Why can it not be sure to rise again?
They say fortune favours the bold
What I am proposing is to recreate the missing iconic building the Christchurch skyline had and has been missing for far too long. This being the Edmonds Baking Powder Factory. Well in external appearance only.
On the face of it looks as if the opportunity exists to have
Option a) 4 Ground and 5 first floor offices with 5 penthouses above,
Or b) Four ground floor offices with 5 first floor apartments and atopped by 5 penthouses,
Or c) 14 apartments,
Or d) all offices,
Or e) as the market dictates.
So let us see what the market requires?
Please send me an email saying what you want, what floor level and how many square metres you want.
Additionally need land so any landowners out there in and around the city interested in participating please email me too.
Finally is there an anchor tenant out there wanting something historic, recognisable and wanting to re-establish back in Christchurch? Please email me.
Gordon J Dickson Associate A.M.I.N.Z. 2 August 2015
gordondicksonqs@outlook.com
Candidate James or potential “President two pay packets” # 2 in the imminent University of Canterbury Students Association Elections
1 I take solace from your words “I will look into Huntsoc”. I may well be in possession of more additional information as soon as the Chairman, oops Chairperson (sorry frauleins/damsels* etc) Geoff, Murray, Ross, Fiona & Rachel (being the balance of council members) of the New Zealand Mountain Safety Council respond to correspondence. See if you can find any minutes of meetings of the elusive and secretive Huntsoc executive. Which I believe to be of around ten members. See also my email 28/5/2015 to UCSA marked as “Inward Correspondence’’ Section “2” The President and the Presidents P A have it as a minimum.
2 In relation to your line 13 You clearly need to clean your ears out or learn to ask the Secretary and fellow members of the UCSA executive when you get the Agenda for the executive meetings this question
“Are all the received items titled “Inward Correspondence” included in the agenda section called “Inwards Correspondence”? Yes or no? Not hard really
3 Your line 17. You get Vice Chancellor Rodney to provide the answer about meetings with the Minister of Tertiary Education and correspondence (note “and correspondence”) with the Minister of Tertiary Education. You want my vote which to date comes with it the “two pay packets” and a possible “Degree” of certainty, the kudos on your C V or do you not. I ask voters to withhold their vote until James comes clean. Seems unlikely you can hide from social media. Time will tell. It is unequitable to come with dirt on your hands sir!
4 James and other law students etc. If you are of a mind please feel free to comment on my blog dated 23/6/2015. gordondicksonblogtown.nz The University of Canterbury law school tutors and lecturers have failed to respond to this query with any enthusiasm or substance from a student on behalf of the victims of the earthquakes. Outside of class their voices are conspicuous by their silence. In fairness two members of the legal academia did pop their heads up above the parapets of the law school building but albeit briefly. Our Law school is out of step and touch with the the other University law schools (the exception being the University of Waikato and their Law school employee Margaret Wilson still has to finalise her viewpoint which is well overdue now!)
5 As to meeting with you Mmmph. My experience has been with politicians that often they say one thing one day and another the next day, hence maybe we can continue here for a while. I note with dismay you haven’t asked for my vote either From that I, and the balance of the voters can conclude you either don’t want my vote or are ambivalent/ nonchalant about it. Do we all want to able to call you “President Ambivalent” or “Nonchalant President (“Non-President” for short)? Which would you prefer candidate James?
6 Soon we will be able to move onto theft of students personal property by University of Canterbury staff/public servants or contractors. My initial thoughts are “public servants” for clarity.
7 Like “the Treaty” its about “compromise” and “partnership” and I need money to get an independent legal opinion on these possible Official Information Act/Local Government Official Information And Meetings Act/ Incorporated Societies Act/Health and Safety Act breaches by the University of Canterbury and the UCSA. But I will trade/partner with you as long as you are cut, paste and email keen/committed. Politics can be pretty basic. “Deal or no deal” potential UCSA President James Addington?
