We were given a presentation by Doug Ducker and Murray Douglas representing Business Hawkes Bay. And what they told us, is that what Hawkes Bay needs is action. We don’t need any more reports that tell us what we should be doing or could be doing – the archives of all the councils are full of those. They told us what they are doing and what they are going to do. How refreshing is it to hear that!

Business Hawkes Bay is an initiative of the Hawkes Bay Chamber of Commerce. It combines the expertise and resources of the private sector and of all local bodies. Business Hawkes Bay is exactly what Hawkes Bay needs. Now we (all of Hawkes Bay including the elected representatives) need to acknowledge this excellent initiative by getting behind Business Hawkes Bay and ensuring their success.

I was particularly impressed with the enthusiasm shown by both Doug Ducker and Murray Douglas. They presented their case with almost missionary zeal. In Doug’s case, his business Pan Pac Forest Industries, will gain no direct benefit from the Business Hawkes Bay initiatives and yet his passion for Hawkes Bay is such that he is more that happy to put his and his company’s support behind the project. Murray, always an effusive and enthusiastic fellow, was in his element. He proudly told us of the projects already successfully undertaken, those currently underway and those planned for the future. There is more to come at the official launch of Business Hawkes Bay on the 29th of February.

Of course this positive path is going to put pressure on local bodies. It is pointless Business Hawkes Bay developing new business initiatives and attracting new businesses to the Bay, if we can’t provide them with land and services appropriate to their needs. So we need to work closely with Business Hawkes Bay to ensure we have industrial sites coming on stream now and over the next 20 years. And when these businesses become established in the Bay, there will be greater need for housing and we need to provide for that also.

We all need to start being positive about Hawkes Bay and Business Hawkes Bay is providing us with an appropriate rallying point. For too long we have been bombarded with everything that is negative about the Bay. It’s time we put that behind us. We need to accept the positive vision of Business Hawkes Bay and all work towards the same goal.

Business Hawkes Bay – the strong possibility of a water storage dam that will irrigate thousands of hectares – the downstream industries from that – the future for Hawkes Bay looks brighter by the day.

Dr. Smith is, of course, the Minister for Local Government and some of the figures he quoted were extremely interesting and some were simply alarming.

The 78 councils in New Zealand are responsible for $100 billion worth of public assets, employ 23,000 people, spend $7.5 billion of public money each year and every day make thousands of regulatory decisions that impact on the lives of all New Zealanders.

Interesting stuff.

But alarmingly, over the last decade average rates across the country have risen by 6.8% per annum – more than twice the rate of inflation. Rates have gone up more than any other component of the consumer price index. Equally alarming is the fact that council debt has quadrupled over the same period.

These are really concerning figures and yet the local press shows no interest in taking up the issue. Why don’t we see articles that include these figures? Why don’t we see articles that show how our local councils have performed over the last decade against each other and against the national average? Surely at a time when our councils are considering a study on the future economic performance of the Bay, this sort of information would be of interest to readers.

Frankly as a city councilor I don’t know the figures and I would like to.

It is interesting to note that whilst rates have risen 6.8% per annum over the last decade, over the previous decade the increase was only 3.9%. Clearly after the loony leftie Local Body Minister Sandra Lee, dumped a whole lot more duties and responsibilities on councils in 2002, costs began to escalate. That would suggest to me that whilst some councils became more efficient and absorbed many of the additional costs, others increased their indebtedness and have increased rates to service the debt.

I challenge the local press to seek the relevant information from the various councils and to publish an article showing how they have performed over the last decade in terms of rates and debt against each other and the national figures supplied by Dr. Smith.

I for one would be interested in seeing the figures,

2011 was a tough year and frankly 2012 looks like being tougher. In terms of the world economy, the New Zealand economy is like a cork in the sea – it goes in whatever direction the tide is going. The economic tide is certainly not going in New Zealand’s direction right now. Corruption and excesses have destroyed the economies of several Eurozone countries to the point where the Euro currency is under threat. These things impact negatively on the New Zealand economy.

However, if we are having to endure tough times, there is no better country in the world in which to endure them than New Zealand and no better place in New Zealand than Hawkes Bay.

