Saturday, 25 February 2012

Is McCully being treasonous ? You decide...

Has the Beehive moved to Washington? 

I recieved this:

Hon Murray McCully
Minister of Foreign Affairs
Parliament Buildings
Fax (04)8176510
Dear Ministers,

I have just learned that this Friday US time in Washington DC the New Zealand Ambassador to the United States, Mike Moore, is co-hosting on behalf of the Ambassadors to the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations a corporate lobbying event, which is sponsored jointly by PhRMA, Philip Morris International, Chevron and Target.
The event is promoted as an ‘exclusive reception is a unique gathering of Governors and other top state officials, select US trade officials, Ambassadors and key embassy personnel from large US trading partners, and businesses reliant on the expansion of international trade. This reception is designed to establish and strengthen the critical personal connections at the highest levels of state/government with embassy and industry representatives to lay the foundations for growth in two-way trade, foreign direct investment, and strengthened economic ties.’

As you will be aware, PhRMA has launched a concerted attack on New Zealand’s Pharmac scheme through the TPP negotiations and New Zealand’s negotiators have taken a very strong position in resisting the industry-driven text that has been tabled by the USTR on intellectual property, transparency and technical barriers to trade.

 You will also be aware that New Zealand is a signatory to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Article 5.3 of that Convention obliges the government ‘in setting and implementing their public health policies with respect to tobacco control, Parties shall act to protect these policies from commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry in accordance with national law’. Co-hosting a lobbying event in which a tobacco company that operates in New Zealand clearly violates the intention of the Article.

I have just been informed that the Australian ambassador has declined the invitation to attend the event as being inappropriate, especially given the investor-dispute launched by Philip Morris against Australia’s law on plain packaging of tobacco.

I urge you to instruct New Zealand’s ambassador that his participation is equally inappropriate and to withdraw his agreement to co-sponsor the event and not to attend.

Yours sincerely,

Professor Jane Kelsey

Here is one persons reaction to Jane Kelsey concern that is no doubt a real concern for most thinking New Zealanders and I agree completely with its suggestion that McCully and Moores behavour borders on treason...

Greetings everyone,

Today I received the message above from TPP Watch an hour too late to email a response (Jane Kelsey sent the message at 8.45am and letters had to be faxed or emailed to Ministers Groser & McCully’s before noon; I didn't see it until 1pm).  Why last minute?  Because we weren't supposed to know about Mike Moore's meeting at all.  I nonetheless sent the following brief but clear message to Tim Groser:
Tim,  Mike Moore should not be meeting with the very American corporates that are undermining our health. PhRMA?  Philip Morris?  This is madness.  I am not alone in thinking of this as treasonous.  You are acting on behalf of the 1%.  Wake up!  You're selling us out!
I am hopeful that Mr Groser will take issue with the term "treasonous" or the notion of "...selling us out."  If he does, our email exchange will go public.  I'm so annoyed that I may send it to the press, the Greens, whether or not he takes issue. 

It seems to me that we need to have another look at how we define treason.  The Crimes Act (1961) is now fifty years old.  It was passed at a time of relative innocence--before the mass realisation that multinational corporations are global predators. 

Now fancying themselves part of the "elite", our so-called leaders are actively working against the will of the people they govern and colluding with sinister offshore interests.  This is treasonous because it will do major long-term damage to our health, safety and possibly national security for generations to come.

At present, the term "traitor" has no teeth; because of its very narrow definition in the Crimes Act, it is merely a "slur" against officials in power who are perceived as acting against the interest of their constituents and their country.

The problem actually lies at the much deeper level of how we perceive reality.  We call people whose behaviour does not mesh with social reality and are a serious threat to the health, welfare and safety of others "criminally insane."

If there is broad social consensus on such fundamental issues as

-the safety of offshore oil drilling (Chevron)

-the health and safety of cigarettes (Philip Morris)

-the right to choose our medications and health supplements (PhARM)

and most New Zealanders are aware these will have a negative impact on human health and the health of our global environment, what will be the consequences of giving carte blanche to these and other corporations...including Monsanto, perhaps the most toxic and destructive corporation on the planet, whose products contain microorganisms with the potential to create worldwide famine?  Could giving these companies rights to dictate terms under a "free" trade agreement be considered sane and in our country's best interests? 

