After all, since the whole ‘Supercity’ nonsense was first mooted, we normally reticent Waihekeans have had to get used to some changes in the way things are done, politically speaking.
So let’s look at some of the issues that have cropped up over the last few weeks and see if we can make some sort of sense of it all.

VOTER TURNOUT.
Sent your ballots off yet?
Chances are, if you are reading this, then the answer is yes. But for every one that is there will be a dozen who won’t. Those of us who love local politics and try to soak up as much as we can on the subject are few and far between. ‘We few, we happy few’ and all that.
If I had to take a guess at turnout this time around I’d say we’ll get maybe fifty percent or thereabouts. Not that impressive, but given the limited coverage and the lack of a public meeting or two, I suppose it’s not that surprising.
Plus, let’s face it, the weather has been amazing and when there are fish to be caught and barbecues to be lit and beers to be drunk then who’s taking notice of a few dull candidates eh? Leave ‘em to it. I’m sure they’ll sort it all out between themselves and let us know when they’re done.
All that boiling rage we saw eighteen months ago over the local board shake out seems to have been kept in reserve until the next full election and even Paul Walden, who carries more of the expectations of the seriously disgruntled on his shoulders than most has been pretty quiet on the subject.

Ah well. Keep it simmering I say. There is a heavy reckoning to be made a year and a half from now and I really hope that those of you who were incandescently livid back then can manage to remember why.
If you can’t then don’t worry, I’ll be right here to remind you.

CANDIDATES.

I’m going to stick my neck out here and predict that Paul Walden will win the seat with a comfortable margin.
But what of the others? Without a public meeting to help us get a good close up look at them it’s been a tricky business sorting out who stands for what. We are left with only the revealing radio interviews to guide us plus whatever bland mush the local papers can be bothered serving up. As far as the rest of the field are concerned, we have the old familiar faces still trying to look like they belong, plus a few new contenders.
Of these the only one who stands out is Sue McCann. Personally, I’d like to see her get second place, or at least enough of a vote to show her it might be worth persisting with her political ambitions beyond this by election.

CAMPAIGNING.

Here of course is where things get interesting. Campaigning for a seat on the board in the old days was a charmingly bumbling business. You stood for election, put up a few billboards, handed out a few leaflets and tried not to make an arse of yourself at whatever public meetings were organised by interested citizens. Public disagreements were few and far between and all candidates stood not only as independent from the left/right factions in the city but from any kind of perceivable power bloc within the community itself. All we usually had to guide us were vague indicators such as whether the person commuted, ran a business, wrote to the Gulf News excessively or was actually known to be barking mad.

Pretty much all campaigns boiled down to; “I’m a nice person. Some of you know me. I have lived on Waiheke for…..years. I’m passionate about this community. Have a leaflet that says all the stuff I just said. Er….That’s it.”

Which was pleasant but somewhat dull.

Even the performance on the hustings of the seventeen contenders for the first new Local Board seats followed this basic trend which made it all the more surprising to see a sudden shift to factional politics emerge once the result was announced. Well, obviously I don’t need to rehash what happened then.

So it was refreshing to see the appearance of a genuinely professional looking set of promotional material appear for Paul Walden. The glossy newspaper was certainly a neat touch, though maybe not as clever in actual content as its look suggested. But, pedestrian though the bulk filler may have been, it was new and unexpected and certainly made an impression.
Likewise the highly professional billboards, though one wag suggested that it appeared that the candidate was looking for members to join his church.
But overall, Waiheke has been treated to a new look in local campaigning. Is this a good thing? Well, on the one hand it might make for amusing times ahead if others follow the same lead and vie with each other to produce ever more flashy and entertaining material. But what of the potential board member who may be brilliant, talented and worth electing but who is duller than a vegan’s lunch box and has no mates with a sense of humour either? How will we know their worth?

Of course at this point those who know the deeper weirdness of the last few weeks are waving and calling out. “Tell them about the ON-LINE STUFF!”

Yes, I was just getting to that. Watch.

SOCIAL MEDIA.

See?

The Social Media or ‘Facebook’ to give it its more accurate name, has been around for many, many years. Or so it sometimes seems. In fact, most of us had only just acquired an identity on this ubiquitous means of public driveling when the whole local board business erupted eighteen months ago. Yet now, most of us take it for granted  and all the silly jokes, pictures and video clips of kittens behaving amusingly that we’d normally be annoying our friends with by email are now distributed in a far wider way by this new technology.
And so it has proved with the by election. Those of you who have managed so far to resist the ‘charms’ of Facebook will have missed out on the best part of the whole process.

Things started off on the Waiheke Community page a couple of weeks back when one candidate suddenly and without warning, let rip in the direction of another candidate. Others on the page either reacted in horror or egged him on. The whole debate grew so frisky that before too long some regulars were becoming distressed and calling for the whole lengthy debate to be shut down. After all, if you are trying to spend the day posting stuff about jam making, needlework or gardening tips you don’t want this sudden boisterous fracas going on!
At this point Hans Versluys took the initiative and opened up a new Waiheke People’s Parliament page where local politics junkies could congregate and keep the pot stirring.
And stir it they did. However, the downside to all this is that in a real public meeting you can see who is making the noise. Like the memorable time John Stansfield reintroduced the splendid word ‘Ninny’ into the local lexicon at the Ostend hall. But on facebook it is perfectly simple to appear in full disguise and take potshots at anyone. And so it proved.
(Incidentally, any information on the true nature or identity of ‘Maggie Hromada’ will get you the usual pint of ale.)

So just as we face new situations within the political structure, so we face them in the way the campaigns are both run and commented upon. Had facebook been around back when the final community board elections were taking place four and a half years ago then I for one might have had a way better platform from which to challenge the assertions of a certain (subsequently notorious) local representative and, had I been heeded, we might have been spared a LOT of vexation.
Still, ‘Oh tempora, oh mores!’ as some bloke once observed. We all loved the idea of a new millennium, now all we have to do is get used to it and see if it makes any kind of sense in the long run. This time next week all will be known on the by election at any rate even if everything else still confuses us.
I’ll get a chance to go over most of this one more time on the radio next Saturday so if any of you think of stuff I may have missed then by all means let me know.

What a curious situation we have developing on the island as the voting papers drop into our letter boxes. Only last week I was mentioning that the race for Denise Roche’s vacated Local Board seat seemed somehow dull compared to the high passion fuelled frolics that accompanied the main event eighteen months ago. Indeed, the only whiff of skullduggery came from the closed doors meeting a couple of months ago that saw Roche anoint the ever eager Paul Walden as her successor of choice. But more on that later.

