<![CDATA[MARK WILSON - Blog]]>Thu, 21 May 2026 16:43:32 +1200Weebly<![CDATA[Demand results, not just dollars and virtue from politicians.]]>Mon, 19 Oct 2020 11:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/demand-result-not-just-dollars-and-virtue-from-politiciansPicture


​MOST of us hold strong opinions as to what we want from elected officials, but are they well informed and do we apply enough rigour in our judgement of politicians and how their policies actually deliver on the ideals we hold dear?

As this disrupted election cycle closes out, we have seen a raft of promises, big dollar announcements from all sides. Millions and billions spent on this and that buying votes, but should we be so easily impressed? Shouldn’t we be measuring politicians on their results, not just how much money they spend?

Imagine a business where success was implied simply by the size of the expenses column? That’s not how it works. Businesses and even personal household budgets are after results — good value for money and a return on investment.

​Personally, I’m not really interested in what you are going to spend on health, only the outcomes in terms of operations, available medicines and level of care.

I’m not impressed by the number of extra cops announced; I’d really like to know how much crime is going to be lowered.
We are too easily bought off with our own money and coerced by being told what we want to hear.

We don’t seem overly interested in doing the due diligence on whether spending will translate into something beneficial, or checking back if the policy announced actually delivered the results intended.

You only need to look back three years to the promises made last election. A quick stock take by anyone other than the most ardent Labour lap dog will unearth a dearth of results. No light rail, no billion trees and even less progress on KiwiBuild, just to name a few of a plethora of unfulfilled election vote candy.

Promise big, buy votes, deliver little and repeat.

We can all be guilty of falling for headlines and well-manicured speeches from pulpits, treating words as if they are the results themselves, and basing our approval of policies on their intention, not their effectiveness.

A recent example of this is the Prime Minister announcing if re-elected she intends to declare a climate emergency to go with the Zero Carbon Act. ‘‘Job done,’’ the fans say. Yet for all its good intentions, we need to see this for what it is — nothing but a virtue-laced, puddle-deep platitude that will achieve nothing. NZ accounts for less than 0.13% of global GHG emissions, and if we sunk into the ocean tomorrow it would make no difference to the rest of the world’s effort to combat rising emissions.

However, where we do make a difference is via displacing emissions that would be created elsewhere through feeding 40 million people with high-quality, low-emissions protein. Yet the Prime Minister is asking Kiwis to eat less meat and the Greens are hammering rural NZ at every turn.

But if we produce less food, production shifts to higher-emissions producers and we get poorer at the same time. Unfortunately, fanning the delusional hypocrisy is one of my favourite people, Sir David Attenborough, praising our Prime Minster for her climate change efforts.

But if we do our due diligence and look under the hood at the results to date, our emissions have gone up under the current government’s watch. More interestingly, the often-vilified USA has lowered its emissions significantly over the last decade, and they are lower now than when climate change villain D.J. Trump took office. Who would have ever believed that?

What happened is we cared more about what was said than what was done, what was promised than what was delivered and what was spent over what the results were.
​
This election and all those that follow demand results — don’t just vote for promises.
]]><![CDATA[A vehicular approach to weighing up the Covid-19 debate]]>Mon, 27 Apr 2020 00:52:43 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/a-vehicular-approach-to-weighing-up-the-covid-19-debate
Picture
I know I risk adding to a bitter debate, filled with intolerant vitriol aimed at anyone who dares raise questions of proportionality regarding our response to Covid-19. But hey I’m locked down at home and have a website, so I’m going to throw my two cents in.

I also know like all those who have dared to post as little as a Facebook comment questioning a certain set of Covid-19 response tactics, I’m going to be tagged as a cruel, stupid, ALT right, racist, anti-vax, pro Trump, anti-science, climate change denier who wants to kill old people. It’s OK I have thick skin and can assure you only a small smattering of that description is true.

Firstly, I want to have a dig at those of you who have dragged this debate into the gutter. Disasters often bring out the best in humanity, but they also bring out the worst and these two contrasts have been on equally vivid display over the past month.

I find it interesting those, that self-proclaim tolerance and caring, can engage in the most demonstrable behaviour towards others online and on air. 

Whether it be on TV, radio or online people have been, for lack of a better word, terrible humans.
  • shouting down thoughts and opinions
  • aggressively bullying anyone who doesn’t agree with their view
  • using the most hateful language
  • worst of all labeling people with horrible tags without knowing anything about them (I’ve seen Hitler thrown around, that really is sinking to the bottom of the barrel)

Something to keep in mind, just because someone disagrees with you doesn’t mean they hate you.
Whatever happened to reasoned debate that doesn’t end in people de-friending each other?
Make points, not personal insults, respect people’s right to think differently to, or have different views on how to get there and agree to disagree if you must.  

Anyway, back to my point small point about cars and Covid-19 and how we take a balanced approach to life and death in decision making.  

I don’t know whose response to Covid-19 has been the right one, it’s too early to tell. I’ve seen a lot of very good arguments made for every approach from Sweden’s liberal efforts to Vietnam's militant no nonsense.

I’m open to taking the facts once they are all in and weighing up the total cost and total benefit in the long run from each approach and picking a winner but it’s too soon for that now.

What I do know is we risk making poor long-term decisions if we do not question, probe and rigorously debate our approach and the proportionality of it at all stages, just like we do with other important issues in our society.

As I’ve noted above this interrogatory approach has been hard due to extreme pressure applied to agree with set narratives or risk being cast out of reasoned society. 

One core argument of the lockdown at all cost group, is that comparisons with other causes of death are not valid when dealing with Covid-19. Apparently its immoral or at the very least inappropriate to discuss and compare the efforts and associated cost incurred saving people from Covid-19 to those associated with saving people from drowning, cancer or car crashes.

I don't agree.

The argument goes something like this. Lock down antagonists will point out that, we don’t stop people driving because 353 people died on the roads in 2019, so why would we lock the country down to save an unknown number of people from Covid-19? Probably a bit of a simplistic argument, but still valid for consideration.  

Lockdown protagonists oppose this using a multiplicity of arguments, but the primary one's focus on the impact to others from a contagious virus along with the unknown nature of a new virus. It’s therefore better to be extremely cautious to avoid unknown downside risk. They are both valid points but don’t detract from a sensible cost benefit approach especially since we now have a lot more data to add into the mix.

If we lockdown for Covid-19 and take a similar approach to lowering the road toll by banning driving, it plays out almost identically.

With Covid-19, the risk of death is significantly reduced for the individual themselves as well for society in general. Health wise in the short term we are all better off.

With vehicle accidents, if we ban driving, the risk of death on the roads is eliminated for the individual and significantly reduced for pedestrians, horse riders, cyclists and any other road non-vehicular road users and health wise in the short term we are all alive and therefore better off.

On the face of it this seems like a fair comparison of results.

Yes, there could be endless debate about the validity of the comparison and we could get lost in the rabbit warren of semantics, arguing about how essential driving is compared to say visiting a sick relative but at that point it’s all very subjective.

So, while enjoyable and extremely useful especially to those in far flung areas driving isn’t compulsory and we survived 99% of humanity without cars, so there is almost more precedent to a life without driving than our current situation of effectively quarantining healthy people.
So, if we wanted to save the approximately 350 lives lost in road accidents each year in NZ, we could in theory ban driving completely, just like we have locked down society to save lives from Covid-19, yet we don’t…?

The reason why we don’t is simple, the costs are too high. Yes, it would work but it would also create a plethora of broader issues, including extreme financial destruction to the NZ economy. The cure is worse than disease in this instance.

Covid-19 is very similar, we can shut down the economy and severely restrict social interactions (lockdown), we know it’s possible and it’s likely saving lives but just like banning cars it creates a mountain of other issues.

Quite simply we don’t ban cars because the cost of not driving is too high for society to entertain as an option, even for the sake of those lives. The deaths while tragic, are collateral damage for the benefit to society of vehicular transport.

In NZ we value those lives lost at around 4.7 million a pop, which gives us nearly 1.7 billion dollars of lost life per year on the roads. To mitigate deaths where we can (trying to spend around or less than 4.7 million per life) we invest money based on a cost v benefit basis in road safety.

