Saturday, September 11, 2010

Jimwatch; But wait; there's more

Who knows just WHAT Jim Anderton is thinking - read on, from The Press this morning (our emphasis added):

Wigram MP Jim Anderton may reverse his stance not to resign from Parliament if he wins the Christchurch mayoralty.

Anderton said he was giving "serious consideration" to whether he should change his mind in light of last Saturday's earthquake and the massive rebuilding job the region faces.

He would make a decision this weekend and hoped to make an announcement within the next "two or three days."

Voters needed to know his stance before voting forms were mailed out next weekend, he said.

Anderton has said he could perform both jobs, but yesterday said the city was in a more fragile and difficult position after the quake.

The events of the past week had fuelled what he said were legitimate questions about his stance on the two-jobs issue.

Anderton said he had been visiting communities and organisations since the quake, but he wanted to stay "off the radar screen".

"You don't want the human impact wrung out like a soap opera. I know how intrusive the media can be."

He had attended several meetings related to the recovery effort, but he did not want to disrupt the work that Mayor Bob Parker and officials were doing.

"Bob doesn't need to hear from me unless I have something to offer. You don't want politicians shuffling around and trying to get their faces in the frame," Anderton said.

He would reluctantly resume his election campaign on Monday. "It's a bummer, but we have to do it. We owe it to the people."

He urged voters to evaluate Parker on his performance over the past three years, rather than "the last three or four days"..


On again; off again; on again; off again. For someone who reckons he wants to "stay off the radar screen", Jim Anderton is doing his best not to in our ever-humble opinion. Does Christchurch REALLY need a mayor who can't decide if the mayoralty is worth giving up his MP's salary for? That's a no-brainer as far as we are concerned.

0 comments: