Despite widespread opposition from the good people of Christchurch, Councillor Sue Wells still expects the ratepayer to pay for her trip to Europe.

There is widespread public opposition to Councillor Sue Wells proposed German wine junket in October. The Christchurch Mail, a suburban freebie, this week published two pages worth of letters on the subject. Only two of those letters supported the loyal Sideshow Bob supporter having a European vacation on the Christchurch ratepayer.

Geraldine Watson of Avonhead, whose house is to be demolished, wrote;

'I left my home on September 4. Why am I paying a $110 a month in rates? Apparently to fund this individuals's luxury holiday in Germany. How nice. Actually I think this mayor and this council have dome very little for Christchurch ratepayers. Tell her to fund her own luxury holiday.'

Wrote John Samson; 'Their never-ending sense of entitlement to ratepayers' hard earned dollars disgusts me. Please book a one way ticket Sue Wells and take the rest of the city council rabble with you.'

Of the 24 letters published only two agreed that the ratepayer should pay for Wells wine holiday.

During the 2010 council election campaign, Wells repeatedly declared that it was important to be 'accountable' and to listen to what the local community was saying.

But she wasn't listening to the local community when she supported the $17 million bailout of failed property developer Dave Henderson and she isn't listening to the local community now. Despite being told by the good people of Christchurch that should pay for her own wine junket, she still intends to sponge off the embattled Christchurch ratepayer.

Yes, Sue Wells is always up for a bit of double-dipping and a few perks at the expense of Christchurch ratepayers. Who cares that half the city has been flattened by an earthquake?

Sue Wells is not slow to ride 'the gravy train' and she's also not slow to moralise about the behaviour of other people.

On her tediously self-important blog The New Canterbury Tales, Wells has a lot to say about the recent British riots. And its ugly reactionary stuff indeed . Of the rioters she sneers:

'You who are striking down your cities are nasty little neanderthalic two bit muppets with too much time on your hands and pathetic hate in your hearts, the waste products of drugs, laziness and chronic dependency. You don’t have it in you to build. You only have it in you to destroy.'

The double-dipping Wells goes on to lecture in the 'best' tradition of Margaret Thatcher::

'When I visited your country a couple of years ago I came home horrified at what I’d seen. I was appalled at your hands-out culture, the level of your public subsidies for housing and transport and education for people eligible for it simply by spawning little urchins and refusing to create themselves a constructive future.'

She was, the reader will note, not 'appalled' by the increasing levels of poverty and joblessness in Britain. Nor, it seems, was she 'appalled' by the British Government bailing out the bankers and the finance houses.

In the conceited and patronising world of Sue Wells, the people have no right to a home, but the hedge fund managers have a right to the bailout.

Wells thinks that its just dandy that the poor go homeless and the wealthy get bailouts - and its just dandy that the good people of Christchurch pay for her wine junket as well.

She's a stupid and arrogant woman and, worryingly, a stupid and arrogant woman who harbours mayoral ambitions. She must be stopped.


  1. If Wells can go to Europe for a week she obviously doesn't have enough to do in Christchurch. Her work hours should be cut and her salary reduced accordingly.

    Since CERA has taken over much of the functions of the city council I am surprised that the councilors are still paying themselves the same extravagant salary for a much reduced workload. Seems like a handout to me.

  2. The following comment from Ian Dalziel was filtered out as spam so I missed it for a number of days. In order to ensure that Ian's observations get the readership they deserve, I'm also reposting the comment here.

    I find it odd that the Christchurch ratepayers are footing this entire bill,where are the cash inputs from the other South Island wine growing areas thatare represented under this umbrella group - namely Canterbury, Waipara,Marlborough, Central Otago and Nelson. (on top of their share of the $35,000annual membership fee of course!)

    Wells may have been President for a year but she has done us no favours.

    A simple browse through the Great Wine Capitals website ( very little that points at Christchurch or Canterbury.

    There is a tourism impact report from 2010 in which we are not mentioned at all(

    Many of the drop down menus on the site list only 8 members (not Christchurch/South Island).

    As this link ( indicates the other regions are reaping benefits: - why not contribute to the costs then?

    "As Marcus Pickens, General Manager, Wine Marlborough, commented, "South Island wines and tourismdestinations are already marketed with great success overseas, but there are real benefits in working together across our regions to produce even better results."
    Why not contribute to the costs then?

    I also note at least two other council employees are tasked with working on Great Wine Capitals work:

    Elizabeth Wilson
    Great Wine Capitals – Christchurch/South Island Coordinator
    + 64 3 941 8775

    Samantha Sii
    Great Wine Capitals – Christchurch/South Island Administrator
    +64 3 353 6955

    At what further cost to Chch ratepayers and what input from the other SI regions?

    As reported by Stuff back in 2009 ( - The initial trip was another piece of Bob Parker's Too-good-to-miss-seek-approval-after-the-fact initiatives: "Parker and Deputy Mayor Norm Withers were unable to accept the last-minute invitation, so Parker chose Wells as she "speaks French and is used to working with the media".

    Parker said a council representative had to attend the meeting to accept membership of the network.

    "You can't pull down a major international opportunity like that and not turn up. That would be incredibly short-sighted," he said. "We couldn't not send someone over. For the cost of a return airfare, we are able to close a deal on a very significant economic opportunity for the South Island.

    "This is part of what a council does and you have to do it well. It is hardly exorbitant."

    The $35,000 annual fee for membership of the network will be shared among winegrowers and theChristchurch, Hurunui, Marlborough, Kaikoura and Central Otago councils."

    Looking at their "Best of Wine Tourism" PDF from Wells "Presidency"
    period( of Wine Tourism brochure2011.ppf) only one christchurch/canterbury winery (Old Glenmark vicarage) gets a mention, and no mention in that of any earthquakes in the area.

    Low marks for honesty or transparency, but then Wells is in Bob's A team!

    I suspect the Presidency just goes to the city /area the AGM is held in (look for a German president next year),and the local council workers do all the graft while Sue takes the perks.

  3. Hard to believe that TWO people actually thought it a good idea that ratepayers fund her jaunt...who were they ...Mr and Mrs Wells ?

  4. Definitely time for commissioners, this rabble is out of their depth, some good ones but the majority in the A team are running amuck, Wells, Parker and Marryatt need to go, hell the companies office have initiated steps to remove Marryatt's company from the register (from what i see on the website for not filing returns). Seem's those making the calls have no idea.


Comments are moderated.