We have laws to restrict speed limits, enforce safe vehicles and seat belts, ban substances that impair driving as well as preventing certain people (too young, too old, too blind) from driving, we have road safety adverts on TV and billboards around our highways.

We have had an active debate about death on our roads for decades and worked hard to reduce them while continuing to drive as we realise the alternative is catastrophic.

Reluctantly but in a fully cognisant manner we accept some death, as its necessary for what we have decided is the greater good of society.

It may sound harsh but it’s an accepted reality, so why is Covid-19 any different?

Andrew Cuomo the Governor of New York said if we save one life the lockdown is justified. Just one life…? He was forceful in this argument and berated the reporter who was simply trying to make the point I'm making here.  This is hardly balanced is it? We don’t take this approach with Cancer, on the roads or at our beaches, lakes and rivers to save lives.

There are so many things we could ban, change and do away with to save just one life if we deemed the cost was worth the benefit but as a society we haven’t. What we have done is take a balanced approach to risk mitigation and looked at the costs of reducing death further to see if they are reasonable. We then decide how much to fund the likes of road safety, Pharmac and the health system and what laws to pass to save people from harm without impinging too deeply on their freedoms. 

It may sound harsh but with limited resources it’s the only way to sensibly allocate funding. If you disagree about the allocation you get to have your say every three years at the election.  
Taking the ‘whatever it takes’ approach for Covid-19 and applying it more generally, how can we then in the future...
  • Tell cancer patients we can’t afford to fund their drugs?
  • Hip replacement patients they need to wait years to get their operation due to health funding issues yet?
  • Communities they can’t get that roundabout or underpass because not enough people have died to make it worthwhile?

Id argue, morally now that we can't going forward. We have removed that bar with this approach and it’s a dangerous precedent to set in a country of limited resources.

Putting it into a practical example. Patients, waiting for treatment drug treatments to be funded by Pharmac, would be royally pissed off after having often received little government compassion for their cause, that now billions of dollars have been pulled, essentially from thin air to fight Covid-19. This is the same government who said no to them, the government that has made tough choices to allocate our limited resources in the best way to save the most lives, the government now seemingly willing to spend whatever it takes to save any one life from Covid-19.  

We have never taken a win at all costs approach like this.  We have always considered the costs and benefits both in the short and long term of our options, made those public and had a debate about them.

Now I'm not taking a side here on which approach is right.  But I am asking, just how you go back to, cold hard cost benefit analysis, to decide who the government saves after this? How can we ever again justify billion-dollar slush funds for the likes for Shane Jones to splash around? Given the Covid-19 approach shouldn't it all be going to health and saving lives directly, little else matters or does it?   

Being fair to the government, this has been a train wreak globally and something all countries are struggling with, they have had to make lots of fast and hard choices and there was no real playbook. I’m sure there has also been a lot of debates behind closed doors around the issues raised in this piece and many models and predictions being made to weigh up various policies.

However little of this has filtered out to the general public, aside from some very questionable initial models on deaths and some treasury forecasts on how many of us will be unemployed. What has come out hasn’t been up for debate. As I’ve noted any dissenting view has been jumped on quickly. We haven’t been able to maturely and broadly debate our if measures are proportionate and appropriate without fear and fracture.

We have been told there is no plan B, plan A is the only plan, that to me seems ignorant at best and arrogant as worst.

For what it’s worth, I’ve been a pretty good lockdown subject, I’ve kept the bubble small, washed my hands, worked from home and played my part, for now, I won't be and don't see others doing it indefinitely.  

While I’ve reluctantly complied, my personal opinion is, we have gone too hard for too long and need a more balanced approach that considers costs and benefits more broadly in the long run, just like we do for every other cause of mortality.

However, as I’ve said it’s too early to tell and I’m happy to be debate it, learn more and be proven right or wrong in time. What would be nice is if governments and their army of partisan online warriors bashing people on their behalf were open to this as well.  

]]><![CDATA[Interesting Covid-19 Numbers]]>Fri, 17 Apr 2020 01:27:53 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/interesting-covid-19-numbersLooking at death rates in relation to testing rates provides some interesting insight. 

  • Countries who test more than 40,000 people per million death rate = 0.91%
  • Countries who test between 20,000 and 40,000 per million death rate = 3.09%
  • World average death rate = 6.67% 

More testing appears to result in lower death rates on average.

​The wider the net is cast away from highly symptomatic, very ill people self presenting to testing stations, towards the more general population the better actual representation of the morbidity of the disease we get. 

* Death rate is number of deaths/total cases. 
Covid 19 death rates
Death rates v testing rates 17/4/2020. Source: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/
​
]]><![CDATA[Never take popularity for granted]]>Wed, 19 Feb 2020 11:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/never-take-popularity-for-granted
Recent events are a timely reminder never to take tourism, nor the economic growth that rides on its back for granted.
 
History shows good times rarely last forever and after a stonking hot streak post GFC, our local economy is being unsettled by headwinds.
 
Corona virus, adverse weather events, climate change induced flight shaming, price resistance and entry taxes are just some of the red lights flashing at already slowing tourism growth.

Queenstown’s prolonged strong form has instilled confidence in many businesses and individuals to invest heavily in an increasingly bright future while the pace of change panicked some townsfolk into calling for the council to turn off the tap with politically crafted constraints.
 
Recent events should remind both the growers and growlers that an endless stream of people visiting us at the bottom of the world isn’t assured. We have been and still are a boom town, subject to cyclical forces often beyond our control which can drop a brick on the accelerator or pull the hand brake. The Wakatipu basin has ridden the roller coaster since its inception. Many have made their fortunes through hard work and good timing while others have been swamped when the tide turns.  
 
The recent shocks from Corona Virus and the tragic deluge which washed out some of our most iconic tourism attractions are not things we can predict but nor should be we surprised, challenges to our social and economic future are trust on us with a degree of regularity.
 
These shocks are hard for the community with workers and business owners beginning to feel the pinch. Some will be able to ride out the challenges with resilience and others will be less fortunate, particularly employees of impacted businesses who until very recently were in such short supply. Let’s make sure we support them as they are an essential part of our community.
 
Hopefully this is a small speed bump, not a multi car pile-up and Corona Virus turns out to be over-hyped like SARS and Birdflu and those working on our damaged tracks and roads have strong shovels and fine weather for a swift repair job.
 
If not we need to brace for impact and evaluate some of or tactics during the good times, continue to diversify and build resilience for the future.
 
While it’s good when we are running hot, I’ve long been concerned about pigeon holing ourselves to the higher end market and relying heavily on one or two key regions. This came unstuck during the GFC, so while they might not be flavour of the month younger, scruffier and more frugal lifestyle travellers and their bungy jumps and sky dives patched a hole to some extent back then. We should always aim for a diverse visitor mix demographically as a hedge against economic, health or political turmoil in certain markets.
 
We dragged heals as a community on a world class convention centre which rightly ended up being left to private enterprise. Its eventual completion will reinforce and grow our presence in the lucrative conference and incentive market. Let’s hope we see it emerge from the ground at Remarkables Park sooner rather than later as it will be increasingly vital if the leisure visitor market takes a long term hit.  Maybe we needed to chase this harder?
 
DQ has unveiled a brand refresh, which is a back to future move with Queenstown once again embracing itself as the home of adventure. To be fair this is how we have always viewed ourselves. The vigour and rigour with which this is taken to market will be key.
 
But we can only do so much and we will still need to roll with the punches as we have always done.
 
Whether we escape with a flesh wound or take major damage, remember we will have periods where visitors are not smashing down the doors to get in, so it’s lets never get complacent some might say arrogant about our position nor greedy, ungrateful or less welcoming to our guests when it’s busy.

]]><![CDATA[Clean up your room before saving the world]]>Sun, 07 Jul 2019 12:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/clean-up-your-room-before-saving-the-world​OPINION: Queenstown’s  council has hypocritically pushed its way on to the overcrowded virtue express train 5 with its recent declaration of a climate emergency.
Picture
Lake Wakatipu: By Mark Wilson
​OPINION: Queenstown’s  council has hypocritically pushed its way on to the overcrowded virtue express train 5 with its recent declaration of a climate emergency.

Not only have councillors misinterpreted what an emergency is, they have distracted from urgent local issues for which they have far more direct  responsibility and a much greater chance to resolve.