Why then are there so many people in Hawkes Bay bagging the place? Why do we have people in positions of influence, determined to make Hawkes Bay look like the lawless, economic basket case of New Zealand?

Whilst I vehemently disagree with them, Lawrence Yule and his cohorts in Better HB, have taken an understandable position. Appalling but understandable. They are so determined to force amalgamation on Hawkes Bay that they are prepared to blacken the image of our wonderful province. Their modus operandi is clearly one that endeavours to show that we are such an economic and social failure, that only amalgamation can save us.

Their argument is lost on many and in my view, only undermines the good work that is going on in the Bay.

Now the HB Today has joined the fray and insists on running negative headlines wherever possible.

On Saturday they ran the headline “Bay among worst for AOS call-outs”. Anybody walking past the newsstands would immediately conclude that the fact that the Armed Offenders Squad was being called out more frequently would suggest we were becoming a much more violent place. The article went on to quote senior police officers saying that a change of responsibility meant squads now provided assistance for drug operations. More robust risk assessments was another factor. Frankly the article did not support the alarmist headline.

The world we live in is certainly not a perfect place. But the place in the world we are lucky enough to live in is as good as it gets. Sure it can be improved and there is good solid work going on to see that, that happens.

But that work is not being helped by those with an alternative agenda.

David shearer has only been an MP since 2009 having failed on two previous attempts to get into parliament. His work history is impressive indeed but since becoming an MP he has been largely invisible. My life is so boring that I watch a bit of parliament on TV and frankly Shearers performance in the house has been average at best. This in a house where the average performance of all members is appalling.

Becoming the leader of the Labour Party is a huge step up for David Shearer and I hope for his party’s sake, and because good politics needs strong opposition, he shapes up. I think he will.

Unfortunately the previous leadership team made such a mess of the party list at the recent election that Shearer is going to have to cope without some of the brighter, younger hopes for the future like Stuart Nash. I have no doubt that if Nash was back in parliament, Shearer would be looking to him to carry some real responsibility.

Stuart Nash has every right to feel bitter. Not towards the voters in his electorate, but towards the senior members of his own party who to put it simply, let him down. I would be surprised if Labour doesn’t find him something to do until a safe seat becomes available.

So where does David Shearer go from here? He’s only got 34 MP’s and some of them are well past their use-by dates (some of them of course have never been any use) so his options are limited. He will want to show that he is in charge and that Labour is a rejuvenated and potent opposition. That is a big ask.

Poor old Phil Goff will trot off to the back benches. I have always said that if I was looking for a good parliamentary team from across all parties, Phil Goff is one of the first I would select. However I would never make the mistake of having him as leader.

Annette King is struggling to hide her bitterness and I predict she will not complete this term. It would not be surprising to see King to step down mid term, perhaps to contest the Wellington Mayoralty, and who knows – that just might create a gap for Stuart Nash.

Have a great Christmas – I will resume my rambles in the new Year.

Unusually there is no council meeting today so I can’t upset anyone there. The new version of the same government is taking shape and Winston Peters has shut up long enough for me to ignore the fact that he and his rag tag bag of lightweights have their snouts in the public trough. Those in Hawkes Bay who seem determined to paint us as some sort of backwater where only the unfortunate live, seem to have gone into Christmas mode or perhaps – just perhaps – they have cancelled their full page advertisements so they can donate those funds to the Christmas Cheer Fund. At least there, the funds will make a difference.

I think of my daughter battling the cold in London – although she must like the cold because she’s off to Russia for Christmas – and my son who will be rushing to catch the commuter train with all those who are heading for their offices in central Melbourne. Their choice I suppose.

Where on earth would you rather live? We live in an area that features two vibrant but distinctly different cities just 23km apart and small rural towns each with their own character. For those who want to get on and make a dollar, there is opportunity despite what the negative doomsayers say. We have a very good climate and good access to beaches, rivers, mountains and lakes.

For those who like to, and are fortunate enough to be able to travel, Hawkes Bay must be the best jumping off point in New Zealand. In less than one hour you can be in Auckland and from there you can fly to anywhere in the world. Always when I fly back into the sprawling metropolis of Auckland, I am thankful that one more short flight will have me home in Hawkes Bay.

