Comments following Super-City Fob-Off on Civil Defence Concerns

NB:   SEE PREVIOUS BLOG FOR ISSUES RAISED BUT IGNORED BY THE MEDIA

POINTS RAISED REGARDING NEW ‘SUPER CITY’

1. QUOTE from Super-City Bosses – ‘The new arrangements should strengthen Aucklands ability to respond to an emergency’.

Q.1. NOT guaranteed – only should?

Q.2. Auckland as in ALL Auckland or just Auckland city central?

Q.3. At what level – Regional Group level or local levels?

Q.4 How can it if most CD Centres now are only education and training

centres?
2. QUOTE – ‘All staffing levels have been retained’ – FALSE.

NO operations staff at North Shore. Only education and training staff at most of the other centres – NOT response people.
3. What level of support can Rodney District give when their workload has been tripled by the adding of North Shore’s area and challenges?
4. QUOTE – ‘North Shore to be used as an alternative incident management centre’ !

Q.1 How can it be when they are de-staffing it and removing all the experienced staff?
5. QUOTE – ‘ Local knowledge and the need for motivated well-trained volunteers is very much part of the new arrangements’.

Q.1 Will the existing ones stay with the changes being made?

Getting volunteers is getting harder as the current people leave.
The regional level of management needs improvement but they are destroying the support of the local bases in the process and at who’s lives and expense?

The letter on Civil Defence they REFUSED to Publish (19 August 2010)

North Shore residents could be left unsupported during a civil defence incident. We all have a right to know about the future of civil defence in our city under the new Auckland Council.
"Secret proposals leaked to me, by concerned Civil Defence experts, reveal that the Auckland Transition Agency is proposing to close North Shore’s Civil Defence Operations Centre on East Coast Road.
The leaked documents and proposals show quite clearly that Civil Defence operations will be closed on the North Shore and centres will be only retained at Waitakere, Manukau, Central Auckland and Orewa.
As a former firefighter, I am certain that most North Shore residents will be appalled at being left without emergency support by these secret plans.
North Shore needs its own co-ordinating and operations centre. We need to nurture our Civil Defence volunteers on the Shore, in their own communities. We cannot expect our volunteers to travel to Orewa to train.

The current plans can only ensure that the current high level of Civil Defence readiness will diminish, and that the quarter of a million North Shore residents will receive much less help in an emergency, and the Civil Defence response times will lengthen.

This situation is untenable

What's Wrong with Onewa Rd?

Onewa Road is not working and needs fixing. But the problem is how? I tried addressing this problem back in 1998 when I was an opposition MP. Transit told me at the time that Onewa Road was deliberately congested to stop commuters queuing on the motorway. Further Transit (as it was called then) argued that it was unfair that residents of Northcote, Birkenhead and Beach Haven should have a shorter commuting time, than residents elsewhere, just because they lived closer to the Harbour Bridge.


Obviously this is a ridiculous strategy but identifies the problem we have all had with Onewa Rd. So, when congestion is deliberately created it is hard to get those responsible to reduce it. Many suggestions have come forward including making the T3 a T2 lane, changing traffic light phasing, allowing commuters going to businesses and homes along Onewa Rd to travel in the T3 lane etc.
There are also a number of areas that are worse than others. A major bottle-neck is in the vicinity of the Queen St intersection. Some of the issues were resolved with the addition of the yellow hatched lines that we pushed through against officers' desires. But the traffic lights need co-ordinating with Sylvan Ave and the intersectio by the BP station. I am concerned that the congestion might get worse when the northern lane becomes a T3 as well. This needs to be monitored and acted upon quickly. The most obvious problem is stacking of cars through the intersection and with the T3 lane fewer cars will be able to access Onewa from Queen St.
A further issue is the T3 lane and it is now the only T3 on the Shore. The predicted traffic counts show that about 53% of commuters travel will travel in the current T3 at peak time. So a change to T2 will then ensure that both lanes will be about 50/50 and so the current advantages of the T3 lane will be lost.
The answers lie in a number of areas. Improved public transport from the western side of the motorway is necessary. This includes ferries at Beach Haven and improved services at Northcote and Birkenhead. It also means investment in a bus station or improved bus stop at Highbury to ensure improved services to commuters.

And finally improvements can be gained from monitoring traffic flows, adjusting phasing so that it is synchronised and encouraging changing modes of transport.  An illuminated overhead travel time indication sign would be useful as well.  The construction at Onewa has added to the problems, frustrations and delays. It was supposed to have started during the New Year break when traffic was reduced. However, a number of constraints delayed the start a few months. Hopefully the works, around the Queen St intersection stretch of Onewa, (which I did not support) will finish on time.

North Shore’s Civil Defence Proposals a Disaster in the Making!

“North Shore residents have a right to know about the future of civil defence in our city” said North Shore City councillor and Chair of the Strategy and Finance Committee, Grant Gillon.
"Secret proposals leaked today reveal that the Auckland Transition Agency is proposing to close North Shore’s Civil Defence Operations Centre on East Coast Road," said Grant Gillon.

“Leaked documents and proposals show quite clearly that Civil Defence operations centres will be only retained at Waitakere, Manukau, Central Auckland and Orewa. There is nothing planned for the North Shore!”
“I am certain that most North Shore residents will be appalled at being left without emergency support by these secret plans, says former firefighter and North Shore City Councillor Grant Gillon.

The North Shore Civil Defence Operations Centre on East Coast Road is reputed to currently have the most resources in the region. It is elevated high on a ridge providing excellent communications. It has a specially designated building on, and its elevation allows it to avoid disasters such as tsunamis.
The Rodney facility is just above sea level, on a flood plain and has difficult radio reception around its territory.
North Shore is the 4th largest city in the country and yet the Transition Agency is looking to Orewa to run our emergencies. There are only two main road accesses between the two communities, both of which could be severed creating access issues. Both Waitakere and Auckalnd Central also have only one main access via bridges.

