Or is it just a typical Labour about turn to suit what they want and to hell with the consequences?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130999427/350-home-govt-project-on-site-minister-once-ruled-too-risky-for-80-homes
It'll be interesting to see how Rich explains this as another good decision from his woke government :)
On 2023-01-18, John Bowes <bowesjohn02@gmail.com> wrote:
Or is it just a typical Labour about turn to suit what they want and to hell with the consequences?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130999427/350-home-govt-project-on-site-minister-once-ruled-too-risky-for-80-homes
It'll be interesting to see how Rich explains this as another good decision from his woke government :)
This has so many aspects to it.
"In a written statement a MHUD spokesperson confirmed the purchase
and said the site would be used to provide a mixed development of
affordable housing for private market and public housing.
Clarity please. So these private market people are going to build some of
the houses, for a) profit, or b) rentals.
There has been concnern at length over flood and congestion back in 2018 and >it dropped. So now we we have a) 4 years of dithering, and b) an election >coming up and c) the motel situation getting worse.
Remember folks there is a climate emergency in the country, and climate >change means that the storms will cause greater flooding far more often.
Comformation and destination bias, when you push on as you think everything >will work out.
On 18 Jan 2023 06:41:33 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:Or are you just making shit up?
On 2023-01-18, John Bowes <bowesjohn02@gmail.com> wrote:
Or is it just a typical Labour about turn to suit what they want and to >>>hell with the consequences?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130999427/350-home-govt-project-on-site-minister-once-ruled-too-risky-for-80-homes
It'll be interesting to see how Rich explains this as another good decision >>>from his woke government :)
This has so many aspects to it.
"In a written statement a MHUD spokesperson confirmed the purchase
and said the site would be used to provide a mixed development of >>affordable housing for private market and public housing.
Clarity please. So these private market people are going to build some of >>the houses, for a) profit, or b) rentals.
There has been concnern at length over flood and congestion back in 2018 and >>it dropped. So now we we have a) 4 years of dithering, and b) an election >>coming up and c) the motel situation getting worse.
Remember folks there is a climate emergency in the country, and climate >>change means that the storms will cause greater flooding far more often.
Comformation and destination bias, when you push on as you think everything >>will work out.
There is a significant difference between a development for 80 homes
and one for 350 - the latter will require considerably different
underground services. Clearly those differences are sufficient for
both the Rotorua Council and Government to take a different view of
the project - each being advised by their construction advisers. It
is notable that the protest gives no reason other than the comparison
with a previous decision to be concerned, and apears to be lazy
journalism - Bathgate may have written it entirely from his desk, with
one of his calls to a mate who just happens to be an ex-Councillor for
the "Residents and Ratepayers" - and who has consistently spoken
against any use of public land to house those in need in Rotorua - he
is likely to be dead against anything the Rotorua Council want see for >example: >https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/ldr/461225/code-of-conduct-breaches-rotorua-councillor-reynold-macpherson-removed-from-committees
and >https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2022/12/reynold-macpherson-why-scepticism.html
Given his performance as a previous Councillor, it is surprising he
got as many votes as he did to get the 5th highest number of votes for
Mayor . . .
So ask yourself, was Bathgate infuenced by his political connections
and history working for a Property magazine in reaching out to
Macpherson for an assurted anti sentiment on this issue?
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 18 Jan 2023 06:41:33 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:Or are you just making shit up?
On 2023-01-18, John Bowes <bowesjohn02@gmail.com> wrote:
Or is it just a typical Labour about turn to suit what they want and to >>>>hell with the consequences?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130999427/350-home-govt-project-on-site-minister-once-ruled-too-risky-for-80-homes
It'll be interesting to see how Rich explains this as another good decision
from his woke government :)
This has so many aspects to it.
"In a written statement a MHUD spokesperson confirmed the purchase
and said the site would be used to provide a mixed development of >>>affordable housing for private market and public housing.