One of the things I am often asked when I return from holiday is “what was the best thing you saw on your trip?” The answer is always the same – the green hills as we descended into Hawkes Bay.

Hawkes Bay has been home to my family since 1867. My father was the youngest of 13 born in Napier and I am the youngest of 4 all born and still living in Napier.

I only hope that in time my three kids all end up here. They all still regard the Bay as home so here’s hoping.

I wonder if Lawrence Yule and Chris Tremain have taken that message on board.

In 2009 Lawrence came out with a strong call for all the local authorities to amalgamate and Chris Tremain supported him. Since then they have both softened their approach to one of “we only want a study done” but we all know what their real agenda is.

If Lawrence had used his brains and carried the people with him, we could have avoided the horrible Napier versus Hastings situation that his actions have fueled. He could have identified all those things that will have to be done in Hawkes Bay if amalgamation takes place and should be done if it doesn’t. He should have set out a clear path with a timeline attached to align contract dates and to merge all regulations and rules. In modern language, to ensure all councils are singing from the same songbook. Lawrence would have got unanimous support across Hawkes Bay for that project and his dream of amalgamation would be well under way.

Instead Lawrence has decided not to take the John Key approach. Not to carry the people with him. He has chosen to take the “I know what’s good for you” approach and that has set Hawkes Bay back 12 years. It is a bloody shame and totally unnecessary . Lawrence has undone much of the good work many of us have been doing over recent years to ensure a truly unified Hawkes Bay.

Surely Chris Tremain has got the message from Saturday’s election result. In an election where the National Party blitzed all other parties, where Napier people gave National a very strong mandate, Chis’ majority dropped by over 60%. No message could be clearer and the result will not have gone unnoticed in Wellington.

Everyone knows that the Better Hawkes Bay line of “we just want a study done” is a smokescreen for those who want to amalgamate. And the people of Chris Tremain’s electorate have told him loudly and clearly they are not going to be bullied into such action.

Lawrence and Chris would be well advised to take a leaf out of John Key’s book. They should steer a sensible path for Hawkes Bay that has the support of all the people. Only when that journey is completed should we look at what the next sensible step may be.

Firstly we voted to retain MMP and then saw results that proved what an appalling system it is. Too late now folks! Frankly we should have had the results of last nights election debacle and then have asked the question – do you want to retain MMP or not. I am sure the result of the referendum would have been quite different than last nights one.

If ever there was a clear demonstration that MMP is an absurd system it was last night. Apart from the rag tag bunch of one man parties, how the hell can we justify Winston Peters returning to parliament – and worse, he drags 7 of his lightweight mates in with him.

Winston Peters is arguably the most untrustworthy politician ever to sit in our house of representatives. In the first MMP election he campaigned on getting rid of National. He encouraged us to vote for him so he could get rid of the terrible National Government. When it became obvious that this ridiculous system had delivered him the balance of power, Peters, after holding the country to ransom for weeks, did a deal with National which kept them in power. National even created the new role of Treasurer for him which suited Peters perfectly. It was just a posers role and Bill Birch did all the work as Minister of Finance. Eventually National saw through him and Peters was sacked.

Peters subsequently campaigned saying he was “not interested in the baubles of office”. This time he went with Labour who gave him a first class air ticket and told him to stay out of the country as much as possible. They too eventually saw through him and gave him the shove.

Winston Peters could not be trusted then and he can not be trusted now. He is the poster boy for all that is wrong with the MMP system.

Look at the graphic of the House of Representatives in this mornings paper. Does it occur to anyone else that one side of the house looks solid and the other side a shambles? All these little parties with one MP are just nonsense. And like Jim Anderton did for years, they will all be putting their hands out for the party leaders funding which is significant. Leaders of what? In the good old days these people would have been leaders of ginger groups within the main parties.

Being an optimist I need to look for something positive that came out of last night. And it’s easy to find isn’t it. At least Hone didn’t get John Minto and Sue Bradford into Parliament!

So that’s got that off my chest – I can now go and enjoy a magnificent day in the Bay. At one stage last night I was seriously considering moving to Australia – I kid you not!

Naturally the leader is important but the leader is just that – a leader. The leader of a team we expect will run the country well and for the benefit of all New Zealanders. The team is every bit as important as the leader and yet we have hardly seen anyone bar the leaders.