Disclaimer – I’m not a climate change sceptic, I studied climatology and climate change for my science degree at university. There is no doubt the climate is changing, it’s obvious for all to see and clearly supported by a strong scientific consensus.

I still think there is room for more sensible discussion on the scale of human impact but what I am very sceptical about is our approach to addressing our climate challenges.

It seems ironic that as we endure a very dry and mild winter complete with bare mountain tops, that myself, a keen skier, wouldn’t term our warming climate as an emergency.

An emergency, the Oxford dictionary says, ”is something dangerous or serious, such as an accident, that happens suddenly or unexpectedly and needs fast action in order to avoid harmful results”.

We have been talking about climate change non-stop since 1990, it’s hardly unexpected or sudden and while over time the results can be dangerous, I’d argue for Queenstown the chances of any mass fatalities as a result of climate change in the near future are low.

Climate change is not an emergency for Queenstown, it’s a large, extremely complex issue that will continue to impact us over our lifetime. It requires sensible and, equally, large cooperative action to mitigate.

The scale of the issue is such that Queenstown council’s action can only ever be seen as virtue signalling; in fact, most of our global action to date would fit into this basket, unfortunately.

NZ could disappear into the ocean and global C02 concentrations would carry on rising as they had before.

The formation of another Large Igneous Province (volcanic area) such as the Siberian Traps would render
all our global mitigation strategies useless due to the amount of C02 it would pump out.

Does that mean we are not impacted, or we shouldn’t try to be part of a sensible response? Not at all, we are dependent on our natural environment and our climate. We need the world to work together to maintain a safe climate and ensure we aren’t a mountain biking-only resort.

But we should clean up our own room first by focusing on our local social, economic and environmental emergencies, crises and issues. We have a hope and strong need to resolve these in our lifetimes.

Prior to the last local body elections there were promises to address our worker housing shortage, which many would call a crisis, and those living in expensive and overcrowded conditions or struggling to find good staff would agree with this term.

While there has been a lot of constructive talk, action has been far slower, and the issue remains.

If you want an emergency, look at our healthcare or lack of, we have spent decades begging for proper resources locally.

Despite this being a hot topic at local and national elections and a lot of talk about private solutions, like the little girl in the World Vision adverts, ”we still wait” for a tangible outcome.

We have a traffic crisis, with gridlocked roads significantly impacting our local and visitor experience. The talkfests around solving this have set records and yet those in Shotover Country and Lakes Hayes Estate know all about waiting … waiting in traffic!

Lastly, if we want a real environmental emergency, we need look no further than our freshwater. Queenstown’s council has breached its own consents for wastewater discharge hundreds of times and has been fined
for numerous overflows into our pristine fresh water bodies in recent years.

Its answer is to apply for a resource consent to make such
discharges legal for the next 35 years.

It is this blinding hypocrisy that makes this climate circus even more galling.

So, Queenstown council, by all means take sensible action in step with the global community on climate change, but first look at the things we have cocked up in our own backyard that need solving first, and if you really want to pretend to be serious about the environment, save our freshwater as we will poison ourselves long before we cook at this rate!
]]><![CDATA[Likely to cause offence]]>Mon, 06 Aug 2018 12:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/likely-to-cause-offencePicture

We all get offended by things we hear or behaviour we experience.

It’s natural to feel upset or hurt by inappropriate comments or actions and it takes a level of resilience to deal with it. It’s normal to disagree with others’ views but usually that doesn’t mean they should be banned from voicing them. 
​​
NZ hasn’t been immune from heated debates around free speech or racial and gender equality, cue the recent fracas around controversial speakers Lauren Southern and Stefan Molyneux.

It’s also been hard to miss the emboldened voices of other segments of our society who have traditionally been on the receiving end of discrimination or disrespect with the likes of the #MeToo movement hitting headlines.

As a democratic and civilised society, these topics bubbling to the surface for debate isn’t to be feared, it’s how we evolve social norms. However, it’s not always positive, and these elevated levels of social justice coupled with our hyper-connective world have served up some negative outcomes.

One such outcome is people living in a state of perpetual offence on behalf of others. Mark Richardson said it well the other day, he doesn’t want to walk on eggshells for the rest of his life at the risk of offending or upsetting people and we need to develop resilience. That very resilience we need to turn the other cheek and carry on is being severely eroded.

We have a proliferation of self-appointed guardians of social dignity, getting offended on behalf of others, in a rabid rush to signal their outrage and hashtag the moral high ground.

In this frenzy, things get taken out of context and people are attacked without the full story being taken into account.
We had a classic example of this closer to home in recent weeks.

A light-hearted conversation between two consenting adults on Facebook apparently required intervention from Auckland lawyer and #MeToo blogger Zoe Lawton, who made a complaint to the Law Society.

Mainstream media rushed in like schoolboys to a playground fight, fanning the flames of discontent around well-respected Queenstown lawyer Graeme Todd and his whimsical Facebook comment to a friend in regard to the female gender imbalance at his local law firm.

No one bothered to ask Graeme’s staff if they were offended by what was clearly a joke, or if they enjoyed working with him. Zoe and others simply rushed in, misinterpreting the jovial banter’s harmless intentions, vilifying the well-respected lawyer.

Incidentally the comment in question was made under a shared photo of a work lunch at The Hills’ golf course for the Todd & Walker team.

Luckily the defence for Todd was equally as swift with most people seeing the issue for the PC garbage it was.

I’d challenge Zoe Lawton to visit Todd & Walker Law and ask staff about the work environment, it’s probably one of the most progressive and harmonious I’ve seen.

The staff Christmas functions are even overseas trips.

Media and the armies of offended keyboard warriors give legitimacy to this sort of dross. No one would have heard of the likes of Southern and Molyneux nor of Graeme’s light-hearted comments if people hadn’t made such a song and dance about them.

The very people who wanted to silence things they didn’t agree with ensured that everyone heard about it.

Remember, you can always stop reading, listening to or viewing things you find offensive, including me, and before you get offended on someone’s behalf ask them if they are in fact offended. You might find they have a better sense of humour than you think.

View the original column published in the Mountain Scene - HERE 
]]><![CDATA[Paying at the pump]]>Mon, 16 Apr 2018 12:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/paying-at-the-pump
We are a generous lot down here in the Southern Lakes, especially when it comes to Auckland and the government.

We are a great host and the holiday destination of choice for many from our biggest city, we keep the grass mowed and beer cold for their arrival.

On the country’s behalf we also host millions of overseas visitors and pump bucket loads of GST, and other tourism-associated tax revenue from company taxes and PAYE, back to Wellington to help the government rumble along.

We also pay hefty excise taxes on fuel, in fact tax makes up about half the cost of filling your tank and added to that what AA claims are the highest distributor margins on fuel in the OECD [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development].

Just to compound things further we live in an isolated part of an isolated country, so it’s little surprise fuelling is an expensive job.

Now excise tax most would argue is a necessarily evil as it funds NZ Transport Agency and its roading network, which most of us use regularly. But as money streams north we are right to ask what comes back?
​
Historically we have been forced to scrap and fight for every penny, with our council and local MPs constantly working hard to lobby for funding on various transport-related projects, often with limited success.

For example, it took decades to land a two-lane bridge over the Kawarau, which is behind schedule and will no doubt be overwhelmed before we get a second crossing.

There are also improvements needed along SH6 for the swathe of large housing developments already underway or planned, which will see the Shotover Bridge reach capacity in the next decade. It will require massive investment from NZTA.

Now those up north want even more from us as a new 12 cent increase has been mooted to cover the cost of increased investment into public transport, road safety and a few million for regional roads, but let’s be honest this is the rest of New Zealand funding Auckland’s new trains, buses and bike lanes.

This isn’t the first time regional NZ has been left feeling like it’s footing the bill for Auckland’s shambolic planning and council ineptness and yet we face many of the same challenges. While there has been increased recog-nition, we still sit behind our larger cousins in the north fighting for their disregarded scraps with other regions.

In fairness Auckland is being hit with an extra regional fuel tax to help cover the costs but even with that the average Aucklander will still pay less for their fuel than we do.As GST is levied on the total cost of filling up, including all the taxes, we will also pay a high tax on the increases, so it’s really double whammy.