Are the Nats helping American corporations to help themselves to chunks of NZ?  Consider how Warner Bros. dictated employment terms to the Beehive over the Hobbit strike in 2010.  If the TPP is signed, there is nothing to prevent Monsanto, Dow, (or any of the corporations that have systematically destroyed America) from doing the same thing here; in short, we will give up our sovereignty for thirty pieces of silver.  

It follows that one could be excused for thinking that National Party pols are betraying Aotearoa-New Zealand, and the Maori Party pols in their greed are "in" as long as they get their share of the spoils.  Historically, the accusation of treason towards a group of people has been a unifying political message; however a`propos our current situation that accusation may be, there is nothing in the Crimes Act that supports it.

What constitutes a "verifiable treasonable action" needs to be reviewed, and the term redefined in a 21st Century context to include intentional collaboration with offshore interests in ways that adversely affect the people of Aotearoa-New Zealand or conscious acts that serve to undermine our nation's sovereignty.  It is small comfort that in
Dante's Inferno, the ninth and lowest circle of Hell is reserved for traitors.

Thursday, 23 February 2012

Lombard Directors Guilty but will they get punished?

Will justice be done? That's the question. 

Wheeler’s Corner got it spot on last week when it called on the government to consider stripping Sir Roger Douglas, Sir Douglas Graham and Sir Michael Fay of their knighthoods, now the person who forced Sir Douglas Graham into court is calling for the same thing…why because: This from the news media...

"Two former justice ministers Sir Douglas Graham and Bill Jeffries have been found guilty on four of five charges relating to their role in the collapse of the Lombard finance group.
But it would seem that the Judge [Robert Dobson] has no plans to give these guilty men any jail time, it would appear that jail time is reserved for shoplifters, speeding motorists, but not for white, aged rich males. The guilty four are very lucky that they are not Maori…

"Graham, knighted for his contribution to the Treaty of Waitangi settlements process, was reportedly visibly shaken by the verdict, delivered in the High Court in Wellington on Friday morning by Judge Robert Dobson against four Lombard directors: Graham, Jeffries, Lawrie Bryant, and Michael Reeves.
"All were released on bail without conditions after an eight-week trial that wrapped up earlier this month and involved some of the highest-profile professional directors to get caught up in the widespread collapses of finance companies as the New Zealand property market went sour and the global financial crisis hit.
The charges relate to making untrue statements in a 2007 prospectus, investment statement and advertising material.
Lombard went into receivership in April 2008, owing about $127 million to 4400 investors.
The four charges successfully prosecuted related to registration of a prospectus that omitted to disclose the company's deteriorating cash position, advertising in December 2007 seeking investors for various types of unsecured notes and debenture stock”.

We should not forget that Lombard was, when compared to some of the outfits that Smirky [John Key] worked for, a minor player in the business of ripping off, people, states and even countries.

Smirky buys support for Asset Sales...Maori Party leaders cave in...

Co-Leaders steer Nat's course. 

The Maori Party moves true to form, after a rousing haka, they then did their usual and decided that a cabinet position with the so-called mana that goes with those positions is far more important than principle in the world of politics.

Smirky Key’s has once again made them eat humble pie and brought them off in his usual and well practiced style. Ponzi artists like Smirky are well practiced at buying off opposition to get their own way.

The Maori Party and Smirky still have to overcome the fact that 75% of the population doesn’t want the planned sell off of NZ assets, but it would seem that the Maori party leadership now have jumped waka and are now rowing in a different direction. It’s amazing what a bob or two can buy these days.

Could it be correct that our Smirky PM is being paid, by unknown interested parties, to sell off our assets…could this be the real reason why he was selected as the Nat's leader…one could be drawn into this conclusion based on the fact that his whole career has been founded on trading money for big bonuses…

Also it appears his background employment failures or successes have become a ‘no go’ area by our mainstream media. There was no in depth discussion during the entire election campaign on just how Smirky [Key] made his millions.

It is not known exactly what power Smirky and Bill English has over the Maori Party but all the Hui [sometimes misnamed consultation] were almost one hundred percent opposed to Asset Sales yet it was left to the newly formed and growing Mana Party to actually lead the Maori input within the debate, because most Maori Party members knew that their leadership would in the end cave in and ride the wave of their ministerial posts.

But the battle is not over we should all watch this space. But one thing is certain and that is that the Maori Party leadership is on a downward slide to nowhere.

Friday, 17 February 2012

Paul Holmes may he rest in peace.