When you are considering your party vote, I suggest you undertake this exercise. Write down the top 12/15/20 – how ever many you want – names in order for each party and then decide which team you would prefer to run the country. It will certainly make your decision making easier I’m sure.

Your electorate vote is much easier. Vote for the person you believe will work the hardest for your electorate and has similar views to yours on the future of the electorate.

The electoral system vote is the one that is going to have the most influence on the future of New Zealand and yet it is the vote that is being debated the least. That is disappointing.

MMP has been a disaster for New Zealand and it has the potential to create even greater problems in the future.

Supporters of MMP tell us that it has given us a parliament that is far more representative of New Zealand Society and that may well be true. But New Zealand is not just made up of the clever, the caring, the able, the honest and the honourable. It is also made up of the thick, the uncaring, the unable, the dishonest and the dishonourable – do we want them represented in our parliament?

We don’t need a cross section of society in parliament, we need the team of people who are best qualified to run the country for all New Zealanders.

If ever there was a time in economic history when stability was required it is right now. And yet the media are trying to convince us that MMP may deliver Winston Peters back to parliament. Winston Peters who has proven to be totally untrustworthy and has created instability in his previous stint in parliament, might just sneak back in and might even hold a position of huge influence.

Tell me how that disaster for New Zealand shows MMP in a good light.

Those running the Better HB campaign simply have no conscience. They promote erroneous figures and when proven to be wrong, refuse to retract them or to issue an apology. They promote half-truths and untruths with reckless abandon. And now Regional Councillor Neil Kirton has joined the fray, publishing material he knows is wrong in fact.

Let me quote from Kirton’s article published in a HB Regional Council publication and subsequently in the Napier Mail.

“The Regional Council has agreed to contribute $40,000 for an independent study into the role of local government in the region. The study will include looking at the way our councils are structured with the possibility of amalgamating councils. There has been stout resistance and opposition from various councils, most notably from Mayor Barbara Arnott and her council”.

The clear message Kirton is trying to convey is that Mayor Arnott and her councillors, oppose the undertaking of an economic study as proposed by the Regional Council.

Kirton knows that is not the case. He is being intentionally misleading and mischievous.

The facts are clear and well known to Kirton.

Lawrence Yule approached the Napier City Council and asked for support for a feasibility study to be done on amalgamation. The Napier City Council refused.

The Hawkes Bay Regional council subsequently proposed that an independent study, including looking at how governance will effect our economic future, be done. Mayor Arnott immediately sent a letter of support to the Chair of the Regional Council offering the Napier City Council’s support and also funding.

These are the facts. Neil Kirton knows them and yet he choses to present a different picture.

Bloody disappointing from an elected representative.

Then just this morning, some fellow rang me up and started abusing me because we were about to, in his words, squander ratepayers money on such a study. You just can’t win!

The one sensible thing this fellow said to me was that the study is going to be expensive. And of course it may well be that the study is just the start of ratepayer expenditure on a process that hopefully will bring some closure to the divisive amalgamation debate – for the time being at least. Following the study it is quite likely we will have to undertake an electoral petition and following that it is probable that we will go to a referendum. The all-up cost will be hundreds of thousands of dollars.

The first and very important step will be to set the terms of reference for the study. There are some in our community who have declared themselves “Key Stakeholders” and believe they should have a big say in setting the terms of reference. Well the truth is, when hundreds of thousands of dollars of ratepayers money is being spent, that every ratepayer is a key stakeholder. None more key that the next. And all stakeholders can’t be invited to set the terms of reference. We all know that in that situation it would be impossible to reach consensus.

So how should we handle such a task? The answer is found when we look at the very basics of the democratic system.

In a democracy we elect people to act in our best interests. Those people take an oath that they will act in the best interests of the community from which they were elected. If the are found not to be serving their community in an appropriate manner, then they will be tossed out of office at the next election. Simple democracy.

When we look at these people who now believe they are “Key Stakeholders”, somehow more important then other ratepayers, we find that they have never stood before the ratepayers and offered to serve. There was an election just one year ago. I didn’t see their names on the candidate list.

So we elect representatives to act on our behalf in a democracy. We don’t appoint ourselves to a position above others.