily newspapers it would think it was winning the PR battle. But in a town where the local newspaper behaves like an incontinent elderly poodle rather than a watchdog of democracy, we can see how it would come as a shock.

But don't panic, Watchers, things will soon return to normal.

"It was no coincidence, I think, that editor John Maslin was absent on annual leave."

That explains it, then. We'll refrain from highlighting the implications of this statement and allow Watchers to draw their own conclusions.

But towards the end we find ourselves on the same page again. After lamenting the loss of Sean Hoskins, the Diva notes that "council will get its fourth council reporter in the past 15 months. The problem is that each new one takes some months to get up to speed and often has no reference for what is happening in front of them. We’ll do our best but it can be a frustration at times".

Indeed it is. And indeed we will.

Comments on this post are now closed.

Signs of confusion

This blog is often accused by its critics of being trivial, and there's few things more trivial than election (or in this case, buy-election) hoardings. Hands up one single person who's changed their vote based on a hoarding. We'd hope people are making their decisions based on something other than a roadsign anyway, otherwise we'd have to stop to relieve ourselves every time we passed a sign indicating a rest room.

But they're ubiquitous because every candidate in every election anywhere (well, anywhere they make corflute - that corrugated plastic the things are usually made from) believes their opponents are going to have them, so they have to as well.

LawsWatch's view is that candidates should sign a Corflute Truce at the beginning of every campaign, thus saving the greenhouse gases that go into making yards of plastic onto which the faces of some very unattractive people end up getting stuck.

The buy-election has seen an inevitable sprouting of such signs - and those made of other materials as well. We're distraught that Frog didn't enter the race with a range of hemp-based signs which could have been safely incinerated after the polls closed. And right before half the township - the half downwind - felt the irresistible urge to go to McDonalds.

The problem with signs is, once you've got a few hundred, you have to put them someplace. Every Council has different rules on where you're allowed to erect them, and then there's Transit New Zealand, which looks after state highways.

But if anyone should know where signs can and cannot be put, it's people who are already elected to Council. So with the recent spate of Vision signs breaking first the Council's rules and then Transit NZ's, there would seem to be only two possibilities. Either the diVisioners need the Diva to tell them how to tie their shoelaces. Or, to quote Allan Anderson, it was a case of diVision assuming "one standard for our masters and a different one for the peasants". This was an echo of Rana Waitai's earlier comment, that the diVisioners seemed to think they were "somehow exempt from things that apply to the rest of us".

Either option doesn't exactly recommend these people for Wanganui's highest office. But if LawsWatch had to bet, we'd put our money on the latter cause, particularly as Bob "Maddog" Walker had to be muzzled by an apologetic Diva after insisting his erection was going to remain on display in the Puriri St reserve.

Still, the whole "Signgate" affair - must we add "gate" to every scandal? - made a nice change for the Diva. For once he was the one following the incontinent elephant with the mop and bucket.

(Don't forget, the LawsWatch Polls site still has the Buy-Election poll running. Go there and vote if you haven't already).

Comments on this post are now closed.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc

Yes, the River Queen 'premiere-that isn't' is nonetheless a splendid event. Given the startling ignorance displayed by some people *cough*Americans*cough* about the whereabouts of New Zealand despite the international success of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, it's doubtful that the spectacular scenery - surely the real star of the movie - will create the mini tourism boom hoped for by the Diva and most especially by Dotty (who needs to look up "conflict of interest" in a good encyclopedia before getting too excited about tourist-boosting events in her official capacity).

In fact, given the average movie-goer's intelligence (they are making another Rocky movie, after all - presumably titled "Rocky's Last Challenge - The Colostomy Bag") most would-be tourists will probably stay away in droves, figuring that if they're not kidnapped by marauding may-or-ees, they'll be spit roasted by an Orc.

But the movie was made here, it shows off the Whanganui River to good effect, and Wanganui can be justifiably proud of the result.

It's particularly appropriate that the three waka built for the film will be gifted to Whanganui iwi in recognition of their contribution. And exciting to note that Rangitihi continue to resonate long after the film - which is receiving at best luke warm reviews (Kiefer Sutherland's "atrocious Long John Silver accent" was a line Watchers particularly liked) - is forgotten. Unlike Invercargill's effort, The World's Fastest Indian, which is on track to become NZ's biggest domestic hit.

What's not nearly as splendid, but as inevitable as flies at a barbecue, is the hijacking of the red carpet by the likes of Helen Clark, Judith Tizard, Steve Maharey, and of course the Diva and the Dwarves. Perhaps we missed the bit in the movie where Samantha Morton bumps into a trio of Ministers and a prancing attention-seeking Mayor in her search for her son, but it seems to confused Watchers that these people had stuff-all to do with making the film, unless you count some tenuous connections to the Film Commission, which is independent in terms of what it funds anyway.