The man in the middle should disappear.

Paul Holmes: Rest in Peace.

He was born sixty plus long years ago, and self destructed 2012 in a blaze of ignominy and bigotry.

No, he is not physically deceased, just brain dead for he has simply stopped living in today’s New Zealand.

Some years ago when he was with much fanfare dumped from TV One because he highly over valued himself both in money terms, intelligence and in pulling power. He had the opportunity to retire gracefully but alas that is not the way of self proclaimed egotistical gods.

Since that missed chance of being remembered for the odd moment of success, which slipped out of his grasp because of his hugely overstated opinion of his news worthiness. He has chosen instead the path of bluster rather than intelligence as his highway to nowhere.

He has now reached that point.

His red neck, lowest common denominator right wing egotistical talk back telephone style has led him progressively down the path of ignorance and scorn. He now sits below his listeners.
His obvious self-righteousness and superciliousness mis-use of the English language have without doubt led him to behave as a non-swimmer would in the deep end of the local swimming pool. He is in horror mode [as many old white bigots are] as he grasps at straws to survive among a sensationalist but meaningless media dominated by Rupert Murdock style of Australian racism and anti woman clap-trap that ferments this day and age via radio talk back.
He needs a superman style life guard to rescue him from drowning in his own stupidity and unawareness.

Anyone who suggests that ANZAC day remembrance of Gallipoli is an indicator of bravery and heroism needs a lesson in history. ANZAC day is anti war, not pro-war. It is a day we grieve for the dead.
Gallipoli was stuffed up from start to finish. I recognise the bravery that was displayed by individuals as they carried out the insane and idiotic orders of leaders who were not fit to run a kindergarten.
Our military history leads any thinking person to rightly conclude that; New Zealand has become known as a country that fights ‘other people’s wars’… and that has to stop.

Paul Holmes obvious and expressed revulsion of things Maori as indicated in his stupid and childish Herald diatribe about Waitangi day simply proves beyond a shadow of doubt how out of touch he is with our communities.

It really doesn’t deserve comment, as Hone Harawira so elegantly said in his column in the Herald.

The difference between Waitangi day and any day that glorifies war and mass murder is covered in one word, a word that Paul Holmes has long forgotten, and that word is “honesty”.  Paul Holmes may he rest in peace or at least in silence.

Monday, 13 February 2012

Smirky, Dotcom and Greece what do they have in common?

Smirky, Dotcom and Greece

It’s time that our main stream media asked the hard questions about our smirky PM. Instead of highlighting his love of the gay community they could be highlighting his connections to the bankruptcy of Greece.
The companies that employed Smirky were among the leeches that forced and conned their Ponzi style schemes onto the Greek economy by giving massive loans to Greece knowing that they simply could not be repaid.
They did the same in various countries all around the world.
These companies or corporations were not unlike the worms found in the stomachs of sheep that we destroy by the use of a powerful drench. It is a pity that we have yet to invent a drench that will rid the financial world of its stomach worms.
While employees such as smirky took millions in bonuses, the Greek people are now paying the price for that period of maniac financial craziness brought about by greed and so called creative accounting.

We too here paid the price for weak government and open slather financial market place behaviour.

Right now this very same person, now our employee, is looking at sacking thousands of public servants or reducing their wages so as to have them foot the bill for the financial behaviour of a past life. It would be funny if it wasn’t so serious for those at the bottom who as always finish up paying for the wealth gained by the Ponzi artists who are thought by some to be smart financial whiz kids.

What is the difference between Mr. Dotcom and our own Mr. Smirky? I would suggest the major difference is that Mr. Dotcom ripped off the US corporations who the US didn’t want ripped off so they called it theft, while Mr. Smirky’s employers ripped off people and countries that the US were most happy to have ripped off and they called that free enterprise .

In New Zealand we honour and give Knighthoods to those who rip-off people, companies, countries. At least in the UK they took back a knighthood from the old boss of the bank of Scotland. There are some here who should have their knighthoods re-looked at. Douglas, Graham, Fay, etc…but don’t hold your breath. 

Sunday, 12 February 2012

The birth of Mana 2011's big event...for the 99%.