Now I’m a regular visitor to Auckland for work so I might get a bit of value from my kind donation but I can’t see the majority of Southern Lakes residents getting their fair share. Maybe I need to dig up a small segment of tarmac each time and bring it back with me or grab a bus seat or something to give back to our region?

On the plus side, road safety funding has been boosted and might get a few more rumble strips and ‘stay left’ arrows painted on our danger spots, which will be well received, but overall it’s a bit of a kick in the guts.

No doubt we will continue to be frustrated by local roading projects not getting the support they need as we watch from a distance our dollars paying for Aucklanders to get an easier commute.

Link to the original article in the Mountain Scene here 
]]><![CDATA[Country leaving town for dead in respecting water.]]>Thu, 29 Mar 2018 11:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/country-leaving-town-for-dead-in-respecting-waterUrban New Zealand has leveled a lot of criticism over the fence at its rural neighbours, however as we see ongoing health warnings for Auckland’s beaches, its worth looking at who really respects our water and is getting off their chuff and doing something about it?
Picture
The Ministry for the Environment just released their much anticipated report estimating the cost of making 90 per cent of our rivers and lakes "swimmable" by 2040. The bill totals about $220 million a year, most of which would be borne those living in rural areas and Auckland.

The costs were calculated after the nation's 16 regional councils submitted their draft targets for meeting the National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management and in the rural space those mitigation costs fall very heavily on the sheep and beef sector (53% of the total rural bill or just over 70 million per year).

There is no doubt water is at the centre of life here in New Zealand, we are surrounded by it, often drenched in it, it is a key driver of industry and agriculture, it is without a doubt our most valuable resource and in some places its under real threat both in terms of cleanliness and abundance.

Off the back of some concerning water quality numbers urban kiwis have focused the blame on country folk effectively placing themselves on a moral pedestal, but are they doing their bit and do they really appreciate water like those in countryside?

We often in life we find those who talk the biggest games fail to live up to their own lofty proclamations of grandeur.
There are several high-profile examples which spring to mind…

Jason Russell, co-founder of non-profit Invisible Children and director of the "Kony 2012" viral video campaign, fleeced money from good natured folk to chase down the African warlord, only to be arrested for pleasuring himself in public while his charity appeared to be mostly a sham.

In more recent times our generosity towards those heartbreaking TV adverts from World Vision and UNICEF has been blighted by corruption and sexual abuse scandals.

I would argue that the great water debate is a classic example of town talking a big game and delivering bugger all, while country humbly goes about cleaning up its act.

I put the crux of the matter down to respect of water.

For rural New Zealand water is not a nicety used to create ornate gardens and keep cars clean...water is the lifeblood of the productive economy and farmers and growers have come to respect water as essential in everything they do, and this respect is crystallised in our dry years and is leading to action in terms of conservation and cleanliness.

Country not only knows how important water is to its survival it also intimately understands where its water comes from, to be fair it's hard not to when you spend countless thousands on drilling bores, building storage and piping it around your farm! Country also knows that costly, smelly business of dealing with waste, from stumping up for septic tank pump outs to countless hours on the slurry wagon dealing with effluent our farmers need to clean up their own crap and for the most part they do.

Conversely down the road in Newmarket and Remuera water is more of an expected amenity that is someone else’s responsibility. It simply appears clean and treated from the tap each day while the daily bowel movement disappears around the s-bend never to be seen again until the next heavy rain when you spot a couple of nuggies floats past during the morning dip at the beach. I would hazard a guess most in our towns and cities have no idea where their water comes from and those lorded over by metered local authorities only take a passing glance at their usage when the bill gets paid.

In short country has a hard earned respect of water gained through understanding, something that urban New Zealand just doesn’t have. If it’s dirty, dry or overflowing its their issue and they need to deal with it, not blame someone else.

This view was reinforced to me a few months back...While the deep south was parched beyond anything in recent memory a friend of mine, famed travel agent Alan Ward confessed to some weekend watering of his lawn and tussocks. I paused to contemplate this and asked him why he was hosing away merrily as water restrictions and sprinkler bans were being handed out by local councils thick and fast. His response was a little stunted and confused but eventually he managed to settle on because it keeps them looking good.

My suburban friend has just summed up the great majority of Kiwis living in towns and cities around New Zealand. Flushing millions upon millions of litres of often treated water onto their lush urban parklands for nothing more than pure aesthetics.
I countered him stating that surely his ornamental garden was not important when we were so short of water?... shouldn't we prioritise if for growing food and drinking, not to mention those tussocks are pretty hardy and will probably last a few weeks without a drink.

He disagreed and I’d argue like Wardy that most people turn on their taps assuming an unlimited supply of clean water, yet if they get a boil water notice their complacency is rocked and they start looking for a cow to blame if they can find one.
I do concur those in the countryside use their roof or bore gathered supply to water their gardens and lawns (often this is too reduce fire risk) and some city folk make great use of their water growing majestic vegetable gardens spewing forth bountiful courgettes and lettuces for the their summer salads but like any argument mine relies on a general adherence to my theory not complete obedience.

So the battle lines remain drawn, city folk launch salvos at those running their centre pivots and K-Line pods around our rural landscapes and country folk defend themselves while sharing on Facebook the regular beach health updates from Auckland's tragically polluted shorelines. In the end we reach a stalemate on who is to blame and who needs to fix it.
So who as walking the walk in terms of cleaning up their act?

As major users and contributors to water pollution rural New Zealand rightly so is taking to the task of conservation, mitigation and remediation with earnest, waterways are being fenced, effluent managed, riparian strips planted, nutrient limits set, technology’s for more efficient water and waste management adopted and production practices are changing. It’s expensive business but the rural sector is mucking in and getting it done. 

As I noted above this is something rural New Zealand has a responsibility to do but it also pays to remember the water used in the countryside is used productively and almost exclusively goes into growing food which is either sold to other kiwis mostly in urban areas or sold offshore, keeping our economy running. It’s an excuse to be fair but I’d argue it’s a meritorious use of water if its used well.

Conversely urban New Zealand has a long way to go as councils up and down the land face the reoccurring issue of waste water contaminating storm water and said storm water polluting beaches as their ratepayers bemoan costly sewerage system upgrades.

The agricultural sector has been hauled over the coals for breaching discharge rules while councils up and down the land regularly breach theirs with gay abandon. The Queenstown Lakes District Council breached its discharge consent into the pristine Shotover River 174 times between July 2011 and Sept 2014 and have been fined again recently for another breach. If councils are not breaching a consent they are applying for one, Auckland and Invercargill just to name a few are locking in decades more of legal raw sewage discharge into waterways … imagine if a dairy farmer applied for a 30 year consent to discharge effluent into a local river?

I won’t even start with what is washed down the storm water drains daily from the streets and backyards across New Zealand! 

So while aside from the time honoured process of slowly upgrading sewage treatment plants and replacing broken pipes there hasn't been a lot of movement in urban New Zealand to clean up their act but they have offered a lot of advice to the rest of us.

As a sense check on this if you're reading this and living in a city, what have you personally done to contribute towards water conservation or cleanliness in your own home, aside from posted on Facebook or moaned to the council about it? On the flip side I would hazard a guess most farmers have directly been part of taking action both through their bank account and hard toil.

So while country has some issues to fix, its is a least making progress while town sits on its hands and offers advice, it’s time for a little more action and a little less talk! 
​
View Ministry for the Environment Report: Here
]]><![CDATA[Don’t tell me or others how to eat, pray and love]]>Fri, 08 Dec 2017 11:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/dont-tell-me-or-others-how-to-eat-pray-and-love
Summer is BBQ time and what a glorious start to the BBQ season here in the Wakatipu. Add in some great Test cricket on the TV and the arrival of our latest shipment of Bainfield Road lamb from down south, the team at Arthurs Shore couldn’t be happier.

However, as each year goes by I feel a growing animosity towards the carnivores amongst us. It started but a whisper but, amplified by like-minded anti-meat and dairy campaigners banding together on social media and more support in mainstream media, it is now a full-blown movement of some size.
Picture

I’ve got nothing against people eating what they want or for that matter, believing in any god they want or competing in bedroom Olympics with a gender of their choosing – this is providing of course they afford the same courtesy to me.

I regularly endure strings of negative and often abusive comments online whenever I post, share or comment on my support of the agricultural industry or enjoyment of steaks and thickshakes.

