Anyone who thinks the so-called “Uber City” for the Wellington region is going to deliver anything like that which it is hyped to needs a good crack across the bonce with a length of 4×2.
Same goes got he Hawkes Bay.
The name Uber City is a joke too…even if you combined them all they still won’t have the population of South Auckland.
Stephen Franks highlights a problem with the promotors of the Uber City…they are proven liars¬†.
According to Ms Wilde her Council not being allowed to lie in official advertising ‚Äúcould drastically restrict how local bodies operate‚ÄĚ. She believes it ‚Äúposes a real risk to robust political debate‚ÄĚ. Putting aside the inconvenient fact that¬†Council¬†advertising should be informative, not political propaganda, it is incredible that there is no media furore over her further defence that seeking the Advertising Standards Authority ruling was ‚Äúlegal nitpicking‚ÄĚ.
The DomPost has reported the matter under the heading ‚ÄúAdvertising Standards Authority calls GWRC super-city ad ‚Äėmisleading‚Äô‚ÄĚ. Note the implied warnings to ignore ‚Äď ‚Äúcalls‚Äô instead of ‚Äúfinds‚ÄĚ and the word ‚Äėmisleading‚Äô in quotes to distance the DomPost from the dreadfully unwelcome judgmentalism implicit in ‚Äėmisleading‚Äô.
Take a look at the ASA report, ( 15/004) which attaches my firm‚Äôs letter setting out the facts. Someone in the GWRC was either too stupid or too reckless to merit staying employed, or set out to deceive. See also the submission on behalf of the GWRC which says essentially that councils should be free from ASA supervision of their advertising, because being constrained to the truth would be problematic.
How do the honest members of the Council feel about this? Will they seek an inquiry into it. Will anyone be held accountable?
Businesses, remember that indifference to honesty, when you next want to shade the truth to GWRC. Its leader thinks that ‚Äúmisleading advertising‚ÄĚ which was ‚Äúnot prepared with a due sense of social responsibility‚ÄĚ is just robust debate.
In 2008 I blogged on journalistic blind eyes to lies by politicians, compared to their frothing pursuit of easily made mistaken business claims.
‚ÄúAs a commercial lawyer I‚Äôm sickened by the left‚Äôs sanctimony toward business. Labour love passing laws they could never satisfy in their own conduct. They lie happily, yet business people (properly) face prison or huge fines for faulty prospectus statements.‚ÄĚ
I‚Äôve had some journalists and politicians claim that it is because business can lose people so much money. We saw that¬†claim in full lynch mob glory in the media‚Äôs repeated whipping of two former Ministers of Justice. They were found by a court to have been honest though mistaken. They‚Äôd failed to add enough emphasis to their written warnings of the risks facing Lombard Finance.
The company‚Äôs failure (like most mezzanine development finance lenders) had nothing to do with the misleadingly mild warnings. Many commentators wanted them in jail for years, nonetheless.