One of the most dramatic events to take place in 2011 was the fall and rise of Hone Harawira. When he quit the Maori Party because of its developing dependence and dysfunctional relationship with the National / Act Party and headed the formation of the Mana Movement no one realised just what a dynamic effect that move would have on both Maori politics and the politics of the have-nots.
Labour which had once been a party which represented [at least in part] the workers but had over the previous 25 or so years destroyed its tenuous so-called connections to the working class. With self interested leaders like Roger Douglas, Richard Prebble and a bunch of other right-wingers wearing a false centre left label, labour became in many cases a dangerous laughing stock and this was proven correct when Douglas and Prebble finally jumped ship and created the now mortally wounded basket case Act Party.

The birth of a Maori Party was meant to bring hope for a better future for not only Maori but for all those whose social position, earning power, educational opportunities and health status had been slashed, degraded or lost under past Labour / National attacks led by both Labours Roger Douglas and Nationals Ruth Richardson. But alas the Maori Party instead of remaining independent became the unashamed bed mate of National and Act and was then captured by the Maori elite.

Once they took that amazing step backward in 2008 their reason for existing became somewhat questionable. Their strange behaviour was the key driver for Hone Harawira to get out of the bed made by the Maori Party leadership, take a hot shower and return to the world of helping people rather than one that made peoples positions both economically and socially more unbalanced. Many felt that this was the only honourable path in both a political and social sense open to him. The outcome of the 2011 election proved this to be the case.

So Mana was born out of that confusion and out of that blend Mana Manawatu is now preparing for the days, weeks, months and years ahead. Mana; with out any government support achieved its first step goals. It helped Hone get reelected both at the Te Tai Tokerau by-election and at the national election a short time later. It also built a solid and well structured frame work that will see its growing number of supporters make a huge impact within all the Maori seats and thereby create a launch pad for the future. In the Manawatu that momentum is continuing toward the 2014 election or for an early election should the present combination of National, Act, Dunne and the Maori Party lose its slim majority. Thus Mana with Pride is but another stride forward in the search for a fair, equal and just society for all New Zealanders, one that seeks to close the ever-widening gap between the haves and the have not’s. I hope that you will continue to assist or join in this worthy goal, all are welcome.

Whanganui Hui a joke...with police over kill.

Visit to Whanganui Hui re section 9 debate.

On a bright sunny day I climbed into my VW and headed off to Whanganui. I had planned to join up with other Mana supporters at the Nats weak attempt at so-called consultation. I wasn’t on my own, Mana supporters from Taranaki, Rangitikei and Whanganui lifted Mana numbers to around thirty.
It was an amazing sight, banners, and flags plus hand made signs abounded.
There were at least thirty Maori Wardens out front and tucked outback around twenty police, we were lucky there were no US Navy Seals or Helicopters or firearms [At least no visible ones].

Deputy PM Bill English arrived in his new super BMW and was quickly ushered indoors by Wi Gardner, who is much chubbier than when I knew him in the military as a young 2nd Lt. He was always a Nat supporter even in those earlier days.

Paul Quin is silent for once!
Once the Hui got underway 15 minutes late and in front of around a hundred plus anti state asset sales people, which was notable by the non appearance of any Maori Party MP’s. I did notice lonely, silent and grumpy Paul Quin [pictured]…. The very vocal National List MP from the Hutt Valley, he was not at all vocal at this Hui…did he get back in?
It was very clear that no one in the room supported Bill English, nor did they believe what he had to say…the biggest thing missing in that room was trust…it simply did not exist, except maybe between Wi Gardner and Bill English…since Bill pays Wi’s wages that’s not hard to understand.
It was obvious that this mis-trust extended well beyond simply National ignoring clause nine in the SOE Act that enshrines Treaty of Waitangi rights in the Act. This deeply felt mis-trust dug deep into the Nats so-called plans relating to water and the protection of our waterways etc.
This mis-trust really driven home, firstly how stupid it was for the Maori Party to climb into bed and prostitute them-selves and secondly it surely proved that Hone Harawira was correct to step away from that strange love/financial relationship.
The Hui proved for me that the Maori Party leadership was acting like sparrows feeding off the crumbs swept onto the floor by the wealthy and greedy Nat diners…
Almost everyone was upset by the short time allowed for consultations and the fact that the Nats had kept the removal of clause 9 hidden during the election campaign…the most important question that wasn’t asked was, ‘Did the Maori Party members know about it before the election”…I don’t imagine we’ll ever get an answer to that question, why because that would take some honesty…and this Hui was anything but honest.  

Wednesday, 8 February 2012

Salesman of the year [2011] awarded to NZ's top smirker...John Key

NZ's Leading smirker...and his protection squad. 