That won't, of course, prevent the obligatory fawning photographs in tomorrow's newspapers, handily appearing at a time when there's a buy-election happening. Perhaps they'll even manage to get their mugs on TV - and when he sees a camera, the Diva will set himself alight if it means getting in front of it.

The not-so-subliminal message, of course, is "look how great Wanganui is under diVision leadership, because we're having a movie premiere here". But it's a complete fallacy. The movie, and the premiere-that-isn't, would have happened no matter who was in power.

The economic spin-off effects are likely to be minimal or non-existent (where is that study that was meant to quantify those benefits, by the way?). In fact the net overall economic effect on Wanganui ratepayers is likely to be negative, since Council have funded this extravaganza with your money - supposedly to a limit of $150,000, but the normally over-excitable Dotty is keeping very quiet on the exact bill - most of which ends up in the pocket of a Wellington events agency despite Council having its own events staffer.

So enjoy the fun, Wanganui, but when you wake up tomorrow morning, check your wallet - and reality.

Comments on this post are now closed.

Pull the other... string.

With 18 days till the buy-election, and voting papers in the sweaty palms of breathless, excited electors (enough trying to talk up the lack of excitement - Ed.) the Buy-Election Poll is showing a clear preference amongst LawsWatch visitors for Margaret Campion, who's on 42 percent.

In a healthy second place is Mark Simmonds, with Allan Anderson and Phillipa Baker-Hogan third equal. None of the other candidates seem to be exciting any interest whatsoever. The exact results (to approximately 2.45 pm today) are:

• Margaret Campion 42%
• Mark Simmonds 24%
• Allan Anderson 16%
• Philippa Baker-Hogan (Vision) 16%
• Rana Waitai 2%
• Chandra Osborne 0%
• Bren Sinclair 0%
• Heather Marion Smith 0%

When asked to become political pundits, however, Watchers seem to be backing their third choice candidate to actually win:

• Philippa Baker-Hogan (Vision) 47%
• Margaret Campion 28%
• Mark Simmonds 19%
• Rana Waitai 5%
• Allan Anderson 2%
• Chandra Osborne 0%
• Bren Sinclair 0%
• Heather Marion Smith 0%

Anderson's chances can't have been hurt by the appearance of his face on the top right corner of the River City Press - a prime position graced by the Diva's visage for the past few mouths. That space - and, some would argue, the entire paper - was bought for the next two years after LawsWatch was advertised right next to Dotty's Council Comment. And, all of a sudden, LawsWatch's advertising - paid for in cold hard cash - was no longer welcome.

So with a two year contract in place, what's Allan Anderson's head doing where the Diva's ought to be? Enquiries to the RCP seeking to book the same space were rebuffed - the Mayor has it for another year, the would-be advertiser was told.

It seems, however, that the normally well-organised and meticulously planned Diva had conveniently forgotten to pay his bill, thus rendering this prime bit of newspaper real estate vacant for the first three weeks of 2006, right in the middle of an election. And, coincidentally, Mr Anderson popped in with his copy at just the right moment. How terrifically fortuitous, and we congratulate Mr Anderson on his impeccable timing.

It's common knowledge that Mr Anderson has stated he's no great fan of the Diva. But what's not so widely known is that he was encouraged to stand by 'friends' of his in the Vision party. Does the Diva perhaps see Mr Anderson as someone likely to benefit from an anti-Laws / anti-Vision vote, but then able to be manipulated? We certainly hope not.

Comments on this post are now closed.

Please, not the swimsuit parade!

A succinct and apt comment to the last post:

Election papers out tomorrow ... go people power!!!

People power indeed. Though the distinct inability of visitors to come up with a single pertinent question which other visitors might care to ask of the candidates before casting their ballots suggests an almost issue-less campaign.

The fact that the majority of candidates seem to be relying primarily upon their hoardings to get them across the line would tend to reinforce this perception. That's a dereliction of their duty to inform and engage and, on what we've seen so far, no one deserves to win.

That of course suits diVision, who clearly plan to rely on name recognition to get Phillipa Baker-Hogan across the line without her having to front up to any awkward questions about her team's prior performance. But it doesn't excuse her, and it doesn't excuse the other candidates, who ought to be out there espousing a clear alternative.

The buy-election isn't a beauty contest (and how else one judges a candidate's merits on the basis of a hoarding we don't know). Do we really want to see Rana Waitai in a swimsuit, let alone any of the other candidates?

This blog has spent the past seven months highlighting the most controversial questions facing Wanganui, but there are other signifcant issues which Council faces. They haven't been highlighted here because we have no quarrel with the way they're being handled - such as the $35 million sewerage / stormwater project for starters. But that doesn't lessen their impact on the city's budget.

