from the KC News website:

The great Kapiti Scarecrow Competition is on and organiser James Bishop is welcoming all entries.

“If you or your family want to make a Scarecrow and place the Scarecrow at the bottom of the bank along the wall or in our Vegetable Beds please do so before August 23 2020.
“Then take a photo of it in the garden and tag Waikanae Beach Community Garden, like our Facebook page and attach your image to be in to Win.”

James says there are three ways to win:

1, Best Scarecrow individual. Made by any person in our community.

2, Family Made. Made by you and one or more person in your family.

3, Peoples Choice. Chosen by the community.

“Winners will be announced at our Spring Festival when we are planning to have a Seed and Seedlings Swap meeting in early spring. So get creative and have fun.”

For any inquires don’t hesitate to contact James on the Waikanae Beach Community Garden Facebook Page https://www.facebook.com/WaikanaeBeachCommunityGarden/

Although making an effigy of Mayor Guru as a scarecrow might be tempting, it could run foul of the Political Correctness Brigade 🙂 –Eds

The Honourable Eugenie Sage

10 July 2020

Dear Minister, 

           Re: Government endorsement of Kapiti Island ‘Gateway’ proposal

Introduction

I write concerning your endorsement of the Kapiti Gateway Project. This project will provide a transit bio-security facility for visitors to Kapiti Island. Kapiti Coast District Council is seeking Provincial Growth Fund funding on the basis that it will create jobs and grow the economy. It has a ballpark cost estimate of $4.46 million¹. The economic growth will be driven by a purported increase in island visitor numbers soaring to 58,000 per annum. 

Your endorsement was seen by the proponents as pivotal, particularly in light of the project not reaching break-even for 6 years. At the Council meeting of 28 May the Mayor  emphasised the importance of your support in getting PGF funding. Outlined here are the areas of concern.

Government and the business case  

1. Encouraging a “Loss leader”

KCDC identified early on the almost insurmountable problems with trying to prove there was a legitimate business case to put up to the PGF. All of this was redacted when it came to filing the application, but should have been equally apparent to any competent Government advisor. Two memo’s put it succinctly:

• “The business case is a toughie, because from the Council’s perspective, it is a long-term “loss-leader”.
•  “The difficult thing is justifying the expense. Not just the infrastructure but the ongoing costs. Council will have to fund the depreciation, the running costs and maintenance. That cannot be justified without a serious step change in the growth of visitors…. Without growth of this kind the Gateway could remain nice to have- which is likely to be judged as unaffordable in these times”.

Your perceived endorsement of encouraging visitor numbers to Kapiti Island to increase 300% enabled KCDC to present a business case that the project was feasible. Upon what statutory power or other ground did you exercise your decision to support this project identified as, a long-term “loss-leader”?

2. Government encourages PGF to fund projects requiring substantial Ratepayer subsidy

As a Cabinet member your support of this particular project indicates the Government considers projects that need ratepayers subsidy as meeting the PGF’s business case requirements. The details are in Annexure 1. KCDC’s documents show, even on a “best case” scenario the Gateway will not be self- funding for at least 6 years — 6 years of ratepayer subsidy. 

3. 5 real jobs lost and 2 ticket issuer jobs gained

There are 2 boat operators. One operator, Eco (who carried over 6,000 of 15,000 passengers last year) supports a Gateway but opposes the Mayor’s ‘Taj Mahal’. The cost of using the bio security building will be $21 per passenger.  Eco has said the extra $21 fee for using the checking room will kill his company as Eco’s customers will not be able to afford this in addition to the boat ticket price.

4. Phantom economic benefits to Kapiti²

You letter implicitly supports the argument there is a major economic benefit to the Kapiti Coast. Despite the fact that the Paraparaumu Beach Business Association- the alleged beneficiaries are entirely against this particular project.

Please supply the economic studies and data you have that justified your opposing the facts as seen by the business community you project as being the beneficiaries of the project. Your Mr Mace will know these include moteliers, B&B owners, café owners and a Kapiti Island tourism operator. They really want to know what you know that they apparently, despite years of hands-on experience, do not.