As this election begins to warm up, Waiheke voters find themselves once again left high and dry by their local ‘newspapers’ which both appear to have lost the ability to create any meaningful reportage on the election and have once again resorted to the lazy nonsense of sending each candidate a vague sort of questionnaire and allowing them to fill it in at their leisure, and, we assume, with the help of others.

Only Waiheke radio have managed to get to grips with the seven candidates, although even they let two slip away. I do urge you to listen to the five they did get though.

For myself, I have been meaning to get some thoughts and observations down on this fine site for a week or two but have been struggling to make any headway through the drizzle of dull stuff that has emerged thus far. All that changed yesterday as news of Graham Hooper’s public self disembowelment came through.

But once again, I am getting ahead of myself. Let us, dear reader, start from the beginning and see what we can recall of the events that have led us this far…….(Screen goes all wavy…….)

Before the results of the first Local Board election were even published in the spring of 2010 it was already being suggested that the incumbent Councilor Denise Roche might just possibly have her sights set a little higher than just a seat on the Waiheke Board and, at the following years general election might attempt to make her move into Parliament.

And so it proved.
But her decision to take such a step must surely have been helped by the marginalisation that she received from the other four board members as well as from the huge  show of support she drew from the public.

(If you are new to the island or unfamiliar with any of this background stuff then just go back through the posts on here and have a look at October and November 2010. That will explain quite a bit.)

So, Roche, proving once again that living well is indeed the best revenge, took herself off to the Beehive leaving her seat vacant. OR DID SHE? This is where things get a bit hazy. Rather than immediately step down and leave the way clear for one or two of the candidates who narrowly missed out last time to have another go, she drew the process out somewhat, clearly keen to have the maximum influence on the outcome of the by election. Fair enough I suppose. Given the treatment meted out to her by the rest of the board she was hardly going to miss a chance to make their lives complicated if at all possible.

So that brought us to the mysterious meeting between Roche and the rest of the previous left leaning candidates. I for one was keen to attend but was told that an invitation was not going to be forthcoming. Whatever happened behind closed doors we may never know, (although I’d be delighted to hear from anyone who’d like to spill a bean or two on that in complete confidence.) but any hopes that the narrowly defeated Andy Spence might be the perfect candidate this time around were quickly dashed as Paul Walden emerged as the chosen one.

Well, a contender on horseback always looks impressive, and Walden certainly has both the energy and the eloquence to make a decent go of it. His campaigning has been first rate this time around and his publicity material is by far the most professional I’ve ever seen used on the island.

But he is a divisive figure to many. Engage random Waiheke voters on the subject of the election and the sudden pockets of explosive resistance to him can be as surprising as they are vehement. Walden, it seems safe to say, can put backs up as easily as he can charm, and while many seem to see him as a natural front runner this time around it would not do to forget quite how organised the opposition to his election could get.

But we can come back to that. Right now let’s take a look at the other candidates. The first, and easiest to dismiss, is the unknown (but embarrassingly over hyphenated) Mary-Anne Benson-Cooper. Since she declined to be interviewed by Waiheke Radio, we are left with just her anodyne comments in the Marketplace which don’t give us much to go on. I’d be delighted to interview her, though I have to admit my first question to her would be along the lines of ‘Do you realise just how little time Waihekeans have for those who don’t actually LIVE HERE?’ so it might be quite a short discussion.

Then we have two new players, Tracey Mancer and Sue McCann. Both gave interviews on Waiheke Radio which revealed a decent grasp of issues like the Local Plan, the Esplanade etc, as well as the drive and ambition to have a go at local politics. However, while Mancer’s interview went reasonably well, McCann seemed to have done hers while in some kind of terrified spasm which left her sounding like a malfunctioning animatronic. Perhaps some basic media training might be required if she is to make a go of this politics business.

Then of course we have the former Community Board member Herb ‘Eyebrow Value’ Romaniuk. Another candidate who missed out last time around, he ran one of the least inspiring campaigns of the large field. His main approach was to mumble about; “Well, you know, I did this before….Wouldn’t mind doing it again I suppose…..Know the ropes and all that….Up to you really…….Erm…Hrhhhhm….”
While it wouldn’t do to entirely dismiss Romaniuk from contention I for one wouldn’t be putting any money on him just yet.

Now of course it wouldn’t be a local election with out the ever hopeful Allen Davies throwing his hat into the ring. This veteran ‘campaigner’ just can’t bear to think of a ballot paper that doesn’t have his name on it. Davies seems driven by the same strange urges that we see in spawning salmon. Never mind that it’s basically hopeless and will all end in disaster, time and time again he stands for election, hoping that somehow, this time around, Waiheke will finally understand what kind of towering statesmanlike figure they have in their midst.
This will never happen. I don’t mean to be personal here and this may come out as a little mean, but he is standing for election and this is supposed to be an analysis of candidates so I may as well say it out loud, Allen Davis is not a likeable man. On an island known far and wide for its easy going and informal ways, he is a stiff and uncomfortable figure who seems permanently in the grip of some tight lipped disapproval of everything around him.
Now I may be missing the real man but I somehow doubt it. I suppose it may be possible that, among friends, Davies is a jovial and amusing man, a boon companion who loves a beer or three and has a fund of racy and hilarious stories at his command.
But, having watched him through several election campaigns I feel that this is probably not the case.

So, while we are on the subject of candidates who never seem to get anywhere we come at last to Graham Hooper, who is, in many ways the complete opposite of Allen Davies. Where Davies is stiff and formal, Hooper is loose and informal to an amazing degree. He can certainly lay claim to years of passionate involvement in local matters. But, he is a decent and kind man and utterly unsuited to politics. His interview on the radio makes for uncomfortable listening as he fumbles and bumbles his way through simple questions with what appears to be a complete lack of any grasp of the issues. It is awful to listen to.

But then, Waiheke’s political Uber-Hippy suddenly went toxic over the weekend on the Facebook community page. With a venom that would be more suited to an American presidential primary, Hooper suddenly took aim at another candidate and let rip. The immediate torrent of shocked response from others, mostly suggesting that this might not be a good way to do things, only prompted him on to worse excesses. Moving on from negative campaigning, he then went on to do one of those silly “It’s all the MEDIA’S fault!” things, suggesting that while he and other candidates had to face the fearsome radio questioning of Chris Walker the terror of the airwaves, one candidate was allowed to get away with just a gentle gumming from the amiable Shirrin Brown and that this was unfair.