Reflected glory
New Zealanders like hearing nice things about their country, so visitors to NZ are often asked what they think of New Zealand, sometimes even before they’ve actually arrived. In many respects this eager self desire to hear nice things about ourselves is because of the huge and multifaceted insecurity phobia that weighs heavily on many.

We also love to love our so-called winners…

We also love to pick our so-called top performers and put them on the front page so we can heap praise on them and bask in reflected glory.

For example our 2011 salesman of the year…to be in line to win this rather idiotic award needed to be able to successfully do, for example;

  1. Sell coal to New Castle
  2. Sell fridges to Eskimos.
  3. Sell loans to the bankrupt.
  4. Booze to alcoholics
  5. The Act Party to voters and
  6. Peoples own property to themselves…

The 2011 award was given to John [Smirk] Key leader of the National/Act Party and Prime Minister of New Zealand because of his mastery of point’s 1 to five and part way to achieving 6.
Because of this outstanding salesmanship in selling people what they already own; no mean feat, when you consider the magnitude of the sales.

His [John [Smirk] Key’s] behaviour was rather like a car salesman, [A line of work rated just above politicians on the trust measurement scale] turning up on a Saturday morning while you are washing your car and asking you if you would like to buy the car you are washing…
”But I already own the car”, you would naturally reply…
Whereas salesman John. K. would answer, “True, but by selling it to yourself and buying shares in it you can double your profit and turn that into an asset for your future and you can also use that asset to secure a loan to buy another car and you can do all that without paying any tax and you can then sell your shares and not pay any capital-gains tax because we don’t have CGT, he said so quickly that the listener lost track of its meaning.
“But I don’t want to buy another car, I’m happy with the one I’ve already got’, the listener pleaded.
“Well that might be your view, but it’s not mine and I’m an expert at selling peoples assets and taking a commission for doing so”, said our very short tempered PM.

Monday, 6 February 2012

Waitangi, facts vs. Fiction.

Waitangi Day has come and gone but the debate about things Maori continues. It is really strange that those who oppose the Treaty often like to create the picture that the Treaty process somehow bestows on Maori ‘special privileges’ that others don’t receive.

Don Esslemont a broadcaster on AccessManawatu Radio constantly refers to Maori as Part-Maori and also constantly reminds us that he believes in ‘one law for all’. Sometimes I think that he does protest too much. But be that as it may Don of course fails to comprehend the difference between rights and privileges, the rights in the case of Maori were bestowed when the Treaty of Waitangi was signed between 40 Maori leaders and one Englishman on behalf of the Queen. Later the English ignored those rights. Only the rich or royalty have privileges and the rest have rights when they can get them that is.

In spite of the English betrayal, the Maori people and the new [Settlers], for the most part, lived in peace, they intermarried. They fought in all the Wars that NZ entered on behalf of the British Crown and died in their thousands to keep their betrayers in power here and around the world.

Yet after all this they still didn’t demand ‘Special Privileges’, privileges like being able to speak their language in public schools, being able to vote individually on land issues rather than collectively.

As the British racist policy of divide and rule, as practiced throughout their captured territories, decreased and once NZ citizens took control over their own now independent behaviours, NZ as a Nation via its democratic process decided to honour the Treaty between Maori and the British Crown.

The Waitangi Tribunal was the pathway for making progress in that direction; the British apartheid system was at last dead in the water here but remained in South Africa and Australia. In fact the effect of the shift from injustice to justice has been dynamic and even today Scotland is moving to independence from British rule using a similar process. And thousands if not millions of part-Scots are looking forward to a taste of real democracy.

Don in his discussions with himself likes to suggest that those alive today should not be held responsible for the past behaviour and there is some truth in that when dealing with individuals. But the bad behaviour lies and theft was not simply carried out by individuals but by the Crown or the State in its name.

The treaty was signed between two States one Maori and the other British, therefore wrongs can be corrected. There is nothing privileged about that because the States still exists, it hasn’t changed.

Just imagine if this process was followed throughout the British Isles, Canada, and The USA what a fairer and more equal world we would live in.