At the very least, the candidates need to espouse a clear policy on:

• whether they'll support any additional borrowing and, if so, under what circumstances.
• whether they're happy with the present schedule for debt reduction and, if not, whether they have any firm proposals to change it.
• their position on asset sales and in particular which assets they would support selling.
• whether they have any proposals which involve increased spending.
• whether they intend aligning themselves to the dominant Vision bloc (of course we already know the answer to this in the case of Ms Baker-Hogan, but what of others rumoured to have ties to the Diva such as Messrs Simmonds and Waitai?).

And that's leaving aside issues of lesser importance such as whether they support reviewing the Code of Conduct to provide a more effective muzzle for the Diva, or whether they support Council starving community activities - such as the Film Festival - of funds in order to save cents while splashing out (excuse the pun) dollars on other projects.

At the risk of introducing a hand-wringing tone, we can only hope residents find out the answers to those questions (and any others that may particularly concern them) rather than tick the box based solely on a gut reaction or, worse still, name recognition.

If a candidate's answers accord with your own beliefs, they may just be worth your vote, even if they look like Nanny McPhee.

Scroll down, Watchers! The Buy-Election Poll is below. If you haven't already done so, vote now. It's also available at LawsWatch Polls.

Comments on this post are now closed.

Duck and cover

Going DOWN:

• Wanganui itself apparently, which scientists say is sinking and is now 350mm lower than it was just two years ago. It's all due to earthquakes, they say, it's just that we don't feel them. Watchers have made a note of this theory in order to explain lacklustre performance in, shall we say, domestic duties. The ground did move for you, it was just a "silent quake". Time to corner the market in scuba gear, Watchers. The only consolation is that Manawatu is sinking at the same rate, and we have all those paintings in the Sarjeant - yards and yards of waterproof canvas just waiting to find a proper use.
• The NZ dollar, last heard of at US69 cents and falling. So just not imported scuba equipment, then. Still, there's an upside to that, too. It means imported rubbish like American Idol becomes more expensive for the TV channels to buy, so they'll make more local rubbish, like a Game of Three Losers (a.k.a. Idle Celebrities).
• Business confidence, now at a 20 year low. Export expectations are at a 17 year low. So domestic scuba sales only. Might even have to sell some to people from the Manawatu.
• The NZ stockmarket, last heard of almost 13 points down, with the most recent quarterly survey of business opinion showing a net 61 per cent of firms expected conditions to deteriorate in the next six months. So better make that a private scuba company, because there isn't going to be a surfeit of investors around. Which is a pity, becuase there could have been a lot of fun to be had with a play on the word "float" during your IPO.

Going UP:

• Wanganui's borrowing, by $2.6 million to fund the Splash Centre extension.
• Wanganui's debt servicing costs, which Council finance guru Julian Harkness warns could increase by anything from $0.6 million to $1.6 million by 2008/09, on top of the annual charge of $2.9million. And that doesn't take account of an estimated $3.5 million for Heart of Wanganui.

Is it just us, or does borrowing in the midst of a... well, no one's using the "r" word yet, so let's just say an "economic downturn"... seem just a little reckless? Watchers don't claim any great depth of economic insight, but it seems that the typical pattern of local spending during a recession is that it remains fairly steady, falls sharply in subsequent years, and recovers more slowly than the rest of the economy, at least according to this article from the US Federal Reserve of San Francisco.

While there are significant differences in scale between US and NZ government, and US states have additional taxation and revenue options available to them, the lessons of the article are still applicable. It concludes:

The key point about [local] budgets and the economy is that the health of the economy determines the health of [local authority] budgets. Ongoing economic weakness limits [local authorities]' abilities to grow their way out of current problems...

If Wanganui follows that pattern, the "subsequent fall" part of the theory suggests that this diVision-led Council is tying the hands of future administrations, who'll be lumbered with paying for their profligacy. And talking of lumber... we can't rely on that to bail us out, so what's left? Bussing in genetically deficient tourists from Raetihi and offering them cheap entry to the Splash Centre?

The fact that the Wanganui District Council, in common with other local authorities in NZ, relies heavily on rates revenue for the largest portion of its income leaves it with few options if debt servicing costs grow further. So wave a fond goodbye to local assets. Or be prepared for something considerably more than a "nil" rates rise...

Update (5.25 pm): We hope, for the sake of Rangi Wills, Ray Stevens and any other Councillor who's ever dared suggest the Diva might, just possibly, be wrong about something, that he's not an avid reader of the UK press. Seems Tony Blair is about to set MI5 to phone tap, spy on and otherwise trample on the democratic rights of MPs. Can Wanganui be far behind?

Comments on this post are now closed.