In contrast, I think to myself when was the last time I told a vegetarian they shouldn’t eat vegetables or a pescetarian they shouldn’t eat fish?

It used to be simpler. As a scruffy wee kid I smashed back the Southland staple meat and three vege with the carefree naivety of youth.

New Zealand was a place where people could eat what they liked and at worst get a confused look at the restaurant.

NZ had a role, we fed others, we still do. NZ is the number one exporter of dairy products and sheep meat globally and while we are no longer just one big farm, agriculture and the trade of animal-based products still accounts for almost two-thirds of all our exports.

I get it some people don’t like the taste of meat or dairy, I feel your pain, I hate feta, cucumber and olives. Others have food allergies or health issues which limit what they can eat. I sympathise with those who must forgo some of life’s great delicacies.

There are slightly more aggressive antagonists who feel moral outrage over the consumption of animal products but I’m outraged at some things going on around the world as well so I can relate. Whatever the reason is, you are entirely welcome to choose what sits on your plate, just not what sits on mine.

What does aggrieve me is science denial, the kind we saw during the US election and to a lesser extent our own and those who spread around recklessly this mis-information and click bait on so-called health impacts so that it can be picked up by the easily-influenced online.

Cue a flurry of posts on farming ruining the world here…

In moderation, animal proteins from meat and dairy form a key part of a balanced diet for most of the population, or so my sister, who seemed to spend most of her life studying nutrition and dietetics at university, tells me along with the Ministry of Health and every other major reputable public health institution here and globally.

The other thing I think we forget is the poor producer in all of this. The attacks on their product and their way of life are shameful. Most farmers I know love their animals and most hunters respect their prey, there will always be those who don’t but that’s humanity for you.

What is also very human is that we evolved from hunter-gathers by domesticating animals and planting crops (farming) – it allowed us to develop the modern society that we enjoy today.

Without us carnivores, there would be no modern civilisation, no BBQ season, no tofu sausages!

Read the original piece in the Mountain Scene HERE
]]><![CDATA[Immigration – turning off the tap will kill us]]>Mon, 30 Oct 2017 03:28:11 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/immigration-turning-off-the-tap-will-kill-usRafting in Queenstown
Congratulations to Labour and the Greens for wooing Winston and forming a new government.
​
I’m picking the yoga lessons taken in opposition helped keep your hamstrings flexible enough to accommodate the bending required to meet Winston’s demands?

While myself and 59 per cent of our electorate who voted for National will be disappointed, I appreciate equally there will also be many locals ecstatic with the outcome.

One group that won’t be dancing a jig at the result are our foreign workers on temporary visas and those wishing to work their way towards residency and one day call themselves a Kiwi and eventually after a few more years a local in the Wakatipu.

Another group equally unhappy will be those who employ them.
Immigration, be it temporary or permanent, has not only helped shape our region, it is essential to its future.

I ask you this, when was the last time you had a pint poured by a Kiwi and, tourism and hospitality employers, how many of you employ more Kiwis than foreigners? I often have it exclaimed by friends who visit that they can get through an entire trip to Queenstown without meeting another New Zealander bar me.

Whether you like it or not, the reality of the situation is we rely heavily on our friends from other lands to keep the lights on and the tills ringing and Winston Peters has this group well and truly in his sights.

Winnie and his red and green posse won’t always agree on things but the noises coming out of the Beehive are sounding ominous for our area in this regard. Winnie wants us to find, hire and, if need be, train Kiwis. Employers, hands up if you haven’t already tried this? Not many hands, I’m picking.

So Winston and Jacinda, if tourism is such a key plank in our economy (as farming is definitely not on your combined Xmas card list), how is it you expect us to staff our businesses and continue to deliver a world-leading visitor experience without access to the labour force we need?

Before we start, the current system barely works, cutting it back is unconscionable.

We are the shop window for NZ’s tourist industry, a premium destination that needs to offer premium service.
We cannot simply transport unemployed graduates from WINZ university to Queenstown and expect them overnight to become personable and highly-skilled service staff pouring cocktails at our best bars, nor can we throw a trainee badge on them for weeks and months as they get up to speed, that’s assuming these people even exist and are willing to move.

This is the world cup of the tourism industry – we need battle-ready staff or at least ones who are easy to upskill.
Even if we could find suitably-skilled Kiwis, they often tell us they can’t afford the cost of living here in the long run.

We know it’s bloody expensive to live here and it’s true we don’t always pay the best wages but we are lucky as many of our foreign visitors come not for money but for a memorable lifestyle experience.For someone who isn’t looking to build a career and stay forever, and even for some of those who are, our lifestyle is enough to attract skills and experience far in excess of what we could ever afford to pay for or hope to get locally.

Finally, we are like many other global resorts, a multinational melting pot of cultures and experiences and it’s made us, at least in my view, a better place to live. I love the diversity and I know visitors enjoy it.
We have created something special in regard to the varied and dynamic group of people who call Queenstown home for a season or for life and I’d hate to lose this.
​
Winnie’s racist xenophobia and his 1970s command and control economic policy could derail us badly down here. Jacinda, we implore you to listen to us on immigration and keep him in check.

The original column was published in the Mountain Scene HERE 


]]><![CDATA[We have record migration but are too many good Kiwis leaving?]]>Sun, 15 Oct 2017 11:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/october-16th-2017
Kiwis Air NZ
Picture from stuff.co.nz
I ​was just reading this good article from Ryan Greenaway-McGrevy on interest.co.nz. He argues despite a lot of publicity recently around record migration we still have far to many kiwis contributing their skills and experience to other economies. What do you think... is having 1 in 6 kiwis living abroad a failure for New Zealand or a natural result of being a small geographically isolated country in an ever globalizing world?

Personally I think it's entirely understandable that young kiwis want to go and explore the world. They always have and I'm pretty sure short of a massive global conflict wreaking havoc elsewhere they always will.
​
What does concern me somewhat however is those who leave for reasons other than for a grand adventure broadening their horizons around the globe.
Greenaway-McGrevy points out 1 in 4 Kiwi's with tertiary degree now live abroad, which means the ever squeezed NZ taxpayer who is funding 80% of those education costs (soon to be 100%) has done a lot to help the economy's of other countries. That to me regardless of if there has been a slowing in recent years is quite alarming, especially considering we do have a skills shortage for good people in our country across most sectors.

This election a lot has been made of pouring more money into educating our own, so that we don't need to import talent. However with porous boarders, a high global demand for skills and the economic means to travel our educated Kiwis are always going to be at risk of flying the coop. One could argue we wouldn't be as short on talent (we would be short of houses) if even a quarter of those globe trotting Kiwis came home to roost.

It's not that simple though, being a small country playing in the global pool for talent we are competing with far bigger cheque books and you cannot blame our best and brightest for chasing marquee career opportunities and top dollar aboard. One answer to that issue is higher wages but that's a long hard road, so we end up filling the gaps where we can with the best people we can afford, either domestically or via immigration.

Now some of the gaps are glaring, most to be fair being in industries and roles where not everyone requires a tertiary education such as construction, tourism and hospitality or in new industries where training globally has struggled to keep up with the pace of change, such as software development. That quite rightly so begs the question..... are we training people in the wrong skills here in NZ? We export academics, accountants, bankers, marketers and the like, partly due to the best ones seeking oversees opportunity's and bigger pay cheques but also party because lets face it we have too many arts and certain types of commerce grads for our domestic skills market. At the same time we bring in builders, programmers, plumbers and chefs...?

​So I ask is a massive boost to tertiary funding via free education the answer when 25% of those who receive this education are residing abroad and we are bringing in record numbers of other to fill our real skill shortages? If students are free to choose to study what they like and then free to live and work where they like the ROI seems to be questionable on this investment.
​
There is no black and white answer and its going to take a more holistic re-think in terms of how education, immigration and our economy link together in a increasingly open world (both physically and technologically). It is something the government should have high on the agenda, rather than the xenophobic arguments we seem to be having around migration coupled with the ideological ones around access to free education. 
]]><![CDATA[Extreme greenies utopian views defy common sense]]>Sat, 12 Aug 2017 12:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/extreme-greenies-utopian-views-defy-common-senseQueenstown at night from remarkables
I love the great outdoors, I’ve grown up immersed in what it has to offer and care greatly about its future and making sure the next generation is lucky enough to enjoy the scenic wonder and recreational pursuits that I’ve been fortunate enough to. While I’m passionate about the environment I don’t consider myself a greenie.