On the same subject having Grant Miller of the Manawatu Standard [Monday 6th of February 2012] lecturing us on the word Mana was a bit like being taught honesty by Richard Nixon or intelligence by George W Bush or even financial wizardry by an Italian named Ponzi. Grants request for Hone Harawira to control his nephew Wi Popata is also rather strange. Should I hold Grant Miller’s father or uncle responsible for Grants penmanship? Once again Grant creates the impression that Maori are asking for special treatment…they are not, they are simply asking for justice. When have they ever received justice or anything for that matter, without having to protest and fight for it. The PM knew the protest was coming in fact he encouraged it and as we have now seen the main stream media obliged as did the protesters, and to suggest that the protesters are 'less classy citizens' sure proves to me who is racist. Still his item was just an opinion and we are all allowed our opinion, no matter how farfetched.
Grant should read to get a greater perspective on just what Waitangi means I’m sure it would help his education over this subject more that simply reading John Keys press releases…

Mathew Hooten that ex-national party employee and right wing blogger suggests there is no real problem between the Nat’s and the Maori Party and that it’s all the fault of the Unite Union and the Mana Party and that John Key was simply worn out after his lengthy holiday in Hawaii [poor fellow] and that’s the reason why he is not grinning [smirking] lately.

Thursday, 2 February 2012

Should Councils have CEO's and should their salaries be lowered.


In the news of late has been the problems faced in Christchurch, one of these was the agreeing to a massive pay rise for the CEO, the public outcry and then the CEO deciding not to accept the offer in full.

The present system being used by councils to decide the CEO’s salary is both outdated and clearly fails the market style requirements in this day and age.
Using this failed and dated model simply lifts salaries by creating a false picture of just what a council CEO actually does and the value of it. It also leads to ever increasing salary levels which have no connection to actual performance requirements.

Firstly the position is not that of a Chief Executive Officer, it is one of a coordinating and advice nature. So it would better to be called, Chief Coordinating Officer [CCO}.

This is because the various specialist positions presently found directly below the CEO give either specialist advice and or plan the actual activities or recommendations, and are better qualified in both a technical and operational sense.

It is in this area of employment that the real strength of any council rests.

To this end we need to redefine the reward structure for the position [Council CEO or CCO]

Using the market to decide the rewards for a new CEO or CCO position needs a new and more effective process that can achieve the goal of a more balanced and realistic level of remuneration.

I would recommend the following process be seriously considered, it could and would achieve a more realistic and market driven approach to the task of containing the remuneration and therefore ratepayer expense.

  • Call for tenders from individuals who believe they have the skills required and are willing to accept a figure less than that stated below.
  • The key entry point will be based on an individuals’ tender figure which must be below the present salary level of whatever amount your council pays its CEO] 
  • Applicants need to clearly state a figure below that stated above to be considered for an in depth interview.
  • Those who state a figure below that listed above will automatically have a head start over those who tender a higher figure.
  • Applicants will be listed in interview order from the lowest tender up.
  • No tender will be considered if the figure suggested is below the minimum legal figure which is currently $13.24 per hour x 40 x 52 per year. This figure is considered by the government a livable salary.

By using this tender process we will over even a short period of time lower the massive salaries being paid to local government CEO’s and thereby reduce the strain on rate payers who are required to foot the huge salaries being paid at present.

It will also save ratepayers from the huge fees that are being paid to various search organisations which are paid on the bases of a percentage of the salary agreed to.

This is the way the market should work for all those who receive rewards for standard tasks in the management field. Presently some private organisation charge up to three months salary for the position as a fee, others charge a percentage of the total salary, and they always support higher salaries because they gain directly by that support.

This tender process is presently used for the purchase of all services and I consider that the role of a CCO is a service / coordination role.

Possible or present CEO’s / CCO’s who are willing to register themselves as a collective [Union] can have negotiations carried out on their behalf by their elected representatives so long as they comply with the Industrial Relations Act plus the requirements listed above. So the ability to use an agent continues so long as that agent is recognised by all parties to the selection process.

This policy would come into effect once any Government appointee or watch dog has removed. The council needs to have been democratically elected to ensure that the citizen acceptance element is protected. [This clause at present only applies to the Christchurch City Council].

Once introduced the ability of councillors via their councils to offer salaries to their one employee [the CCO] will cease until the tender process has been completed.

CCO’s will be expected to follow this process for all positions they control outside of those presently regulated by agreed collective agreements.

Well there it is folks a dynamic and workable process at designing a acceptable remuneration process that is in line with a market approach as suggested by some of our past and now somewhat disgraced and discarded leadership.

Your feed back on this innovative policy would be highly valued.