Well, this story seems likely to run and run. More soon, and keep up the comments!

If you are a Waiheke Dog owner, a Waiheke Dog lover or a Waiheke resident, we want you to know that big brother the GREATER Auckland City Council, would like us to change our ways! Because we belong to the greater Auckland city, we (dog owners) have been informed that the greater Auckland area should now have the same off leash times on all beaches. This means our hours will be restricted considerably by a total of two and a half hours each day for four months and half an hour for 6 weeks.

This really affects me, as after the summer holiday restrictions, (which we fully support), I was able to take my dog for a run after 4 pm which suited us fine. But if Auckland City council gets its way I will have to wait until after 6.30 pm when I am eating dinner! This is a huge inconvenience.

There doesn’t seem to be any consideration given to the fact we live in a semi rural area with a large choice of beach area to walk our dogs on. We have plenty of space for everyone, as we are not living in crowded spaces. Why do we have to comply with rules that belong to city life?

It seems that people will no longer have to think and read for themselves the rules that apply for local areas.” Let’s make it simple,” Auckland City says, the same rules for everyone across the board. So there goes our individual freedom and the choice of lifestyle we have chosen.

So I am asking you to consider filling in a submission on our behalf, even if you are not a dog lover or owner .For this is just the start of Auckland City rewriting its bylaws. We want to tell them that we are different, special and have chosen to reside here because we don’t enjoy city life with its restrictive lifestyle. We don’t want to change what works well!

If you are concerned, please attend our meeting to be held at Onetangi Residents Hall Sunday Feb 12 at 4 pm .

We have spare submission forms and would appreciate your support.

Thanking you

Thanks to all those who attended the Hui on the Food Bill yesterday.  I thought I would write a quick summary and action points so that people get a sense of what happened if they weren’t able to attend.  It’s probably incomplete or I may get some things wrong so feel free to add to and correct my email.

Thanks to Huhana Davis and Denise Roche and Piritahi Marae who made the event possible and to Stephan who came up from Malborough to talk about the Bill and its implications.

Key Decisions

1  That One Waiheke All list will be used to communicate on this issue
[Andrew says: you can sign up by registering at http://onewaiheke.opengroups.net, or clicking the link in the box to the right.]

2.  The Food bill has had a first hearing.  It is unlikely that it will be reopened for submissions.  However, it is possible that the Select
Committee could hear submissions in a particular community.  As Waiheke is a place where there are a number of initiatives – food coops, small growers and producers, buyer’s club, etc.  it seems like a good place for them to come to, to get a sense of what we need from a Food bill.
In order for this to happen, we would need to lobby the Select Committee and the Chair.
Denise to be in contact with Stephan – to a) get his email, b) provide list of Select Committee and Chair.  c) It would be good if Stephan could draught the kind of request we need to make so that the Select Committee has the right kind of pressure to listen to comments and submissions here or at least have our comments included in their decision process.

3.  To find a way of describing cottage/small scale growers/producers (at the moment this is poorly defined in the bill)

4.  Exemptions to compliance will be on a case by case basis so one option is for all of Waiheke to apply for exemption or for all small scale growers/producers to band together to seek exemption and their own compliance rules – which could be that we comply to the current rules on safe handling of food.

As an additional point, it’s a good Idea to circulate this widely to people/coop lists etc/growers to join the discussion.

Key Points from Discussion

The Food Bill is primarily about Food safety in terms of preparation and handling.

While we are concerned about GMO – this bill is not really about the growing of seeds and plants which is covered elsewhere.  The intention is to make it clear in the Bill that it does not refer or encompass seeds.
However, in terms of food safety labelling of food as GMO is not seen as important or a health risk and yet many of us do want to know how the food is labelled.

It has been designed primarily with our export markets in mind and what big distributors/growers do with food and seems to neglect what small scale growers/cottage industries do.

There was a strong feeling that Waiheke small scale production should be exempt from this Bill and it does not apply to the kinds of things produced here.  Also that instead of complying with the Bill and tweaking it, we should not be forced into it at all.

Initiatives that challenge Community enterprise should be resisted and that we don’t need more regulation than that which is currently available.

Costs of compliance could force small producers out of the market or inhibit people from having a go at starting up a food business.

Penalties may increase from $5000 to $100,000 which is also a disincentive.

They need to define cottage industry and have some sort of blanket exemption that covers this – not say that they will exempt people on a case by case basis.  If you produce food, you shouldn’t have to spend time complying with additional paperwork to get an exemption.

Food labelling.

The Bill currently says something to the effect that if you don’t eat animal product because you are a vegetarian, that is an ethical issue but not a food safety issue.  However it was felt that  a) people’s ethical/religious views should be respected b)  people need to know what’s in their food as they may be allergic and they have a right to know if their food contains cloned or GMO organisms, what additives are in it as well as the country of origin.

Bartering

The notion of bartering needs to be clearly defined or removed as a) it’s impossible to police, b) it’s ludicrous that trade in produce needs to be micromanaged.

Ministerial power

It seems the Minister has a lot of power to add/remove things which seems wrong.

Some things in the food bill may not be so bad – the fact that compliance is standardised across communities.

This Bill is not the TPPA, but it’s exclusion of the needs of small growers/producers and community initiatives provides a potential challenge to our ability to grow our own food, provide for our own community food security, and encourage local entrepreneurship.

Stephen and Denise have both said that they are interested in supporting this issue.

Kind regards and please do feel free to add/or correct what has been written, perhaps in the same thread so it’s not lost.

Shirin Brown

The Waiheke Working Sail project plans to match the need for alternatives to fossil fuel-based transport to and from the island with a long overdue revival of a productive working sail industry capable of providing a livelihood for local young people.

Waiheke Working Sail is the beginning of a journey back to a low carbon, low energy, coastal shipping future while creating boatbuilding apprenticeships and sail training.

The project members will be giving an introduction presentation as part of the Sustainability Festival on Monday, 16 January, 7pm at the Oneroa Bowling Club. The evening will cover an overview of the project and ways to get involved.  Also, Waiheke sailor and designer, Bernard Rhodes will share his new ideas for a custom-made, wind-powered cargo ship.