Increased bio-security safety

You say the project will increase bio-security. How can that be, when for 35 years the current system has worked perfectly, without a single breach? How more perfect can bio-security be than 100%? You avow “Current biosecurity activities are unlikely to be sufficient to fully protect the island from future biosecurity risks…”. 

Please supply the information upon which you relied to support this pivotal contention.

Matters you may not have known — relevant to a change of decision

Proceeding on the assumption the Government is concerned that the citizens in the “team of 5 million” get equal and fair treatment, and the total denial to interested team members of their pre-existing (prior to Covid 19) rights, you are requested to reconsider your support for the project, taking into account these relevant factors.

Consultation on this specific project

The KCDC report at paragraph 68 says, “Neighbouring residents of the site,  contacted in earlier stages of the project …”. This is incorrect. The 5 homeowners / property owners directly affected have made written statements saying they were never  contacted. 

• DOC supporting loss of open space on Reserve land — favours food and beverage outlets.

Not only is the main building a commercial activity building you, as Minister are supporting 2 pods (Containers) for commercial use providing food and beverage.

These further reducie open space on reserve land. This runs counter to the principles in the Reserves Act which you administer. S.3 specifies that reserve land is to be preserved and managed “ for the benefit and enjoyment of the public”. Where access is subject to a fee, that excludes all non -paying members of the public. Reserve land is for free public access.

I look forward to your urgent reply.

Yours faithfully,

C.B. Ruthe LLB

1. KCDC is providing the land and the ongoing expenses. None will be met by either DOC, or the boat companies using the facility.

2. The economic benefit case KCDC relies on is predicated on “40% of visitors to Kapiti Island staying a night and if every person paid $200 a night (that is $400.00 for a couple). That is $1.2 million back into the local economy, p.a.”. A search on the Internet reveals there is no visitor accommodation at Paraparaumu Beach costing $400 per night for a couple: the range is $125–$150.

In fact it has been for a little while now.  As some readers are aware, the problem is that the two arms of the “Y” have similar traffic volumes, but the present layout treats the Rauparaha Street arm as the main route, when in fact the Te Moana Road arm has a somewhat greater volume of cars.  Those heading east (from the beach) along the Te Moana Road arm have to give way via a stop sign at the intersection to those heading west along Rauparaha Street.

However, there is more potential for increased volume in the Rauparaha Street arm — unless the full Peka Peka interchange with the Expressway is built.  Until 2017, people headed north for Peka Peka Beach could turn left off SH1 down Peka Peka Road — they can’t do so from the Expressway, which forces them to turn off the ‘Ewy’ at Te Moana Road, head west along Rauparaha Street as far as Huiawa Street where they turn north again.

The National Party has stated its intention to build the Peka Peka interchange if elected, but there is no such statement from the Labour Party; it was one of the previous National Government’s projects that it cancelled after September 2017.

The options for the council on what to do about the Te Moana Road/Rauparaha Street intersection have resulted in division in both the Waikanae Beach Residents Society and the WCB.  There may be a public presentation about it at the next WCB meeting on 11 August — watch this space.

Stalin looks back at those he sees as “enemies of the people” — these include clergy, capitalists (the hooked nose has a strong anti-semitic implication), ОБЛО́М = oblomov = failures/bums, Mensheviks (part of the Russian socialist movement in the early 20th century, but who were at odds with Bolsheviks) and various other enemies including Kulaks (better off peasants).

This is a poster produced in the Soviet Union in 1930, featuring the communists’ blood red banner,  which given what happened there later that decade under Stalin was rather prophetic.

At the time Stalin saw the Soviet Union as still being engaged in class war and in fact, he saw class war as intensifying, and this provided one of the major justifications for the Great Terror from 1936 to 1938 in which whole classes of people were exiled or executed.

“With the same banner, we will win in the proletarian revolution all over the world”. –I. Stalin

This is a further statement that the Communists saw their objectives as applying world-wide and thus were the first real Globalists. Most Globalists today stem from the Hard Left.

Reference