Clarity please. So these private market people are going to build some of >>>the houses, for a) profit, or b) rentals.
There has been concnern at length over flood and congestion back in 2018 and >>>it dropped. So now we we have a) 4 years of dithering, and b) an election >>>coming up and c) the motel situation getting worse.
Remember folks there is a climate emergency in the country, and climate >>>change means that the storms will cause greater flooding far more often.
Comformation and destination bias, when you push on as you think everything >>>will work out.
There is a significant difference between a development for 80 homes
and one for 350 - the latter will require considerably different >>underground services. Clearly those differences are sufficient for
both the Rotorua Council and Government to take a different view of
the project - each being advised by their construction advisers. It
is notable that the protest gives no reason other than the comparison
with a previous decision to be concerned, and apears to be lazy
journalism - Bathgate may have written it entirely from his desk, with
one of his calls to a mate who just happens to be an ex-Councillor for
the "Residents and Ratepayers" - and who has consistently spoken
against any use of public land to house those in need in Rotorua - he
is likely to be dead against anything the Rotorua Council want see for >>example: >>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/ldr/461225/code-of-conduct-breaches-rotorua-councillor-reynold-macpherson-removed-from-committees
and >>https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2022/12/reynold-macpherson-why-scepticism.html
Given his performance as a previous Councillor, it is surprising he
got as many votes as he did to get the 5th highest number of votes for >>Mayor . . .
So ask yourself, was Bathgate infuenced by his political connections
and history working for a Property magazine in reaching out to
Macpherson for an assurted anti sentiment on this issue?
On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 23:27:14 -0000 (UTC), TonyYolur view of the entire thing is jaundiced and rigidly extreme left wing.
<lizandtony@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich80105@hotmail.com> wrote:
On 18 Jan 2023 06:41:33 GMT, Gordon <Gordon@leaf.net.nz> wrote:Or are you just making shit up?
On 2023-01-18, John Bowes <bowesjohn02@gmail.com> wrote:
Or is it just a typical Labour about turn to suit what they want and to >>>>>hell with the consequences?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130999427/350-home-govt-project-on-site-minister-once-ruled-too-risky-for-80-homes
It'll be interesting to see how Rich explains this as another good >>>>>decision
from his woke government :)
This has so many aspects to it.
"In a written statement a MHUD spokesperson confirmed the purchase
and said the site would be used to provide a mixed development of >>>>affordable housing for private market and public housing.
Clarity please. So these private market people are going to build some of >>>>the houses, for a) profit, or b) rentals.
There has been concnern at length over flood and congestion back in 2018 and
it dropped. So now we we have a) 4 years of dithering, and b) an election >>>>coming up and c) the motel situation getting worse.
Remember folks there is a climate emergency in the country, and climate >>>>change means that the storms will cause greater flooding far more often. >>>>
Comformation and destination bias, when you push on as you think everything >>>>will work out.
There is a significant difference between a development for 80 homes
and one for 350 - the latter will require considerably different >>>underground services. Clearly those differences are sufficient for
both the Rotorua Council and Government to take a different view of
the project - each being advised by their construction advisers. It
is notable that the protest gives no reason other than the comparison >>>with a previous decision to be concerned, and apears to be lazy >>>journalism - Bathgate may have written it entirely from his desk, with >>>one of his calls to a mate who just happens to be an ex-Councillor for >>>the "Residents and Ratepayers" - and who has consistently spoken
against any use of public land to house those in need in Rotorua - he
is likely to be dead against anything the Rotorua Council want see for >>>example: >>>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/ldr/461225/code-of-conduct-breaches-rotorua-councillor-reynold-macpherson-removed-from-committees
and >>>https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2022/12/reynold-macpherson-why-scepticism.html
Given his performance as a previous Councillor, it is surprising he
got as many votes as he did to get the 5th highest number of votes for >>>Mayor . . .