WWS was started in 2011, with the aim of reviving a Waiheke-based shipping programme using purpose-built vessels. The project is still in its conceptual stage but has already brought together people with a variety of skills, from boat designers to RYA sail instructors, to working sail enthusiasts. The presentation hopes to engage interest in the community for the possibilities within the realm of coastal shipping for the 21st century. Ever-rising petrol costs have alerted many on the island to a pressing need in the future for alternatives to fuel-based transport. Already there has been interest among businesses pursuing low carbon and CarbonZero policies. Many find it an added selling point in a market that is increasingly aware of the need to cut down on fuel usage.

Although coastal sail shipping cannot hope to compete in the immediate future with fossil fuelled shipping methods, the timely pursuit of alternatives might just leave Waiheke in a strong position in the long term, as well as encouraging new business and trades. In 2012 WWS will be hosting historical reenactments of Shipping voyages around the Hauraki Gulf. Information is available on the website: http://waihekeworkingsail.onewaiheke.org

Anyone interested in the possibilities of Coastal Shipping please come along!

One of the protesters, a Mr Andrew Hendrie, is complaining, (to the Council of all things), that the encampment is attracting the ‘Wrong Sort’ of activists and that something needs to be done. Let me quote from today’s Herald;

Mr Hendrie, a health activist, said he had been involved with the Occupy Auckland site from the first day on October 15, building the camp, running seminars and helping with police liaison.
“I was encouraged by the gathering and networking of numerous concerned citizens, with a broad spectrum of issues including environmental, poverty, children, regulatory and more,” he said in an email to the council on Monday.
Mr Hendrie said as the weeks rolled on he witnessed an erosion in the number of genuine campaigners, an increase in the number of homeless residents and a lack of controls around new members and their behaviour.
There had been “repeated hijacking of the general assemblies for issues not consistent with those which birthed the occupy movement”, he said.
That’s right folks he actually used the expression ‘Birthed the Occupy Movement’ in public. But let’s not get too distracted by his mangling of language, he is a ‘Health Activist’ after all, (Whatever one of those is) and doubtless knows more about this kind of thing than the rest of us. What he has against homeless people is likewise a mystery. But let us instead look at what is going awry in the Occupy Movement.

Now personally I’ve been too busy ‘Occupying’ a bar stool recently to have got to grips with the finer nuances of anti-capitalist rhetoric and activities, so I turned to my old friend Roland ‘Bolshy’ Anstruther, Joint Co-Chairperson of the Aotearoa Indignant Coalition to explain it all to me. Over an organic, fair trade chai latte at the university café he got down to the basics of the split that threatens to destabilise the protest.

“Basically,” he explained, “the Occupy movement started out as a protest against world capitalism, utilizing, broadly speaking, a banner waving and slogan chanting based approach to achieve change. We drew on a large number of petulant, disaffected middle class student poseurs to get the ball rolling, while holding our cadre of Dreadlock Wearing Crusties with facial piercings in reserve for when the pepper spray action got going. But for some reason that hasn’t happened so far. In fact as far as I know, nobody has even been tasered yet which is a huge letdown. Bloody Pigs! You just can’t rely on them for anything.

So that’s when things started to go wrong. The dreadlock guys felt that some really concerted Drum Circle action was needed. So, without any consultation with the General Assembly, they contacted the Scary Bad Tempered Women in Woolly Hats Collective and got hold of a load of drums. Now don’t get me wrong man, Drum Circles are seriously effective for issues like achieving World Peace and getting rid of nuclear energy. But for bringing about a total collapse of the capitalist banking system? Talk silly! It’s just never going to be workable. So that was when the split occurred between the Drummers and our comrades in the Aotearoa Indignant Coalition.”

“So what were you looking for?” I asked.

“Look…Basically, it seemed to us that real change was only going to happen if we adopted a seriously focused programme of Going To The Toilet In The Flower Beds.”

“You mean…..”

“Totally. Going To The Toilet In The Flower Beds. It’s the only language these Capitalists understand right? Now obviously the Crusties were already doing quite a bit of that. In fact they were dropping their bundles all over the place from Day One while our lot were still sneaking into the local cafes to use the facilities. But the point is, they didn’t clear any of this with the General Assembly so as a protest statement kind of thing it wasn’t really valid you know what I mean? After all, some of those jobbies might have been put there by drunks, or homeless people. There’s no way of telling.”

“Yes, I can see that might confuse the message. So what did you propose?”

“Stickers.”

“You mean putting actual stickers on the…….”

“Exactly. Draw attention to the fact that the deposit was left there by a concerned citizen as a valid statement about world capitalism.”

“So have you started doing that?”

“Well…Not as such. Just yet. You see the important thing is to get the wording on the stickers just right. We in the AIC wanted them to say “Down with the exploitative system of Global Capitalism right now please!” But when it came to the vote during Tuesday’s General Assembly we found that a number of our members had gone to WINZ to sign on that day and the other Joint Co-Chairperson had gone home ‘cos his Mum was insisting he changed his clothes. So we got voted down by the Grey Lynne Anarcho Syndicalist Co-operative, who, in my opinion are a bunch of bloody SPLITTERS who need shooting. They wanted to go with ‘Turd Power!’, which I thought was pathetic. But just as we were getting into negotiations we all got attacked by some Peace Activists who thought we ought to be using buckets instead.”

“Sounds complicated.”

“It is man, it is. Still, nobody ever said bringing about a Workers Revolution was going to be easy. Actually, now I come to think about it I did say that. Anyway man, I gotta get back to the Square. We have a vote this afternoon on which trees we plan to uproot next. The Greens seem to think we shouldn’t be damaging plant life but what do they know eh? Bourgeois poofters. They’ll be first up against the wall when the revolution comes believe me!”

To the polling booth then…..

Personally, I don’t rush to be there early. The exercising of one’s right to vote is better savored slowly like a good scotch. So I take my time over it and finally present myself at the desk around lunchtime. Get my ballot papers and find the funny little cardboard booth that feels just right. The nasty orange marker pens are something of a letdown I always find. They lack a certain gravitas. But then I spend my customary few moments in quiet remembrance of that brave Chinese lad who stood before the tanks in Tiananmen Square. Would he have cared what he got to vote with? He’d probably have been happy with a bit of charcoal or a wax crayon just as long as it got him that which so many of us take for granted. Thank you fellow, whoever you were. I won’t forget you and I hope nobody else ever does either.

On with the voting. I already know where my ticks are going and have done so for a long time. ‘Undecided Voter’ is just another word for Slack Brained Cretin in my book. I then wonder if I’ll inscribe my ticks with a sharp flourish or do them slowly and with care. Always a tricky one. I compromise this time and do the party vote one way and the candidate the other. Then of course comes the feeling of wanting MORE! Deposit the ballots in the appropriate boxes and it’s all over. If it wasn’t for the long delayed batch of home brew that I put on to mash earlier and have to get home to, I’d be here for another hour or so, getting in the way and passing the time of day with other voters.