8 To James I say congratulations for popping your head up above the political parapet and to the victor goes the spoils but not “two pay packets” You will note my word stipend is in speech marks and therefore is a quotation. This from a letter from the University Council dated “ 9 July 2015”
Remember now you cannot put your head back down behind the political parapet till polling closes OK?
Perhaps the balance of the candidates have no voice????
9 *Online dictionary definition of “damsel”. “even regular unmarried Janes can be referred to as damsel” but I am not brave enough to rely upon a quote from an online “Uncle Google” dictionary and refer to my fellow female UCSA members as “regular”. We know our place. The intent is to get you motivated to vote and if it takes a careful balance of gender and humour then so be it.
Kia kaha
Gordon E & O E
To all UCSA “Candidates” in the election for President & Executive officers. 1/8/2015
Congratulations on putting yourself forward.
Can you please advise me of your position on the following so all members can decide whether to vote for you or not
Q 1 Do you support Huntsoc’s view that by a member contacting the other members of this UCSA Society by email is a “Breach of the Privacy” of the member? This is the current position advised to me by Huntsoc as being the advice given to them by the current UCSA Executive.
Q 2 Do you consider Huntsoc’s Constitution should be changed to ensure 25% or 50% or 75% of their meetings become drug free?
The current U C S A President receives two paypackets. One in the form of a salary of almost $50,000 from the Students Association and the other of an unknown amount in a form of a “Stipend” for time in the other of this dual role, sitting on “Council”. That means your President has two masters and has been asked repeatedly and formally to deny and address this situation. Given it has been months now since our President was formally asked to address this situation, it is no longer tenable that our President can deny that this “conflict of interest” exists. In correspondence forwarded to the UCSA by email and by hand to the recent poorly attended Executive called “Half AGM” at the Foundry (not enough of the members turned up to amend the constitution) I took the precaution of hand delivering copies, of the previous unacknowledged and unanswered correspondence to UCSA, to this meeting. Copies were also delivered clearly marked for the attention of the President, Vice President, the Financial officer and the Secretary. I watched this document placed it the right hand of our President whilst at and had the use of the lectern. It was marked clearly marked “Inward Correspondence”. This twice delivered to the Executive of the UCSA “Inward Correspondence” was withheld from the assembled members and all other members as in normal circumstances this would have been recorded in the Minutes by the Secretary. This is unprincipled behaviour is all made possible by the recognised undeniable apathy and additionally exposed tardiness /laziness of you my fellow members. Vigilance is the price of freedom.
Q 3 So to the current Presidential candidates do you have any objection to being called “President two pay-packets” or “President Conflict” after the election?
It should be noted that when the current “President Two pay packets’” of UCSA attends “Council” of the University of Canterbury much of it is held with the “Public Excluded” so you never really know how our President conducts him or herself. The University of Canterbury’s Councils online presence was devoid of the agendas and minutes of last week’s meeting, the staff reports are false and misleading and the location advised for the meetings are false and therefore misleading too. At first glance this is a breach of an Act of Parliament. Lawsoc invited to comment please!!!!
Q 4 To the Executive candidates do you support the position of the current President and if not what would you do about it if elected?
Q 5 Do you support the installation of metal detectors at all the entry points to the University of Canterbury campus?
It is written that the Vice Chancellor Rodney Carr was in Wellington very very recently
Q6 What I would like you candidates to find out about was did he take the opportunity to meet with the Minister of Tertiary Education and if so was the University of Canterbury discussed?
“No Nukes” Student #86829284 E & O E
P s 1 Why don’t you Political Science students and academia grab this opportunity to do some polling after the recent U K debacle by your likes?
P s 2 The Law School Academia in particular are again encouraged to “wade into the fray” in regard to the access to fit and proper information from “Council”. Please do so as “law is all about the argument” N’cest pas? Perhaps your views on the subject of “Conflict of interest” to help the 12,000 students vote wisely?