“North Shore needs its own co-ordinating and operations centre. We cannot expect our volunteers to travel to Orewa to train. We need to nurture our Civil Defence volunteers on the Shore, in their own communities.

The current plans can only ensure that the current high level of Civil Defence readiness will diminish,

That the quarter of a million North Shore residents will receive much less help in an emergency, and

The Civil Defence response times will lengthen

This situation is untenable” said Dr Gillon.

Response to NST Letter 17th August 2010

Dear sir,


I write to correct the misinformation printed in August 17th edition by a Rebecca Thomas who I understand is Councillor Lisa Whyte’s sister.

A quick check of the many minutes on the swimming pool issue will show that I have not ‘consistently voted against the recommended option’ as claimed.

In fact, what I have done is consistently and successfully argued for guaranteed minimum levels of public access and at prices no higher than charged at other North Shore pools. This is important in any public pool in which ratepayers have invested even if the pool has been developed in partnership with another entity.
However, I am not surprised that there is a level of misinformation on this and other subjects as this Council has been beset from the beginning by a small group of councillors who have used central government-style, oppositional tactics to frustrate many good projects in our communities.

Watercare Must Come Clean!

"North Shore and other residents across the region have a right to know what plans Watercare has to increase their water costs." North Shore City councillor and Strategy and Finance Committee Chairman Dr. Grant Gillon said today.
"Auckland Mayor John Banks let the cat out of the bag this week when he revealed details of a secret Watercare briefing that will see water charges skyrocket on the North Shore in 18 months time," said Dr. Gillon.
"Watercare is owned by the ratepayers, and it is obscene to have a bunch of Watercare bureaucrats cooking up plans for a new regional water charging regime behind closed doors without letting the public in on their big secret."

"Insiders suggest that they are planning to roll out the user-pays charging used in Auckland City onto the North Shore and elsewhere, severely penalising families and people with pools and gardens, around half of all North Shore residents."

"Waiting for the Watercare plans to be rubber stamped by the new Auckland Council is simply a device to remove the issue from proper public scrutiny in the election, and Watercare must come clean with ratepayers over their plans, and not just give a secret briefing to one of the Mayoral candidates."

"We actually have John Banks to thank for 'outing' Watercare. It is now up to Watercare to let the rest of us in on their big secret," Dr. Gillon said.

Dr. Gillon said he fully expects Watercare to deny that any firm and final plans exist and to play dumb over the issue so as to deflect any public outcry over their secrecy.

"Their plans are clearly at a stage when they can share them with John Banks, and sufficiently radical to set alarms bells off in his mind, so the usual corporate spin, cover up and diversion will not cut the mustard this time," Dr. Gillon said.

"When lined up with the recent changes to the Local Government Act to allow contracting out of water services for a generation, and legislation currently before the House placing water quality standards under threat, we have a right to know what Watercare is cooking up for the region's water users."

Dr. Gillon added that water charges on the North Shore have remained fairly stable for nearly seven years now because the local council has a direct say in the charging system and the tariffs, a level of community control that will be lost once the expanded Watercare takes control of the region's water and wastewater, and the Council is relegated to simply setting high level 'statements of intent' for them.

Right are going to split the Shore vote

Word is the 'Right' are going to split the 'Shore vote with an Act grouping called "North Now" and a National Party grouping led by former office holders and members such as Diane Hale, Kevin Schwass, Margaret Miles, Jennifer Yorke plus Lisa White and others...Tragic.

Great Submission

I saw a fabulous report on a submission on the latest anti-democratic measure introduced by Rodney Hide - the privatisation of water.  I reproduce it here for your information

Magge Tait; NZPA Correspondent


Wellington, July 22 NZPA - Allowing more private control of water will end up costing ratepayers more, a select committee considering a bill aimed at keeping rates down was told on Thursday.

New Zealand Council of Christian Services executive officer Trevor McClinchey told the committee he was concerned by measures in the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill to repeal a provision that gives councils control over the management of private contracts of water services and extend contracts to private companies from 15 years to 35.


Mr McClinchey said transferring management and decision making control over water to the private sector see profit making the priority and not public good.

Internationally private control had led to rising costs and poor quality and delivery, he said.
In Britain the price of water doubled in the first four years after privatisation, within eight years water companies made 142 percent profit. Water and sewerage bills increased 67 percent between 1989 and 1995 and service disconnections rose by 177 percent. There were also major maintenance problems.
Australia and New Zealand were being targeted by two big French companies, Veolia and Seuz, which had 39 contracts.
"Their track record is appalling in many places around the globe. In Australia the companies have made savings by reducing the workforce and failing to invest in infrastructure," Mr McClinchey said.

There was a major outbreak of water borne diseases in Sydney in 1998 not long after privatisation and there were problems in other countries too.
"It would be retrogressive for councils to hand over the control and management of water services to the private sector which is accountable to its shareholder rather than to communities."
The New Zealand Water and Wastes Association — Water New Zealand — said there should no specified term for contracts or joint arrangements for water services. However it recommended yearly renegotiations on pricing and policy.
"Whoever is managing the water services, which we don't have at the moment, needs to adhere to comprehensive performance requirements. And because they are a monopoly supplier there needs to be an element of price regulation attached to it," the association said.
The Institution of Professional Engineers, and Association of Local Government Engineering said for long term contracts the local authority needed to retain core responsibilities. The organisations strongly supported the 35 year contract period because that would allow cost-effect bids for major capital works such as treatment plants.
- Content provided to you by NZPA

Go Trevor, a warning to us all!