I remember growing up seeing a bumper sticker which read “the only fresh air is the space between a greenie’s ears”. The phrase has always stuck with me.

It's often said our reckless capitalist consumerism is killing the planet,  but its my view that illogical rhetoric from the green lobby, personal apathy and misplaced polices of political parties both foreign and domestic are also contributing threats.

Aside from a handful of exceptions, the poorest countries on earth have the largest challenges in terms of their environment and the loss of native flora and fauna going forward. 

Their lack of wealth means they have very few choices and they are easily exploited by large corporations.

At a local level, if people are cold they need to burn what they can to keep warm or cook food. If they are hungry they need to eat what’s available regardless how or where it’s grown to survive. They don't pause to think about preservation for the greater good, they simply don’t have that luxury. 

This is well supported by research with a body of evidence showing that once GDP per captia passes $5,000 USD people start caring more about the environment and improvements begin occur in many key indicators.

New Zealand relative affluence gives us choices. We can choose to use plastic bags or not, or to protect some areas of our country from logging or mining for the next generation. Even though in doing so we might forego some short-term economic gain, our country can afford it. 

Thus we have chosen to try to restore some of our native species and become predator-free by 2050. These wildlife preservation campaigns are not cheap, neither is pest eradication, and all of these things come at a great cost and all rely on a successful economy to deliver funding.

There is a balance between the economy and the environment and here in aotearoa we at least have the freedom of speech and political alignment to debate where that lies and what policies we need to achieve it. However the conversation is often sidetracked by the extreme green lobby and their views that at times defy logic and common sense.

As a result of this global green pressure we are about to spend $14 billion over the next decade on buying carbon credits to meet our Paris accord obligations. This is despite our greenhouse gas emissions being an inconsequential 0.1 per cent of global emissions. How many new waste treatment plants, waterway and beach clean-ups or recycling campaigns could that money buy? Not to mention social services or even tax cuts for hard-working Kiwis.

The Australian government is in the equally difficult bind of justifying rising energy costs associated with phasing out their 6 remaining coal power plants while globally their are over 1000 new plants either under construction or planned. Is there a better way they could contribute to environmental causes without impacting on the well being of their population. I'd rather they focused harder along with NZ on tackling illegal fishing in the Southern Ocean for one and not leave it solely to NGO's like Sea Sheppard. 

Then there is the argument around well what is the natural or ideal state for the environment? Riddle me this, what is more natural, a handful of Hereford beef cattle drinking from a high country creek or thousands of flush toilets funneling human waste, sanitary products and cleaning chemicals via sub-standard local septic and centralised waste treatment stations back into our waterways, oceans and ground water?

While it may be manageable and sensible to exclude livestock on intensive lowland farms from our waterways, excluding those animals on our extensive high country farms would require millions of treated fence posts, concrete troughs and lengths of plastic piping from here to the moon.

The visual pollution alone would be devastating to our high country vistas, not to mention the use of fossil fuels and other chemicals to complete the water systems. 

We need to continue to have a common sense approach that allows the drivers of our economy to continue to operate in parts of our landscape so that we can foot the bill to protect others and maintain the quality of life Kiwis expect.

The environment is vital for our economy and our economy is vital in allowing us to protect the environment.
​
The fact they go hand-in-hand is often forgotten by certain elements in our society.

Read the original column in the Mountain Scene  online HERE
]]><![CDATA[Is a revamped WinterFest too little too late?]]>Wed, 21 Jun 2017 12:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/is-a-revamped-winterfest-too-little-too-lateMark Wilson, Queenstown Winterfestival Dog Barking Speight's Dog Barking Competition, WinterFest
Tonight we mark the opening of Winterfestival (sort of) but are we also marking the beginning of the end of an era?
 
I’m a creature of habit, a traditionalist and recidivist attendee of certain events.
 
I rarely miss a Southland Stags home game, love the Glenorchy Races and you would have found me fossicking around Waimahaka at our Mai Mai the first Saturday in May since 1993.
 
Another of my annual traditions has been Winterfestival.
 ​
Mark Wilson Suitcaserace Queenstown WinterfestivalSpeedo Swat - Suitcase Race, Queenstown Winter Festival
I’ve been attending since the 90’s involving myself as an overactive participant, MC and advocate since 2004. To be fair I’ve probably been guilty of enjoying myself excessively at festival over the years. I’ve shown too much skin, embraced dressing in drag too readily and woken up dusty and disheveled from night time antics too often, because embracing the spirit of the festival is what it's all about right?
 
Over the years Winter Festival has served an honorable purpose for Queenstown.  It heralded the start of winter, showcasing the adventurous yet laid back atmosphere and great activities the region has to offer. It also allowed locals to emerge from their burrows let down their hair a little and embrace what it means to live in the greatest place on earth.
 
Behind the scenes it's not easy running an international-quality festival in what is still a small town. Financially, logistically and creatively it’s a real strain to maintain success for over 40 years. But credit where credits due, on a tight budget the festival team have to strived hard to stay relevant for locals, a shop window for the region, and an entertaining experience for our visitors. 
 
However talk has been around for some time of struggles. Like many events money has been harder to find, this required more backing essentially from the public purse. Organisers also found relevance harder to attain with some events no longer the sell out successes they once were and others shelved for a variety of reasons. Calls came for revitalisation, they grew loud enough to force a rethink and a move to a shorter festival this year.
 
I whole heatedly support the move but feel it might be too little too late… Why? Well it’s not something you can pin on any one person or thing. There have a couple of misguided decisions over the years but any event will have those, there has been societal change and things like stricter health and safety and alcohol legislation hasn’t helped and the ravages of time always wear down an event.
 
I think the most pressing cause however is festival slowly moving away from its roots and becoming too politically correct, a lot like the Wellington 7’s did, without really remaking itself well enough to appeal to a completely new audience. The party atmosphere was carefully phased down and has been replaced to an extent with a softer more artistic and family orientated tone. The brash adolescent excitement and eyebrow raising madness of early years replaced with a mature, controlled and appropriate feel.
 
Sadly I seem to have lost my enthusiasm, going from addicted to indifferent. After years of battling the cold in the splash and dash, sliding down the peak on a suitcase and chasing Jose around the hills in the Dog Derby, I’ve hung up my drag racing heels and said goodnight for now - but hopefully not goodbye to festival.
]]><![CDATA[Rethinking Transportation 2020-2030]]>Mon, 15 May 2017 11:50:56 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/rethinking-transportation-2020-2030
Rethinking Transportation 2020-2030
Click to read report
]]><![CDATA[We don’t know how lucky we are, New Zealand]]>Sat, 13 May 2017 12:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/we-dont-know-how-lucky-we-are-new-zealandBay of Islands NZ
OPINION: I was too young to enjoy John Clarke, aka Fred Dagg, in his heyday but like many Kiwis I’ve always felt a strong connection to his message of 'we don't know how lucky we are'.

I’m not afraid of a bit of travel – I recently had a fantastic trip around Asia. However, I always appreciate coming home.
​
That said I’m in a state of constant bafflement at those who seem ungrateful for the privilege of residing in the greatest country on earth.
Most global agencies seem to rate us as the pinnacle of places to live, but this group of Kiwis seems to live in a bubble of ignorance, with little idea of the rest of the world.

1st - THE LEGATUM PROSPERITY INDEX™ 2016 
4th - Safest Country in the world 2016 
1st Equal as least corrupt country - Transparency International’s 2017 Corruption Perception Index 
9th - Human Development Index for quality of life 

Just like Fred Dagg’s anthem: “It’s not perfect and shit does happen but when it’s all said and done we just don’t know how lucky we are!”

There’s no shortage of examples of Kiwis running down New Zealand like we are going to hell in a handbasket.
Take water quality – you’d think from our media landscape NZ’s a toxic wasteland of poisoned streams and polluted rivers.

While we have challenges I’d take the Kawarau and Oreti over the Red River in Vietnam or the Pearl River in China any day.

Our cities’ sewerage treatment systems need improving but on the famed tourist island of Koh Tao, in Thailand, and many other parts of the world, they don’t have any at all.

Human waste just works its way into the ocean via the ground water – the same ground water from which drinking water is drawn.

