Chris Darby is another councillor who needs rinsing in October

The strains of despair are already showing on Council with the almighty golden NIMBY – Chris Darby – having a tanty about Labour’s decision to join National against the Urban Boundary.

Darby is not unlike many of his fellow politicians. Principally they buy into the whole compact city nonsense.

Auckland councillor Chris Darby says politicians should stay out of the boundary issue.

Darby, one of four councillors assigned to the proposed Unitary Plan and deputy chairman of the council’s development committee, said the comments were premature.

“It’s only a few weeks until we get the report from the Independent Hearings Panel on the unitary plan. There are submissions to soften, abolish or strengthen the boundary,” Darby said.

“We don’t know what the panel will decide. But we as a city have gone through a long process and it’s out of order for any politician – myself included – to try to influence that decision.  

“Why did we establish the Independent Hearings Panel to work for almost three years on this, receive thousands of public submissions, hear expert evidence, all put before highly qualified commissioners?”

Twyford’s boundary abolition suggestion also ignored the Future Urban Land Supply Strategy which the Auckland Council confirmed this year, Darby said.

I’ll get onto the Future Urban Land Supply Strategy this week – because it’s a dodgy attempt to backstop any efforts by the Government to force change. Through that strategy the Council can refuse infrastructure builds and stop greenfield occurring anyway.

As for Darby – he needs to wake up and smell the coffee.

Nobody likes Auckland Council and even less people like the way the Council has gone about wrecking Auckland with foolish city plans.

Because it’s dumber than a bag of hammers.


– NZ Herald


THANK YOU for being a subscriber. Because of you Whaleoil is going from strength to strength. It is a little known fact that Whaleoil subscribers are better in bed, good looking and highly intelligent. Sometimes all at once! Please Click Here Now to subscribe to an ad-free Whaleoil.

  • sheppy

    “We don’t know what the panel will decide. But we as a city have gone through a long process and it’s out of order for any politician – myself included – to try to influence that decision. ”
    Presumably apart from those politicians that threw in secret intensification plans that were not supposed to be considered by the “panel” or the community?
    He must be gutted that the little people found out about them, and council were forced to withdraw them after a very public vote.
    Hope he’s got a job well away from council lined up for after the election

    • The Fat Man

      Probably a directorship on a CCO.

    • Raibert

      There was much more interference in the IHP process by council than just the secret planning maps. All through the process they have controlled the flow of information and with the use of “expert” witnesses who were quite often consultants that have been or are currently employed by council tried to direct proceeding. This tactic even led to the IHP cautioning council.
      It is wrong for councillors to now act upset over possible further government intervention considering council is not obliged to implement the IHP findings. Or once again is this a case of brinkmanship with the government aware of councils intentions and warning them to act democratically.

      • sheppy

        I suspect that Government has to fight Auckland Council to release land, no matter what the IHP comes up with. It’s what happens when you allow a bunch of idealistic Councillors and bureaucrats to run the show. If they want a return to common sense, everyone from PDB down that’s wedded to this compact city ghetto plan needs to go.

  • RoboRob

    I’m Confused. I missed the news most of yesterday but
    I hear the media congratulating Labour for proposing abolishing the urbane boundary
    and that National has joined them, describing this as a win for Labour.

    This seems backwards to me. I assumed that national would have instigated
    this and the Labour would have opposed it. Is it that Labour got wind of
    what the nats would propose and bet them to the post by announcing it first as
    their plan?

  • The Fat Man

    Yes I concur Darby go or be gone.

    What we need is some one with the power to bring this feral supercity back under control.

    Faceless unaccountable bureaucrats making all the decisions and being rubber stamped by limp wrist ed Councillors is a recipe for disaster.

    Unfortunately we will have to hit the bottom of the cliff before anything will change.

  • Win

    Darby has aligned himself with far left lobby groups and his AC voting shows he endorses spending ratepayer funds on wasteful schemes.

  • Greenjacket

    Darby: “it’s out of order for any politician – myself included – to try to influence that decision”
    So why do we elect Councillors then?
    If decisions are made by a faceless and unaccountable “independent panel of commissioners”, and the Councillors are powerless and not accountable, then why bother with elections at all?

    • Disinfectant

      Haven’t met an independent commissioner yet.

      You have to remember who’s paying them. Yep the council.

  • Wayne Hodge

    I think you are being unkind to hammers.

  • Gladwin

    Get rid of any doofus councillor of any persuasion who doesn;t know he’s a politician!

  • rua kenana

    There seem abundant suggestions/predictions being put around of who will or should get rinsed at the next council elections.
    It’ll be interesting to compare the predictions/suggestions with what actually happens.
    In my view the ones who should get rinsed are those who are immune from local democracy but nevertheless want to have an excessive influence on local Auckland decisions. This includes English, Smith, the New Zealand Initiative and developers other than those entitled to vote in Auckland.
    I prefer the actual, concrete, demonstrable results of local elections rather than ethereal unproven opinions about what the alleged majority of people might or might not want. Unfortunately there’s far too many attempts being made to put democracy on the back burner.

    • Raibert

      Wholly agree, but would take it one step further and say list MP’s should be made to stand in an electorate. If not elected by electorate vote but still succeeding to gain a seat through the party list then they should be representing electorate they stood in. Yes it would mean more than 1 MP for some electorates, but maybe a little competition would be a good thing. Certainly this would be better than party hacks being put on the list and when elected only representing the party Hierarchy.

  • Kiwi Sapper

    It was Chris Darby who voted to support Len’s last outrageous rates increase and by doing so, cancelled out George Wood’s vote of opposition against it. End result, no wish of any ratepayer in the North Shore electorate was addressed.

  • Santa Fe fan

    I have to admit I voted for Darby last time but definitely won’t be this time. He has disappointed big time.

  • Raibert

    Hope that a history of all councillors and the way in which they voted on the controversial topics over the last term is being compiled for publication on WO.