Posts by Neil Morrison
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Neil is insisting that anyone who protested the way the amalgamation was pursued -- and in particular the original bill -- is now somehow a hypocrite for participating.
No, not anyone, Labour. It's their rhetoric I had a problem with. I thought they would have been better off with "Hide stole our idea" rather than "Hide fronts take-over by rich".
I take you point that quite a few Aucklanders felt dictated to but that would have happened under Labour as well. Both parties were convinced that amalgamation was in the best interest of Auckland and NZ as a whole and they were determined to make that happen and were not going to allow it to get bogged down in endless local govt bickering.
-
Brown has talked of three major rail projects - the inner city loop, the airport line and a link to the North Shore . The loop looks straight forward but has there been any progress on a new harbour crossing? That always seems to stall.
-
Changes were made during the public consultation process - which was always going to happen. I can't see how any of that was anti-democratic.
-
For the sake of completeness, Neil, you might wish to add that Labour also established the Royal Commission that led to the super city.
I was being cute. The Clark govt did set this all in motion and I agreed with that. But Labour in opposition chose to play a negative role and try and stir up discontent.
There was always going to be an element of railroading because the govt would have to fight the entrenched vested interests of the Auckland local bodies. Labour or National it would have been the same.
It never was going to be the end of democracy as Labour claimed. And I see now Goff is saying the that Labour will work with the super city. I hope he doesn't think that it's only democracy when his team wins.
-
did any politician react to Henry's comments about the Chief Minister of Delhi's name at the time?
-
I might have an idea of whether it was good or bad in maybe five years time at the earliest?
I think Auckland has a better chance at least of solving some long standing problems with the greater co-ordination now possible across the region.
And the elections certainly were not the end of democracy as was predicted by the opponents of amalgamation. Much like the Electoral Finance Act was never going to be the end of democracy either.
-
a centre left mayor, record voter turn out and a considerable empowerment of South Auckland.
Just the destruction of democracy Labour predicted.
There were quiet a few centre-left people who thought that the amalgamation was a good idea and it has turned out to be so. Pity Labour opposed it.
-
...most of these big union guys have a strong sense of core values and fair play. It's what gets them up in the morning anhas made them rise to the top in what they do. Unlike, say, Chris Trotter or Irishbill for example.
I have some admiration for the US unions - they get things done in a tough environment. And it is real unionism at work unlike the local pretenders as you mention.
But their system is quite rigid. Getting that union card is a big ask generally.
Hopefully it may be as I think you're saying that the Australians went a bit rogue and SAG might be inclined to sweep up after them.
-
I tend to suspect SAG have had no interest in NZ's industial relations laws. They might back down but it will be a strategic decision.
I might be being unfair to SAG but my impression is that they want the way things work in Hollywood to be how it's done elsewhere.
-
It's possible SAG might not lift the boycott whatever AE do.
Also, they will still be oblidged, I gather, to stop any of their members from working on what they consider a non-union film.