The seemingly pristine beaches in the rainy season would breach NZ health guidelines daily due to polluted run-off.

We think our tourist industry is destroying our serene natural beauty, but in Halong Bay, Vietnam, while cruising with more than 100 other tourist boats, I watched a tour guide throw the local delicacy ‘choco pies’ (a biscuit) complete with wrapper to monkeys.

Those wrappers ended up in the ocean to join the already plastic-laden waters.

We think poverty is rampant, yet we only really know what relative poverty is – being poorer than someone else – and have little concept of absolute poverty. I would encourage some further reading for people on this instead of NZ media headline skimming. 

A trip overseas will often highlight the difference for most Kiwi's, who will come home as I do every time with a far greater appreciation for New Zealand.

I challenge anyone to visit the Hmong hill tribes in North Vietnam and tell me you still believe we have it rough in NZ.. Dreadfully poor, they simply get on with life with a mile-wide smile.

In Macau they seem to have built another 50 odd casinos since my last trip 10 years ago.
They provide great entertainment and shade you from whatever pittance of the sun’s rays sneak through the smog and the haze blown from China’s industrial belt.

The action might be hot and the shopping amazing, but air’s killing you slowly and the water – well let’s just say you wouldn’t bathe the dog in it.

NZ’s far from perfect and we do need to work hard to protect our environment and our way of life.
But in the words of the late, great John Clarke: We simply don’t know how lucky we are.

View the original piece in the Mountain Scene HERE 
]]><![CDATA[Are you stifling your employees and your business?]]>Wed, 12 Apr 2017 12:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/stifling-your-employeesA couple of weeks ago I was reviewing some radio adverts and taking calls from clients in Halong Bay Vietnam. 

Extortionate SPARK NZ roaming charges aside, It got me thinking about how I work well and what type of environment gets the best out me while also being enjoyable.

In today's interconnected business community most of us are aware and open to the fact that work can take place anywhere for anyone, however there are still too many businesses and individuals wedded to the old ways.
Picture
Halong Bay - Vietnam
Everyone knows someone or you yourself may even be guilty of being overbearingly process driven in your approach to managing staff. 'The Way', the way it always has been done. The 9-5 Monday to Friday, office bound system of work we have all grown up with.

There are businesses and individuals whose primary focus is on how things are done. They place a strict focus first on systems and processes, which they hope leads to a consistent and predictable outcome as a side effect of doing things the right way. Its meritorious and can be effective if you believe that the people at the top are all knowing and the most suitably skilled and qualified to make the right calls and setup the right systems and processes at all times while ensuring these vital systems and processes continually evolve with the business.

I remember a few nations tried this form of central planning and top down management. I think history has shown while getting some early gains it was horribly unsuccessful and inefficient in the long run and the citizens/workers revolted.

These authoritarian regime like companies are great at micro managing the life out of their employees from the top down. It's justified by some very meritorious objectives such as, risk management, compliance, eliminating key person risk, consistency of service etc. They feel an overwhelming desire to know where everyone is, what they are wearing and what they are working on at all times.

These organisations or people within them want things done 'their way' as if its the only possible method regardless of the outcome. This allows the level of control and certainty they desire but just like the USSR and Cuba leaves them vulnerable to becoming bogged down with top heavy decision making hierarchies, inefficient, unresponsive and blind to rapid changes happening many levels below the decision making power base. Along the way it disengages good people and attracts box tickers and robots to the organisation, while the independent thinkers and leaders go elsewhere.

Putting the parallels to failed centrally planned economies aside the whole process first outcome second approach that often comes with this centralised decision making structure is a little like the high school maths class. Where we are told "Its all about the working".... the answer is not important. Huh..?? this is hardly great preparation for life in my eyes and put a lot of promising students off maths in their formative years.

In reality everyone works differently, uses a different approach, peaks at different times and thrives in under different conditions.

Everyone also has their own way of attacking problems and finding solutions, while it might not be the same as others in the office, if the outcome is consistently good the method in to some extent becomes irrelevant.

The modern business needs to embrace this mindset, let go a little, throw some trust out there and let their employee's use their training, education and natural flair to find a way that works effectively for them. Some boundary's are useful but too often businesses are actually creating barriers.

What's the worst that can happen?

If it doesn't work out you might have to put in place more structure later on. That's not hard to do.

However I think if your HR/P&C are doing their job and you have the right people on board you will find your employees may surprise you! Often they may discover improved methods and processes that can be applied to that area of the business. They are also your eyes and ears in market, at the coal face and will pick up key trends and happenings that require senior management attention, while bringing a different set of solutions to be considered.

This approach to managing a team also makes staff feel valued, trusted, empowered and in the right environment with the right people will breed a new level of loyalty and responsibility. It encourages innovation as employees strive to find even better and more efficient ways to reach the end goal. It makes an organisation who knows how to harness this, nimble, responsive and innovative.

The alternative approach, which I still see far more often that I would like, is the stifling of great potential through overly arduous process and micro management. The result is a business is still paying an employee 100% of their salary or wage for less than 100% of their potential output as they haven't worked out how to extract it from them. Additionally you risk building a team of staff who feel that their ideas are not valued and their manager or owner doesn't trust them.

No matter how impressive your systems and process's both technical and procedural are, there is no way to succeed without at least relying on some human capital within your business and the best businesses play to their employees strengths and focus on results not processes.

Sometimes it takes a good manager or owner operator to realise that their staff are actually more proficient than them at many aspects of the role. That being realised their job, rather than managing them in the traditional sense is to help their team unleash their potential while supporting and encouraging them. Ask and answer questions don't dictate terms.

I for one can attest to managing people for various clients who were far superior in most technical and creative aspects of marketing than I. What a privilege that was and the outcome from embracing their skill was far superior. Successful and talented employees under you shouldn't be feared they should be embraced and encouraged.

So next time one of your staff wants to work from home, suggests doing things a little differently, seems to go well at strange times of the night... take a deep breath, and say "YES as long as the work gets done on time and to a high standard, do it your way" .... see what happens, it could be the most liberating thing you ever do for you and your employee's.
]]><![CDATA[Shout-out to summer toilers]]>Tue, 17 Jan 2017 05:38:20 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/shout-out-to-summer-toilers
Spare a thought for those who keep the wheels spinning over the festive season.

We all know Queenstown and Central Otago are unique and wonderful places to visit and to reside.

We have filled the region with all manner of activities, attractions and events to augment nature’s good work, and people scramble from all over the world and all over our own backyard to enjoy it, especially over the festive season.

​This all-year-round infiltration by tourists, turbocharged by Kiwi summer holidaymakers, means on so many levels we don’t run with the rhythms of other towns around the South.
Cities like Invercargill and Dunedin, where things can slow down a little over the festive season, where more people are leaving town than coming in, where offices are closed and the pace slows as everyone takes their well-earned annual holiday. We are bursting at the seams and it’s all hands on deck for those in the key service and retail industries.

So while many of our neighbours from around Southland and Otago and quite a few of us who don’t service the tourism industry are unwinding over a cold Speight’s and enjoying the likes of Glenorchy Races, UB40 and the Wanaka Rodeo, the rest of you are having your busiest time of the year.

So I want to acknowledge the hard work that goes in to keeping the towns of the Southern Lakes and Central Otago running over this period and offer an appreciative round of applause to those who have made my holiday great.

To all the volunteers at the events, the poor souls ringing up the 24 packs and bags of ice, the bar tenders, ice cream scoopers (Morris in Athol), shopkeepers and everyone else keeping the fuel flowing for a great break, you have been outstanding.

I know we can be impatient and under-appreciative of you as we try to sneak every last bit of relaxing or adventuring into our holiday, and for that I think we owe you an apology to go with the applause.

Thanks for sacrificing your family Christmas, sleep-ins, concerts, beers in the sun and days on the beach.

Working at all in Queenstown can feel strange sometimes. With hordes of visitors enjoying their holidays around us as we work, finding empathy with those who do the hard yards over this busy time of the year shouldn’t be hard for any of us.