When all is said and done, it hasn’t been a bad election campaign. A couple of months ago I felt it might all be a bit of a let down, what with National looking so strong in the polls and Labour stuck in that morbid first term of opposition. But then came the resurgence of ‘The Thing From Tauranga That Would Not Die’ and the PM foolishly soiling himself in public. Suddenly the whole race came to life and a jolly good thing too in my view.

So lets study ‘The Form’ as the sporting fraternity would have it. Starting with….Oh let me see now…..

ACT. Oh dear oh dear. Not since the demise of the Alliance has a party gone into meltdown so totally. Now I’ll say it right here and now, I voted for ACT in ’99, ’02, ’05 and ’08 and felt fine doing it. Over the years this has led to many of my mushy liberal friends wailing things like; “But…But I thought you were a NICE person!” As if I’d suddenly declared a fondness for puppy strangling or running down elderly people with my car. Sorry folks, but the fact is I simply don’t trust leftist politics. And I have nothing but contempt for Conservatives either. Too many starchy bores, repellent rednecks, loud-mouthed rugger buggers and creepy God Botherers in National for me to ever feel simpatico with that lot. It’s like finding out you have to spend the evening with a room full of used car salesmen and the bar is SHUT. So ACT always seemed like the party for me. Or at least it was until poor old Rodney Hide, (Bless his little bald head) went and got hoist with his own petard. Suddenly it was Don Brash and John Banks, just the kind of people I was trying to avoid, politically speaking. It would be rude of me to state that in my opinion Brash is a dotard and Banks is a crook. So I won’t.
But you know….

Now Labour on the other hand is a party for whom I have a lot of respect. I’m not saying I would ever VOTE for them, in fact I think my hand would snap off at the wrist if I ever tried, but there have been times, like ’99, ’02 and ’05 when I was relieved to see them back in power. Helen Clarke gave the country good value for money by and large and her concession speech three years ago must surely rank as one of the most impressive and dignified performances I’ve ever witnessed. Her rise to power and wealth at the UN is well deserved. But, as that nice Texan lady with the guitar observed once, “The secret of a long life is knowing when it’s time to go”. By 2008, Helen Clarke must have known that another term would be a guarantee of rapidly diminishing returns. Labour left the country in better shape than they found it and made hay while the economic sun shone. But with a worldwide slump parked outside the door and sounding its horn, Labour went out with their standing undiminished and Clarke herself pulled off the rare trick of avoiding the traditional shame, failure and disgrace that usually ends a political career.

What I do find sad however is that her party then went and lumbered the capable and intelligent Phil Goff with the thankless task of party leader for the first term on the opposition benches. This is always going to end in tears. Just ask Bill English, he knows what that feels like and where it all leads.
Any party fresh out of office after a good run is going to spend a bit of time dealing with internal stresses and fractures as it rebuilds itself for next time. In less stable countries it may well be possible to unseat a new government after a single term but here in sane, sensible New Zealand it would take some serious weirdness on the part of any party to be fated to just a single term. This, I feel, is something for which we should be very, very grateful, no matter how much we may want our party of choice back in.
So labour might have been better handing that thankless job to a safe, but ultimately disposable, pair of hands like Michael Cullen. He was quitting anyway so why not have him sit out the first three years before handing the refreshed and detoxed party back to Goff for a better run at it in ’14? That way he could have worn the generous splatterings of manure that the Shane Jones and Chris Carter debacles threw about and no harm done.

Still, the generally dignified and intelligent campaign that Labour has run this time around stands in stark contrast to the ill tempered outpourings of their so called ‘Supporters’. I have had to give up on Facebook over the last few weeks as the incessant stream of trashy bile and vitriol issuing from disgruntled Labour and Green types is making me queasy. Can it be that the ugliness that we’ve seen in America from the so called tea party is becoming the default setting for people whose particular political preferences are not being adequately catered to just at the moment? I really hope not. But there it all is…Equating your opponent with Hitler? Check. Describing them in hateful terms? Check. Wailing that the incumbent is ‘Destroying the country and all it stands for’? Check. Behaving like spoiled and stupid redneck BABIES just because the party you happen to like just doesn’t have any traction right now? Check. It’s got so bad I’m waiting for some idiot to start raving about John Key’s bloody BIRTH CERTIFICATE next.
Sit down, Grow up, Shut up.

So how are National doing? Apart from astoundingly well by all appearances? Actually, they are doing horribly. Cast your mind back to the appalling spectacle of our new Prime Minister arriving at his victory rally flanked by huge goons and delivering a speech that had me for one convinced that he’d spent the last hour or so face down over a glass topped coffee table building up his self esteem with certain proscribed stimulants?

It was not a pretty sight. (I should point out that I am not saying that our new PM really did indulge in class A drugs on election night, merely that he looked and behaved as if he had done so, which in this day and age is just as bad).

So began the dangerous Cult of Personality which, let’s face it, will be Mr Key’s undoing in the long run. When a leader becomes bigger than the party he leads then the elections become increasingly presidential and the leadership style itself gets harder and harder to control. Public appearances become increasingly embarrassing and the rest of the cabinet begin to look less like a hard working team and more like the entourage of some fatuous Hollywood A-Lister.

Still, it seems that enough voters in this country are actually watching the extensive foreign coverage that the age of the internet affords us and have decided that while John Key has an unctuousness about him that may be slightly unsettling, the bleak economic woes of the world are such that the National Party are probably the best option for New Zealand at present. Oh yes, and here comes the moaning chorus, “Moan moan, whinge whinge, asset sales, moan moan, environmental stuff, bitch bitch, not FAIR, moan moan….”
Well sorry, but that’s just what a workable majority of people seem to feel right now so don’t blame me.

