Posts by merc
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Collecting your own rainwater is banned in Auckland, no? In fact they charge us to take it away. As for their partners, well aren't they all going to be looking for money from someone? This is the sham, everybody going to be borrowing to get on the gravy train, except us that is, because you know, needs to be said, John, it isn't your cash man, or your assets, or your water even, it's all ours baby. And your Govt. is borrowing truckloads right now to simply keep afloat - elephant meets room.
The system they are using is age old, just like the east to west railway competition in America, just wait until the tenders don't come out.
Oh that's right, Fletcher got it all.
Lilith, on all those points I think we know where John really stands - fence meets post. -
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Lilith __,
I get the heeb when his scriptwriter comes across all folksy.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Sacha,
Hard to find funds when you don't know what they are for, no? I can see the trip to the mystery money person now...I need money for some stuff that I am waiting to be told what it's for.
Ideologically Gerry has a conundrum. How you you privatise the profit and socialise the debt when your boss says no one owns water but your Govt. created ECan? -
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Sacha,
ECan shows you.
Presumably using Powerpoint.
-
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Hebe,
You mean like toilets? Goody. Not sure whether the CERA laws give the govt the power to make the council sell assets ; and what happens if the "suggestions" are ignored.
They ain't sayin" ;-)
The whole issue revolves around who is prepared to pay for what. There will never be notified clarity round this, as there can then be no informed debate as to what is and what is not required.
When you have nothing to evaluate against, everything is a wish list. And they know it, this was by the way, how the west was won. -
Hard News: Christchurch: Is "quite good"…, in reply to Hebe,
John says his Govt. (sic) will pay for public amenities. John just hasn't said what they are yet. Gerry says sell, he just hasn't said what yet.
Seriously, these two are more weird than Dick and Bush. -
Gerry says sell.
-
Legal Beagle: Presuming innocence, in reply to Graeme Edgeler,
Ah thank you, yes I read the Law Commission report in part, a lot has been done since 1999, and in the main the system seems to me to work.
Perhaps my issue is that one cannot legislate around political interference. The obvious one about it possibly not being in the interest of a private practice to discontinue a prosecution is probably mitigated by the collected experience of these types of practice.
Swings and roundabouts perhaps. -
Police felt it necessary to publicly state that they had no concerns about the validity of complaint.
The Police become political pawns with these acts of publicly stated feelings. NZ, correct me if I am wrong has a unique situation in this regard and that of their ability to hire private lawyers for enacting public prosecutions. In the past this has allowed for the question as to impartiality on the part of those who may be chosen for such a service.
As in the Thomas case the hired prosecuting lawyer had to follow the evidence trail as posited by the Police (the cartridge case for one). We all know the outcome.
However would a DA situation improve matters? Probably not because the NZ Police have such a history in NZ, I don't see it possible to change it.
http://www.nzlii.org/nz/other/nzlc/report/R66/R66-4_.html may be apposite, need to read just wanted to get the link in before the PAS statute on comment editing limitations came into force ;-) -
Hard News: John Banks: The volunteer did…, in reply to Sacha,
Seriously, how do the Police justify not laying charges and letting a court judge the matter?
That's the problem with the system right there, they don't. Bought and paid for.