Mark writes a regular column for the Mountain Scene to view the original click HERE ​
]]><![CDATA[This Nordic island’s ripe for research]]>Sat, 29 Oct 2016 11:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/this-nordic-islands-ripe-for-researchPicture
​I know David Kennedy was putting his hand up for a hard-earned Icelandic research junket to investigate how the locals are handling the hordes of curious tourists arriving each year.
​
Unfortunately for David, my former Winter Festival partner in crime Jo Holley and I beat him to the basalt in September with a nine-day adventure around Europe’s youngest and most expensive island.

​
As David alludes to, tourism has flourished post Iceland’s GFC financial meltdown. The only flickering remnants of its near bankruptcy are the occasional stories in the media of bankers heading to jail for their role in the country’s financial collapse.

​The capital, Reykjavik, which is home to 60 per cent of the population, is awash with cranes and heavy machinery as the infrastructure build plays catch-up.

Airbnb is the best bet for a room, but it won’t come cheap; hotels even in the shoulder season are bursting at the seams, just like Queenstown. Iceland is expensive but everyone pays and life goes on.

Iceland may be small but driving around it is not as easy as one would imagine; the roads range from multi-lane paved toll motorways with undersea tunnels to heavily potholed winding gravel goat tracks, and this is all on the main island ring road.
Google Maps sent us on a detour over an alpine pass that looked like it hadn’t seen a vehicle for years. The resulting puncture – coupled with a flat spare tyre and no cellphone coverage – cost two boxes of beer, one bottle of gin and a day of our holiday to rectify. Given the cost of alcohol I was considering offering up Jo’s left kidney instead.

Luckily, Icelandic people are a friendly lot, and despite some hairy moments while hitch-hiking at 140kmh in the wet with a local fisherman who didn’t speak English, we survived to finish a 3000km-plus circumnavigation of Iceland complete with the Northern Lights, Arctic foxes and enough waterfalls, glaciers and geothermal pools to satisfy even the most depraved nature fetish.

You wouldn’t know there are three million tourists in some parts of Iceland, which are breathtakingly scenic and refreshingly peaceful. But by the time you hit the main drags of the golden circle and the south coast, it’s like the Milford Road times 50 and the queues for each waterfall can be overwhelming and off-putting.

Iceland has very rigid alcohol laws and high taxes. Beer was illegal until 1989 and you can only buy it now from official government stores. Despite this, Saturday night in Reykjavik makes Queenstown look like a church on Sunday. The drinking culture eclipses any of the rules put in place to curb behaviours and pre-loading is rife due to the high prices. Steve Wilde, I see you and Jim Boult needing a trip for research on our impending local alcohol policy.

Iceland is, however, coping. Some attractions, such as the famous Blue Lagoon, have capped numbers and hiked prices for the precious booking spots. There are 80,000 Icelandic horses, and anyone who owns one seems to have set up a trekking operation, while the farming sector has started recruiting free tourist labour to help with Rettir (their annual sheep muster).

Beware of seemingly attractive female farmers matching you on Tinder and inviting you to a date on the farm. It can end up as an eight-hour shift mustering, penning up and drafting Icelandic sheep, quite an experience but not after 2 hours sleep with a decent sized hangover!

Mark writes a regular column for the Mountain Scene to view the original click HERE ​
]]><![CDATA[Being far away can do us a favour]]>Sat, 10 Sep 2016 12:00:00 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/being-far-away-can-do-us-a-favourSwedish Flag on BoatEurope is changing and even Sweden is not immune.

Hello Queenstown, how are things back home at the centre of the universe?
​
I trust a boardie and jandal-clad spring has sauntered in and warmed things up a bit for some goggle-tan days of spring skiing.


How is the local body election race going? It was great to see some healthy competition emerging before I left with a good selection of candidates.

​I’m sure Basil Walker will continue to barrage the Scene with his colourful ramblings to keep me somewhat updated on progress.

Queenstown, to be honest I’ve not thought about you much while enjoying myself here in Europe and I’m sure you haven’t missed me either – well, except George the Horse and Scoop, who might be short on a few running kilometres since my departure.

It’s good to get out of the bubble every now and then and I always enjoy poking my head out of the blissful mist of our own little utopia, dropping work for a while and experiencing some of the more redeeming features other countries have to offer.

Aside from a few speed bumps – care of some very out-of-character service issues with Air New Zealand, the usual complete shambles that is Spark’s global roaming, and the missions I had trying to find a milkshake in Stockholm, and a Speight’s in London – it’s been a great break to date in the UK and Scandinavia.

I’ve particularly enjoyed the fantastic public transport services and high-quality infrastructure in general. It’s still an area NZ has plenty of catching up to do.

Stockholm is essentially no bigger than Auckland and it’s got a fully functional underground rail system, comprehensive bus network and is laced with bike lanes. Work started in the 1940s and is always ongoing.

The moral of the story is prioritising spending on core services over fluffy nice-to-haves, planning well ahead of current needs and committing a substantial investment pays dividends in the long run. It’s a poignant message for Queenstown’s council hopefuls.

While I’ve had a great time I can’t help but feel a little for Europe. It has changed since my last visit – it feels a little less welcoming than it once was, with the famed freedom movement becoming a little less free if the series of questions I've been asked at airports are anything to go by. Just like Auckland and Melbourne, there is more visible homelessness, even in places like Sweden, which has shocked the locals.

The pool I went to in Stockholm was having some cultural issues with new migrants and the female bathers, leading to segregating of the spa pools. Communities are changing and security is noticeably tighter in many places.

So while we can’t build infrastructure to save ourselves, our unique geographic isolation has spared us from some of the more tragic challenges facing Europe.

I’m heading down to France for a wedding next and I’m sure they will be on edge still down there.
​
However I’m hoping Iceland – recently ranked as the safest country on earth – will allow me to leave my car doors unlocked, like Southland in the ’90s.

Mark writes a regular column for the Mountain Scene to view the original click HERE ​
]]><![CDATA[Queenstown needs to be Queenstown, not Aspen]]>Wed, 25 May 2016 10:08:01 GMThttp://www.markwilson.co.nz/blog/queenstown-needs-to-be-queenstown-not-aspenPictureCredit ODT
A recent delegation to Aspen has highlighted a growing emphasis by community and business leaders to learn what we can from other resort towns that have experienced or are still experiencing growing pains on their journey to maturity.
​

They are definitely not the first to surmise we can learn a thing or two from other destinations afflicted with the fortunate disease of global desirability. Nor do I believe they are wrong in thinking there are valuable ideas we can glean from other resorts.

However the one lesson that hasn't been overtly alluded to in any forceful or meaningful way is that Queenstown does not in my eyes want to be Aspen or Whistler.

Queenstown is unique, there is no place like us and nor should we strive to emulate or copy anyone.

We don't have a $4 million average housing price and our workers aren't bussed from distant service towns to tend to the interests of the absentee elite and opulent, while having no say in our community.

Queenstown has a unique urban cultural atmosphere. We shouldn't seek to replace our melting pot of diversity, which crosses cultures, as well demographic and economic boundaries, with a sterility of exclusive elitist protectionism.

We want to drive higher-value tourism but we can't afford to damage or lose the spirit of our alpine village and its atmosphere, which is bred from a diversity of people intermingling.

We need our workers, as well as visitors, in the CBD. We need all types of tourists, from Scandinavian backpackers to Russian oligarchs, and we need young families, as well as retirees, to have a home in our district.

It's often forgotten that Queenstown is not the only place with beautiful scenery, skifields, lakes, and rivers you can jetboat and raft down. What makes Queenstown unique is not our natural capital but our people and what we have done with it.
The people have crafted a world-class, four-season resort with more diversity of activities and attractions than any other place on earth.

This culture of adventure, innovation and the passion for pushing new frontiers is what has created world-leading tourist attractions, supported by a diverse array of quality hospitality and retail experiences and encouraged many innovative local businesses to excel in the global marketplace.

Many of those wanting to put the fence up, halt growth and create an elitist, high-value resort are, in fact, like me - migrants to Queenstown over the last 20 or 30 years.

I'm not saying we haven't got huge, acute challenges to solve in managing our growth, but the issues are surmountable and we need to be bold and creative in solving them. We need to choose our own future for Queenstown and refuse to accept "no" for an answer.

The next iteration of community leadership has a hell of a job ahead. However, with the right direction, support and endeavour we can forge our own unique path.

Let's do it our way, like we always have.

Mark writes a regular column for the Mountain Scene to view the original click HERE ​
]]>