So ask yourself, was Bathgate infuenced by his political connections
and history working for a Property magazine in reaching out to
Macpherson for an assurted anti sentiment on this issue?
No - as you probably realised, asserted should have been asserted -
and the assertion was of course anti a property development designed
to solve a problem for Rotorua - Reynold Macpherson is perhaps a
little jaudiced, but also rigidly right wing.
On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 23:27:14 -0000 (UTC), TonyStop lying about you making shit up Rich!
<lizan...@orcon.net.nz> wrote:
Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:No - as you probably realised, asserted should have been asserted -
On 18 Jan 2023 06:41:33 GMT, Gordon <Gor...@leaf.net.nz> wrote:Or are you just making shit up?
On 2023-01-18, John Bowes <bowes...@gmail.com> wrote:
Or is it just a typical Labour about turn to suit what they want and to >>>>hell with the consequences?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130999427/350-home-govt-project-on-site-minister-once-ruled-too-risky-for-80-homes
It'll be interesting to see how Rich explains this as another good decision
from his woke government :)
This has so many aspects to it.
"In a written statement a MHUD spokesperson confirmed the purchase
and said the site would be used “to provide a mixed development of >>>affordable housing for private market and public housing”.
Clarity please. So these private market people are going to build some of >>>the houses, for a) profit, or b) rentals.
There has been concnern at length over flood and congestion back in 2018 and
it dropped. So now we we have a) 4 years of dithering, and b) an election >>>coming up and c) the motel situation getting worse.
Remember folks there is a climate emergency in the country, and climate >>>change means that the storms will cause greater flooding far more often. >>>
Comformation and destination bias, when you push on as you think everything
will work out.
There is a significant difference between a development for 80 homes
and one for 350 - the latter will require considerably different >>underground services. Clearly those differences are sufficient for
both the Rotorua Council and Government to take a different view of
the project - each being advised by their construction advisers. It
is notable that the protest gives no reason other than the comparison >>with a previous decision to be concerned, and apears to be lazy >>journalism - Bathgate may have written it entirely from his desk, with >>one of his calls to a mate who just happens to be an ex-Councillor for >>the "Residents and Ratepayers" - and who has consistently spoken
against any use of public land to house those in need in Rotorua - he
is likely to be dead against anything the Rotorua Council want see for >>example: >>https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/ldr/461225/code-of-conduct-breaches-rotorua-councillor-reynold-macpherson-removed-from-committees
and >>https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2022/12/reynold-macpherson-why-scepticism.html
Given his performance as a previous Councillor, it is surprising he
got as many votes as he did to get the 5th highest number of votes for >>Mayor . . .
So ask yourself, was Bathgate infuenced by his political connections
and history working for a Property magazine in reaching out to >>Macpherson for an assurted anti sentiment on this issue?
and the assertion was of course anti a property development designed
to solve a problem for Rotorua - Reynold Macpherson is perhaps a
little jaudiced, but also rigidly right wing.
Rich80105 <Rich...@hotmail.com> wrote:Of course Rich is just making shit up! It's aqll the useless little communist cunt has: Lies!
On 18 Jan 2023 06:41:33 GMT, Gordon <Gor...@leaf.net.nz> wrote:
On 2023-01-18, John Bowes <bowes...@gmail.com> wrote:
Or is it just a typical Labour about turn to suit what they want and to >>>hell with the consequences?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130999427/350-home-govt-project-on-site-minister-once-ruled-too-risky-for-80-homes
It'll be interesting to see how Rich explains this as another good decision
from his woke government :)
This has so many aspects to it.
"In a written statement a MHUD spokesperson confirmed the purchase
and said the site would be used “to provide a mixed development of >>affordable housing for private market and public housing”.
Clarity please. So these private market people are going to build some of >>the houses, for a) profit, or b) rentals.
