Wellington Scoop

E-Mail 'No shows (unconvincing) and complaints (convincing)' To A Friend

Email a copy of 'No shows (unconvincing) and complaints (convincing)' to a friend

* Required Field

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

E-Mail Image Verification

Loading ... Loading ...


  1. Nora, 12. September 2018, 11:54

    Barbara Donaldson and Chris Laidlaw should have been with me at the check out counter at the New World in Thorndon this morning when the man in front of me wanted to know what I thought of the chaotic bus service. We agreed that it was not just the poor service but also the removal of so many seats so more passengers can be squashed in, with in some cases no handles to hold!

  2. Traveller, 12. September 2018, 14:23

    We pay Barbara Donaldson for failing to attend public meetings about the bus failures for which she is responsible?

  3. Jeanie McCafferty, 12. September 2018, 14:46

    Unbelievable that she has the gall to remain in the position, same with Laidlaw. Why do you think we would trust them to fix what they broke? ⁦[via twitter]

  4. Roy Kutel, 12. September 2018, 17:22

    Barbara Donaldson was paid $92,944 for 2016/17 (last financial year for which remuneration figures are available). She came in second, well behind Chris Laidlaw who was remunerated to the tune of $157,126 for ‘chairing’ our public transport and sundry regional services (like possum control). See page 187.

  5. Gary Froggatt, 12. September 2018, 18:04

    Barbara Donaldson’s comments and lack of commitment to her job as chair of the transport committee are unacceptable and she must go. Transport committee members should be made to use public transport so they can promote the product they want everyone else to use. Her payment for attending meetings is three times a bus driver’s wage, is excessive and not justified.

  6. Michael Gibson, 12. September 2018, 18:09

    Barbara Donaldson is working like mad to keep my subject (“the advantages of applying to the Minister of Local Government to have a Commissioner appointed to administer the Council’s transport responsibilities”) off the Order Paper for next Wednesday morning’s transport meeting which she is chairing. This is in the face of her failures so far, especially with her backing for the removal of seats from buses. Not to mention her failures to come to our meetings.

  7. Gary.Tram, 13. September 2018, 8:51

    Tranzit owner Snelgrove has the cheek to say that he expected a number of complaints. What an attitude. It appears the dude just does not care. No effort was made to train drivers or show them the new routes. [via twitter]

  8. City Lad, 13. September 2018, 9:56

    Where will the transport committee meet next Wednesday? And will Chris Laidlaw who is responsible for this bus transport mess be in attendance to support his embattled transport chairwoman Barbara Donaldson? [15 Walter Street at 9.30 a.m.]

  9. Wellington Commuter, 14. September 2018, 8:30

    All the regional councillors representing Wellington City (Council chair Laidlaw and Crs Ponter, McKinnon, Kedgley & Blakeley) were at last night’s Churton Park bus meeting. Also local MPs O’Connor and Hudson as well as WCC Crs Sparrow, Day and Gilberd). [via twitter]

  10. Woodburner, 19. September 2018, 12:33

    There is an assumption here that councillors are in control of the organisation, and I think that assumption needs to be challenged. Yes it does reflect a failure of governance, but that is a broader question of local government. What is often the case is that councils are symbolic and make peripheral decisions that do not materially change the course of the organisation, rather modifying or tweaking it to give the impression of change. The decisions are usually made by long standing executives and are masked to look like they reflect the current council’s intent.

    In the case of GWRC, it is fair to ask whether councillors were presented with full and accurate information to make decisions upon? And were they “allowed” procedural space to properly reflect on the implications. Councils can be easily manipulated by their own processes and it is worth understanding if and how this may have occurred here. It doesn’t excuse the no-shows, but does contextualise it in that councillors may feel they have been misled or hung out to dry by the organisation.