Posted on August 4, 2019
Albert-Eden-Puketāpapa council candidate Mark Thomas is calling on City Vision’s political leader Councillor Cathy Casey to clarify whether she backs the bold rates increase, and vast and unusual spending programme outlined by her running mate Mark Graham.
In a series of tweets at 4am this week, Casey’s running mate called for action on a climate change war, plans to cater for refugees for when Australia is on fire and preparation for expected Queen Street flooding.
“Does Casey agree we need these plans, and also preparation for 40 degree summers, new damns to be built and plans for when the daily Tamaki Drive commute involves swimming – as outlined by her colleague?”
Mark Thomas asked Dr Casey, as City Visions’ only Auckland councillor, to detail what level of rates increase would be required to fund this huge and unexpected spending programme.
“Casey has been a councillor for 24 years, but I doubt she will have seen spending plans such as this.
“Ahead of City Vision’s public launch this weekend and as their senior political leader, Dr Casey must confirm whether this represents a new City Vision action plan for Auckland or whether she rejects it.”
Thomas said Graham’s view also included a “bleak” future he thinks Auckland faces and a need to combat a New Zealand “disease” of building housing cheaply. It also included rejecting the pandering of old school politicians to the selfishness of old rich white people.
Thomas said Auckland has significant challenges in transport, housing affordability and building and in other areas but these are all grounded in the real world – not some fantasy nightmare. He also didn’t think attacking groups of Aucklanders was a constructive way of dealing with the regions’ challenges.
“I am optimistic that if elected to the next council, working with whoever the mayor is, I can use my international cities and technology experience to help Auckland better prepare for the 2020’s.”
Graham said his post would consign him to “political oblivion”. Does Cathy Casey agree with the programme, or with this conclusion?