Suddenly, from my left, (Indeed from most people’s Left) comes an aroma of incense and herbal tea. Can it be the newly energised Green Party? Indeed it can. If any party really deserves to look a bit pleased with themselves this time around it’s the Greens. Their polling has been impressive, though how much of their new support will revert to Labour next time remains to be seen. Right now they look set to gain large chunks of the new parliament and I wish them well with it.
But would I vote for them?
Not really. You see beneath all those carefully cultivated bland smiles and caring cuddly personas I can’t help but detect a whiff of something a tad more sulphurous. The thing is guys, I remember you from the Student Union thirty years back. Not you exactly of course, but your general type. You had ‘Atomic energy, No Thanks’ badges and horrible woolly hats. You smelled of patchouli and took the writings of Marx seriously. You gave off a beastly aura of smug, sanctimonious self righteousness, rode stupid bicycles and you never, ever shut up whining at parties when decent folk were trying to get drunk.
I didn’t trust you back then and I still don’t now. One on one you are delightful people of course but get you in a group and I just can’t help but find you toxic. I well remember back in 2002 when Whathisname with the silly hair came over for an electoral meeting at the Surfdale Hall. What a thick fug of self congratulation and mutual back patting was there! Then I stood up and asked a question that wasn’t in the script. Nandor himself fielded the question with ease but the venom from the rest of the room would, in any other circumstances, have been a bit scary. Luckily of course you were a bunch of old hippies so I was able to leave unscathed.

Why do I suddenly have the urge to paraphrase John Lennon?

‘You have spin doctored smiles when you speak on TV,
And you try to show caring and credibility,
But you’re still hard left zealots as far as I can see…..’

Oh don’t mind me girls and boys. I’m just a nasty old Libertarian at heart and you are welcome to bale me up at the Ostend market and tell me how flat wrong I am on pretty much everything. I won’t mind.

Anyway, time is marching on and the TV coverage of the event is going to start soon so I’d better get this wrapped up and posted before the huge caffeine buzz I have going wears off and I decide to moderate some of my more vexatious observations. I’ve just heard that some poor mad bloke has blown his car up in Wellington. Good going that chap. Now let the local bobbies take you back to their place and find you a nice long flight of stairs to fall down…..

I could blither all day about the other parties but I’ll just content myself by saying I hope Peter Dunn finally gets a good kicking at the polling booths and that I firmly believe that if Honi Harawera and I were ever to sit down together over a few cleansing ales we’d get on like a house on fire.

Let me conclude for now by saying that ultimately I love THE GAME better than I love the individual players and that if politics in this country gives me hours of delirious pleasure then I have proportional representation to thank for it. MMP is quite simply the best thing to have happened in New Zealand and if you were so lost to common sense as to have voted to remove it then you are a fool, and an ass and a prating coxcomb a you don’t deserve a vote.

Now, sit back, pour yourselves a tall glass of something tasty and let the coverage begin.

The council are asking us for our thoughts on this matter, they have even produced this sweet consultation document printed on nice wholemeal paper, that asks us some questions.  Its almost as if we have a choice, or a chance to influence the process.

You can read the documents and download submission forms here: http://tinyurl.com/awmmp and you can also pick up a summary at the Waiheke Resources Trust office in Oneroa.

The headlines are:

• Disposer pays for household refuse, but not recyclables, or organic waste.
• Everyone gets wheelie bins which count how often they are used (exceptions for Gulf Islands – Waiheke gets both bins and bags)
• Recyclables are still co-mingled – broken glass and paper together.
• A weekly organic collection (green and food waste)
• and some changes to the inorganic collection.

The Zero Waste website http://www.zerowaste.co.nz/whats-nz-doing/get-involved-auckland-councils-proposed-waste/
Will give you a good run down of the proposals and what is good and bad about each of them.

Please read that link as I am not going to use this blog to go over what is wrong with wheelie bins and co-mingling again. I want to look at just how non-aspirational this plan actually is.

Sadly although the plan is a step forward from the current state for most suburbs It is really flawed, its just not that obvious at first because they get to ask the questions of you – instead of the other way around. Its basically a big con – and to see that all you have to do is follow the money.

The headline aspiration is Zero Waste, That sounds brilliant, who could be against producing no waste?  But wait, what do they actually mean by zero waste – not much it seems, they mean that they want to reduce the proportion of household waste collected that goes to landfill by 30% by 2018.  So leaving aside for the moment the fact that household waste is only 17% of the total amount of stuff thrown away.  All we are talking about is burying a bit less and recycling a bit more.
As far as I can tell – if the council achieves all its aims it still won’t achieve the level of quality recycling found on Waiheke when we had CleanStream.

Still every bit counts doesn’t it? The less that goes to landfill the more that gets recycled – and recycling is good yes?

Well no.

Lets step back a moment and get the bigger picture.  What really matters is the total amount of energy used and the total amount of pollution produced in the whole process.  And perhaps the total amount of money spent in the process – who pays and who profits.

Lets take this plastic water bottle.
The plastic is made from polyethelene – a petrochemical – i.e Oil.  To make it required energy – i.e more oil, to ship it to the factory from china – oil, to truck it to the supermarket – oil and to get it home – more oil.  That’s a lot of oil to get something that falls on my roof and then comes straight out of my tap.  So when I buy it I pay, I pay an amount that represents the whole oil fuelled economy up to the supermarket – plus a few cents extra for the water inside.

So maybe I refill it a couple of times, before throwing it away, and lets say I put it in my recycle bin.  A truck comes and picks it up (oil), ships it to south Auckland (oil)  where it is sorted by machines (more oil) and then away to another plant (probably in China – a whole ton of oil) where it can be melted down and made into another plastic bottle (oil) or is perhaps just burnt to run the plant (Carbon emissions).   Then off it goes back around the loop.  That’s if the plastic gets made into another bottle,  More likely each trip around the loop the plastic is down-cycled, turned into something lower grade – like black bin bags, or fuel for incinerators.  Eventually after delivering just a few drinks of water that plastic bottle has to end up somewhere – floating in the ocean, buried in landfill – maybe in someone else’s country, or burnt up, releasing its carbon into the atmosphere along with all the carbon from all the processes and trips encountered during its lifetime.

Lets hammer that point home.  Everything that leaves your hand and hits that bin represents energy expended in its creation, and energy to expend in its disposal – one way or another that object is going to end up as some form of pollution.

Who gets to pay for all this – you and I do – after all we are the only ones in the loop shelling out any money.  And our children will too – because there will be a whole lot of hidden environmental costs that they will have to clean up too.

All recycling takes energy – its better than not recycling only because in theory it costs less energy to re-use hydrocarbons, steel, aluminium etc than to extract it out of the ground in the first place.  And because dumping stuff in holes in the ground pollutes water supplies and uses up valuable holes in the ground.

Really you need to think about not creating the waste in the first place.   Remember the mantra – Reduce, Reuse, Recycle? – its that way around for a reason.
Clearly I can replace that plastic water bottle with an aluminium flask that I could probably use for the rest of my life. Or I could just drink my water in a ceramic cup out of the tap.