There has been concnern at length over flood and congestion back in 2018 and
it dropped. So now we we have a) 4 years of dithering, and b) an election >>coming up and c) the motel situation getting worse.
Remember folks there is a climate emergency in the country, and climate >>change means that the storms will cause greater flooding far more often. >>
Comformation and destination bias, when you push on as you think everything
will work out.
There is a significant difference between a development for 80 homes
and one for 350 - the latter will require considerably different >underground services. Clearly those differences are sufficient for
both the Rotorua Council and Government to take a different view of
the project - each being advised by their construction advisers. It
is notable that the protest gives no reason other than the comparison
with a previous decision to be concerned, and apears to be lazy
journalism - Bathgate may have written it entirely from his desk, with
one of his calls to a mate who just happens to be an ex-Councillor for
the "Residents and Ratepayers" - and who has consistently spoken
against any use of public land to house those in need in Rotorua - he
is likely to be dead against anything the Rotorua Council want see for >example: >https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/ldr/461225/code-of-conduct-breaches-rotorua-councillor-reynold-macpherson-removed-from-committees
and >https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2022/12/reynold-macpherson-why-scepticism.html
Given his performance as a previous Councillor, it is surprising he
got as many votes as he did to get the 5th highest number of votes for >Mayor . . .
So ask yourself, was Bathgate infuenced by his political connectionsOr are you just making shit up?
and history working for a Property magazine in reaching out to
Macpherson for an assurted anti sentiment on this issue?
On 18 Jan 2023 06:41:33 GMT, Gordon <Gor...@leaf.net.nz> wrote:By all accounts Wood turned down the 80 house development because of flood risk. According to your ownb idiotic government we can expect more bad weather in the next decades so instead of 80 family's being at risk it's going to be 350 family's at risk
On 2023-01-18, John Bowes <bowes...@gmail.com> wrote:
Or is it just a typical Labour about turn to suit what they want and to hell with the consequences?
https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/130999427/350-home-govt-project-on-site-minister-once-ruled-too-risky-for-80-homes
It'll be interesting to see how Rich explains this as another good decision from his woke government :)
This has so many aspects to it.
"In a written statement a MHUD spokesperson confirmed the purchase
and said the site would be used “to provide a mixed development of >affordable housing for private market and public housing”.
Clarity please. So these private market people are going to build some of >the houses, for a) profit, or b) rentals.
There has been concnern at length over flood and congestion back in 2018 and
it dropped. So now we we have a) 4 years of dithering, and b) an election >coming up and c) the motel situation getting worse.
Remember folks there is a climate emergency in the country, and climate >change means that the storms will cause greater flooding far more often.
Comformation and destination bias, when you push on as you think everything >will work out.There is a significant difference between a development for 80 homes
and one for 350 - the latter will require considerably different
underground services. Clearly those differences are sufficient for
both the Rotorua Council and Government to take a different view of
the project - each being advised by their construction advisers. It
is notable that the protest gives no reason other than the comparison
with a previous decision to be concerned, and apears to be lazy
journalism - Bathgate may have written it entirely from his desk, with
one of his calls to a mate who just happens to be an ex-Councillor for
the "Residents and Ratepayers" - and who has consistently spoken
against any use of public land to house those in need in Rotorua - he
is likely to be dead against anything the Rotorua Council want see for example: https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/ldr/461225/code-of-conduct-breaches-rotorua-councillor-reynold-macpherson-removed-from-committees
and https://breakingviewsnz.blogspot.com/2022/12/reynold-macpherson-why-scepticism.html
Given his performance as a previous Councillor, it is surprising he
got as many votes as he did to get the 5th highest number of votes for
Mayor . . .
So ask yourself, was Bathgate infuenced by his political connections
and history working for a Property magazine in reaching out to
Macpherson for an assurted anti sentiment on this issue?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 297 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 114:07:22 |
| Calls: | 6,662 |
| Files: | 12,209 |
| Messages: | 5,336,164 |