Capital Times Best of Wellington 2010

· by · in Uncategorized. ·

The Capital Times have released the results of their annual Best of Wellington survey for 2010.

Burried under bars, restaurants  and bus drivers they have ranked the city councillors. And they are… (drum roll please)

  1. Ian McKinnon
  2. Celia Wade-Brown
  3. Iona Pannett

Two observations from this. Firstly, the rankings are exactly the same as last year, yawn. And secondly, doesn’t the Lambton Ward do well!

Congratulations to Ian, Celia and Iona.

PS: Also, congratulations to Grant Robertson, Annette King and Sue Kedgley who were ranked the three best Wellington MPs

23 responses to “Capital Times Best of Wellington 2010”

  1. No surprises, all three are well known for their hard work.

    How about a bottom 3? Much more competition here. I’d go Wain, Goulden and Cook. At least Pepperal adds comedy value.

    • Richard :No surprises, all three are well known for their hard work.
      How about a bottom 3? Much more competition here. I’d go Wain, Goulden and Cook. At least Pepperal adds comedy value.

      Richard (Dick for short) and Johnny (Come lately)

      Why don’t you have the courage to give me a call and perhaps we could discuss your pedigree as well, instead you like to remain faceless coawrds hiding behind snide comments about people on websites.
      Inotice neither of you are game enough to stand for Council or anything else. You probably both still wet the bed and are under achievers in all aspects of your pathetic lives.

  3. You three are bottom feeders Tom, Richard (Dick) and Johnny. I always thought the jokes had a Harry in there somewhere, but who cares Johnny aptly describes your spineless personality and anonymity.

    • who are you to make these insults, Rob, posting as anonymously as the others. what’s your real and full name?

  4. Rob, a bit of constitutional reality. You are an elected member of the people serving on Wellington City Council. Your job is to serve the interests of the citizens of the city, set policy and strategy and hold the city management to account. The people commenting on this site are the citizens, well most of them are apart from the other councillors. Their job is to weigh the candidates, test their policies and hold them to account. You are in the public eye, as a public official. We are not, so it’s immaterial who we as long as we comment within the boundaries placed on freedom of speech. Continue with your personal attacks if you wish. It’s quite amusing to the rest of us, but not very edifying for you.

  5. Perhaps this is Rob’s way of raising his non-attendance at council meetings to 100%, by the simple act of looking like such a plonker that he gets voted off the island.

    • No he wasn’t counted as attending that day, you plonker! He was sitting next to me in the public gallery. God knows how in this country you can be evicted from the public gallery- but apparently you can!

      You reprobates should be more concerned about the abuse of power that occurred that day instead of wondering about the time that Cr Goulden had off to attend his daddy’s funeral.

      God save us from you four reprobates – Eckley, Johnny and Richard and Clarke

      • Hey, all you and ‘Rob’ have done with your outbursts is convince people that you have an anger management problem. What have i said or done to be called a reprobate? You two have really lowered the tone of things in the last couple of days – there’s been some really good debate on this blog.

  7. We are concerned about a great many issues involving the council and if you read this blog you will see that we aree presenting them in a fair and reasonable way. Sometimes we don’t have all the information. I suggest that spraying around personal abuse is not the best way to present your issues. But all input is considered.

  8. No you are not – you just want to take a pop shot at councillors – you sanctimonius little man!

    The cheap shot was neither fair or reasonable.

    If you do not have all the information then keep your mouth shut.

    Incidentally it is not me spraying abuse, but rather you and your mates.

  9. Johnny,

    The constitutional reality of the Council is that some of you sit back in ignorance and never challenge or question what is really going on.Some of the things that are will have long term and far reaching affects on our community. You love your anonymity because you can hide behind it. I suppose in your case ignorance is bliss. Its sad that I have to be the one to expose some of the wrongs that are occuring. It would be so easy like half the other Councillors to be a ‘yes’ person and never question anything. The penalty that I pay for being outspoken and challenging is that I get attacked personally for it by the Mayor and her cabal. It seems that you and your mates in cyberspace want to do that as well. Why don’t you focus on the issues and then perhaps you and all the many you claim that you represent will be better informed. Perhaps you should come and listen to and rewad the supportive emails and messages I get from the many I help in the community.

  10. Do I get any condolences or an apology from you in respect of my fathers death and subsequent absense from Council.

  11. Refer to the next post. But suggest that your issue is with the council. They have published this information without any context. Any reader would draw the same conclusion as me. You also owe a numbers of commentators an apology for your abusive personal comments. This blog is exposing plenty of issues.

  12. There not abusive comments at all. You raised and published the issue about my attendence rate at Council and chose to comment on it and even rank me as a result. You did not even have the courtesy to ask me first for comment. So my issue is with you not Council.

    Are you big enough to apologise knowing what you now know?

    • you and ‘v’ have posted many comments on this website that are abusive, derogatory and insulting. you have engaged in a series of ad hominem attacks on other posters and made a veiled threat against one of them. i think that’s disgraceful behaviour for a current councillor and candidate, if that’s who you claim you are. but i find it hard to believe that a person in an elected position would make such a public display of bad behaviour and still suspect that this is someone else pretending to be Rob Goulden in order to discredit him.

      • So “you still suspect that this is someone else pretending to be Rob Goulden in order to discredit him”?

        Is this the real Thomas Eckley – or someone pretending to be him?

        Get a grip, Cr. Goulden is just a councillor, not a god.

        You would also do well to remember that you and your mates started this stouch, that is if you are who you say you are, or am I talking with people pretending to be you?

    • Cllr Goulden. Your first post on this site was to call a commentator a coward, pathetic and a bed wetter. That is hardly becoming of an elected representative of the capital city. All the guy did was express his honest opinion. I hope Swampy Marsh gives you a good run for your money. You are here by virtue of coming third after the 7th iteration of the vote in 2007.

      Have you read the annual report. The council ascribed you with 84%. Not me.

    • This comment is just plain bizarre. How is this You probably both still wet the bed and are under achievers in all aspects of your pathetic lives. not abusive? What about calling people bottom feeders and spineless?

      I stated you were in my view one of the bottom three councillors because of how the media and the mayor rate you, as detailed in the following links http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/local/the-wellingtonian/3870457/Black-mark-for-Hayley-Wain
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/communities/2336138/The-good-the-bad-and-the-invisible
      http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/398169

      There has to be a bottom 3 for there to be a top 3, getting all upset and abusive about it is unbecoming of an elected representative.

Leave a comment