We received a copy of a letter today. Penned by Auckland councillor George Wood, it's addressed to Auckland mayor Len Brown, and it raises a very valid question; why are the Occupy Auckland protesters being allowed to remain in Aotea Square when their "occupation" is in contravention of Auckland bylaws, and therefore illegal?
Here is the letter, reproduced with Cr Wood's permission:
We share Cr Wood's concern that an apparently illegal occupation of council land is being countenanced by the Mayor of Auckland and his CEO. It's even worse now, given that Aotea Square has been designated as a Fanzone for Sunday night's RWC final. The potential for public disorder has just got a whole lot greater. Is Len Brown prepared to take responsibility for that if things turn ugly?
So the question needs to be asked; why is an occupation that both the Mayor and his CEO concede is illegal not being shut down by the council, and by the Auckland police? We're wondering if the reason is political; after all, Len Brown received a lot of support from the unions in last year's election campaign, and from the Unite union in particular; and the Unite union is instrumental in organising the Occupy Auckland protest.
It would seem that Len Brown's loyalties are greater to those who campaigned for his election
than to the citizens of Auckland. Is that good enough?