The WMMP is constructed to only let you think about waste minimisation at the disposal stage. Clearly a serious plan would think about waste minimisation at the creation stage.

Another example – organic waste.
Who hasn’t had a meal, stuffed the left overs in the fridge and forgotten about them until too late, Who hasn’t had yogurts go out of date, or bananas go rotten.  We all have occasions where food gets thrown away.  Even enviro greenies growing their own garden veges have clippings, leaves, cores, skins etc that can’t be eaten.
If this stuff ends up in your everyday refuse bag – and then goes to the landfill it will biodegrade wonderfully – producing in the process quite a lot of methane gas and associated yucky gloop.  Now while there are some landfills that catch that gas and use it for electricity – ( I helped build one once). For the most part it just seeps out – the gas into the atmosphere, the gloop into the water.   Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas, so along with those cow farts your rotten banana skin is doing its little bit for climate change. (although most of that took place in getting it to you in the first place).

So it is great that in the plan the council will provide you with a small bin you can use for your food and green waste, and will collect it weekly so it doesn’t get too smelly.  After that they will drive it all somewhere (oil again) and, compost it, then drive it to a garden shop (oil)  where you can buy it back again.  They might not even compost it – instead using it as fuel for a small energy plant – great eh, slightly less oil gets used and the carbon ends up in the atmosphere anyway.

Or you could just put it in a compost bin in your garden – save all that oil and get your own compost.   Or if you don’t have space or quite enough waste to keep a compost heap going you could use Bokashi – basically a pickle barrel that does a similar job.

So again the solution offered is to collect, and dispose, out of site out of mind,  Instead of teaching people how to create less organic waste in the first place, and how to manage it themselves.

Researchers have found that if you can’t see how much waste you are producing then it is easier for you to produce more.  Or put the other way around – when people are asked to weigh the amount of food waste they produce they then start to produce less, sometimes a lot less.

You see – This is not really about waste minimisation at all – its about money,  who gets to make some money out of the whole system and how can they maximise their profit. That lovely consultancy document is actually someones business plan.

Making all the bins alike, using bins rather than bags, using complex RFID counters, co-mingling, routing all recycling through a central processing plant.  These are all steps that allow a company to start to build a monopoly business in waste management.   They all make it harder for competition to enter the market.

That monopoly gets paid for the amount of waste that it processes, It gets paid to collect stuff, paid to move stuff, paid to sort stuff and then gets to sell the stuff as well.  The only person who is paying in this loop is you the householder. either directly or through the amount the taxes and rates pays on your behalf.

Such a company’s fundamental incentive therefore is to have as much stuff going around that loop as possible.  That’s why the bins are so big – It hides just how much stuff you are throwing away.  It makes it possible for you to feel good about recycling while making them a fat profit, and increasing the GDP of the country.  Now really I’ve no problem with someone making a profit for performing a good service – My issue is when what makes good business sense to them – makes bad sense to the environment.

At the end of the day – everything that you throw away represents energy expended and at some point in the future – water pollution and greenhouse gases.  So unless the plan gives a strong incentive for EVERYONE involved to reduce the TOTAL amount of waste in circulation we are actually going to get the opposite effect.  Yes there might be a reduction in landfill – but there will be an increase in energy used and pollution generated.

Any guess what – when oil doubles or triples in price – this business model is going to go bust anyway. That whole lot of driving stuff around just won’t make sense.

A real plan would move from householder pays to producer pays  - where the companies that put all this stuff together in the first place – the excess packaging, the unnecessary bags, bottles, cans, uneaten, inedible food etc.

A real plan would reward me more – for using less stuff.  For buying a big bag of beans and learning to cook instead of canned baked beans.  For learning how to not have to throw food away.  For learning how to do my own compost and grow my own tomatoes.

A real plan would allow local communities to create local solutions, rewarded for overall gains in sustainability, energy and pollution reduction.  It would encourage local boards to establish by-laws restricting disposable bottles, or requiring deposit returnable bottles.

So Auckland Planners – I’m giving you a C+ for a first effort. Now go back and work out what it would take to get an A.

Unfortunately I was unable to attend the candidates meeting on the island last weekend. And from what I hear it was so busy that it would have been hard to get a word in anyway. So perhaps its best that I send my questions in by email and allow for a more thoughtful and considered answer. Of course I am hoping that I will have more success with my local candidates than Radio NZ had with the National Party.

Here is the question I sent them it is about the Transpacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA), if this new free trade deal is new to you you can find out more at http://tppwatch.org/what-is-tppa/

The GATT and NAFTA trade deals were disastrous for workers in the countries involved, with job losses, environmental degradation, human exploitation and debt growth.  The only beneficiaries have been a few multinational companies.

The TPPA restricts our ability to set laws that govern the behaviour of corporations,  It allows their business interests to be set over our public interest. Their profits over our health and environment.

• What is your party’s policy on such trade deals?
• What is your personal opinion?
• If elected will you commit making free trade negotiations transparent?
• Will you count the costs and benefits for all citizens not just businesses?
• And will you commit to a referendum on any treaty that affects our sovereignty and democracy?

Here is the reply from Labour’s Jacinda Ardern:

Dear Andrew

Thanks for sending through your questions that you were intending to ask at the candidates forum. It’s a shame that you were unable to make the meeting, but I’m more than happy to answer your queries regarding the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement.

In terms of our party’s policy, the Labour Party supports moving forward with the TPPA, however, having said that, we do not support signing it at all costs.

An example of an issue that we are concerned may be put in jeopardy by the TPPA is the future of Pharmac. I believe that the negotiations thus far have the potential to jeopardise New Zealand’s ability to purchase pharmaceuticals at a good price and we are concerned that multinational pharmaceutical corporations may exert extraordinary pressure on the government to change Pharmac in its current form. Binding pharmaceutical prices is a move that would only be advantageous for multinational corporations, not for New Zealanders . For us, it’s about making sure that New Zealand doesn’t have its sovereignty negotiated away in a trade agreement.

We’re also committed to making any such negotiations transparent and accountable to all New Zealanders. In April of 2011, we supported a petition asking for a Foreign Affairs Select Committee hearing into the potential implications for New Zealand of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade talks. The petition, which was signed by significant groups such as the Council of Trade Unions, Oxfam and the Public Health Association, amongst others, asked that the relevant Select Committee convened a hearing into the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations, and sought to provide a greater openness and transparency around the negotiating process and content.

Ultimately, Labour is of the belief that Trade agreements must work for Kiwis and for kiwi interests. We support greater transparency around trade talks and, in government, we would ensure that the views of those who had real interests in the impact of such talks had their voices heard.

Hopefully this response has answered your queries. If you’re interested in learning more about Labour’s policy in regards to Trade, you can read more about it at http://www.ownourfuture.co.nz/trade.

Kind regards,

Jacinda Ardern

Here is the reply from The Green’s Denise Roche, Mainly passing on a policy statement from Russel Norman:

Hi Andrew and Millie – this responds to your question about the TPPA I think. I guess I’d add that the Greens are the only party that has consistently challenged the government on this issue because we recognise that a secret agreement of this nature is a threat to our country’s sovereignty. Labour were suspiciously silent about it this term because they started the negotiations in their last term. I do hope you’ll be getting answers from both Nats and Labour on this issue.

Denise Roche
Auckland Central Electorate Green Party Candidate

Key must come clean about TPP before election

John Key needs to be absolutely clear with the New Zealand public before the election about what is being traded off in the interest of signing the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Green Party Co-leader Dr Russel Norman said today.

The deadline for the end of negotiations by the end of next year was announced by President Obama at the APEC meeting in Honolulu this morning New Zealand time.

“John Key needs to release the position papers so that in the lead up to the election New Zealanders know what he is giving away in the name of a trade deal,” Dr Norman said.

“It is ridiculous the Governments we are negotiating with have been given these documents, but the people of New Zealand are being kept in the dark.

“It is worrying that Key is promising the sale of our state assets while at the same time giving big rights to foreign companies operating here in New Zealand.”

Dr Norman said the US proposals would open up Government decision making to litigation from United States attorneys in World Bank Courts behind closed doors.

“Signing an agreement in secret that would weaken New Zealand’s sovereignty is not in our long term interests,” said Dr Norman.

“This is no ordinary trade deal. It is less about getting market access for our products and more about giving new rights to foreign companies that will undermine good Kiwi initiatives like Pharmac.

“We will be seeking to ensure the transparency of these negotiations,” Dr Norman said.

And here is the reply from Nikki Kaye of the National Party …

”  ”

Thats right – nothing, nada, not a sausage.  Too busy to reply, or doesn’t know the answer.  Just another example of say nothing, get elected and then you can do as you please because you have a mandate.  - more about that issue at: http://andrew.avowkind.net/nikki-kaye-and-the-no-reply-zone

However we can let this recent press release from the PM stand in for Nikki in this instance:

PM welcomes significant Pacific trade deal progress

Prime Minister John Key has welcomed today’s announcement of the broad outlines for the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade agreement, and hailed it as an important step towards gaining greater access for New Zealand exporters.

The agreement was announced at a meeting of the nine countries in the TPP hosted by US President Barack Obama on the fringes of the APEC summit on Honolulu.

“This is a significant step in the TPP negotiation process,” says Mr Key.  “Having all nine countries, including New Zealand, agreeing on the broad outlines for an agreement is very important.

“We have always pushed for lower trade barriers.  It is good for our exporters, good for economic growth, and good for New Zealand.

“Today’s announcement signals that there is a strong political commitment from each country to conclude this free trade agreement.

“I look forward to the detailed negotiations to come making substantial progress towards the final goal of a high-quality, comprehensive trade agreement.”

So its clear that they are for it – at least in the general mom and apple pie sense.  Of course the issue lies in the details.

“What do you mean Miss?”

“I’m sorry, I’ve been stuck on a train for the last three days. I have a cold, pneumonia, malaria and piles not to mention emotional disorders to numerous to count. I wish to register a complaint.”

“We’re just closing for lunch…”

“Never mind that my lad. I wish to complain about the transport system what I purchased not four years ago from this very Council.”

“Oh yeah…The er, ‘Auckland Transport Network”? Wot’s wrong wiv it?

“I’ll tell you what’s wrong with it my lad. It’s Buggered. That’s what’s wrong with it.”

“Nah…It’s not buggered. Someone pressed the emergency button that’s all.”

“Look matey, I know a buggered transport system when I see one and I’ve been stuck on one for the last three days.”

“Nah, nah…It’s not buggered, it’s ‘Undergoing Maintenance’. Lovely system the Auckland Transport Network. Look at Britomart Station! Beautiful décor!”

“The décor don’t enter into it. It’s NOT WORKING!”

“Course it’s working!”

“All right. If it’s working, let’s try going somewhere. ‘Come on train! Let’s go to Eden Park! Eden Park I said! Come on!!!!!’ Now that’s what I call a buggered transport network.”

“There! It moved!”

“No it didn’t. That was you rocking the carriage!”

“I never!”

“Yes you did!”

“No! I never did anything!”

“Ello Transport System! Testing, Testing, Testing. This is meant to be the the 12.15 to Newmarket! Are we actually going anywhere! Now that is what I call a buggered transport system.”

“You broke it just as it was leaving!”

“Now look mate, I’ve definitely had enough of this. This transport system is completely and utterly buggered. And when we bought it not four years ago at colossal expense you assured us that it’s complete lack of movement was due to scheduled track maintenance at Panmure and a weta having eaten a junction box at Henderson.”

“Yeah, well, that ‘appens don’t it? Lovely station Britomart. Beautiful décor.”

“Look. I took the liberty of examining that train and I found the main reason it wasn’t moving was it didn’t have an engine at the front of it.”

“Well, we ‘ad to take the engine off didn’t we? I mean, if we’d put an engine on it it would have been getting people to their destinations so fast they’d be there before they left if you follow my meanin’. Close the doors and VOOOOM.”

“Voooooom? Mate, this train system wouldn’t voooom if you put four million volts through it….”

“Funny you should mention that Guv. We were planning on doing exactly that as soon as we can afford it. You ‘aven’t got a spare half billion on you do you? All these bribes….I mean ‘Consultants Fees’ we ‘ave to keep paying don’t half mount up. But you got to admit, as transport systems go it LOOKS beautiful.”

“Yes but it don’t work!!! It’s a wreck, bereft of use it lies there rusting. It has ceased to be. Even the bloody Superflyte doesn’t break down as often as this! It used up all our money and now all it does is get closed for maintenance every five minutes assuming it’s not RAINING in which case it closes down completely. THIS IS A BUGGERED TRANSPORT SYSTEM!”

“Oh….Well we’d better replace it then.”

“Don’t bother. I’ll take my car next time.”