Across Christchurch last night many bottles of champagne would have been uncorked by business leaders, rugby bosses and right-wing councillors celebrating the city council decision by 13 to 3 to go ahead and build a budget-blown $683 million “multi-use arena” (aka rugby stadium)
The so-called “frugal five” councillors (Phil Mauger, James Gough, Aaron Keown, Sam MacDonald and Catherine Chu) have led the charge for the biggest spend in Christchurch city’s history despite no plan for how to pay for the extra $150 million they approved Thursday night.
It’s important to emphasise this. When the council voted yesterday there was NO PLAN for how to pay for the extra $150 million. That is to be left to the incoming council and “this is the way it should be” says the outgoing mayor Lianne Dalziel.
Borrowing this money will push the city close to its debt ceiling with no room to move in the case of unforeseen problems which are a natural part of any city’s contingency planning.
Needless to say the frugal five have argued (surprise, surprise) for the selling of city assets to pay the blown-out cost.
The decision has laid bare the deep socio-economic divisions in the city as well as exposing the hypocrisy of councillors who continually argue for rates to be capped, budgets to be slashed, community facilities put on the back burner, but fall over themselves in demanding spending to benefit private businesses.
The same mayor and councillors have refused to spend a cent of ratepayer money to rebuild the council rental housing destroyed in the earthquakes (they have made miserly loans at commercial rates to the Ōtautahi Community Housing Trust to do this) have feverishly supported the blown-out stadium.
Congratulations to the three councillors (Melanie Coker, Sara Templeton and Celeste Donovan) who, for principled reasons, voted against the stadium.
As Sara Templeton says “It’s a clear case of privatising the profits, and socialising the costs”
$600 million?
Simple!
Jacinda can just phone up the RB and get more printed.
Or Luxon could sell one of his houses.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the projected cost will eventually blow out to close to double what’s been agreed to.
This nation loses all sense of proportion when considering spending on sport.
That last sentence has the air of an unarguable truth – and it is Richard C
I have understood for a long time that Lianne Dalziel was an adherent to neoliberal economics over consideration for people’s satisfactory living conditions. And this piece from John Minto is so drearily common one could cry. But after that you have to rise up and come out fighting with verve. Can these councillors be legally questioned for taking the city to an unfinancial state? When is it regarded as imprudent at the least? Have the prudent people no power here – it is almost fraud?
The so-called “frugal five” councillors (Phil Mauger, James Gough, Aaron Keown, Sam MacDonald and Catherine Chu) have led the charge for the biggest spend in Christchurch city’s history despite no plan for how to pay for the extra $150 million they approved Thursday night.
It’s important to emphasise this. When the council voted yesterday there was NO PLAN for how to pay for the extra $150 million. That is to be left to the incoming council and “this is the way it should be” says the outgoing mayor Lianne Dalziel.
Borrowing this money will push the city close to its debt ceiling with no room to move in the case of unforeseen problems which are a natural part of any city’s contingency planning.
Needless to say the frugal five have argued (surprise, surprise) for the selling of city assets to pay the blown-out cost.
Is there no standard to be measures against by central government? There is a right given to local bodies under neo liberalism which they didn’t have earlier, called General Competence.
Here is some info from google for those who can find time to get informed on detail.
Meeting the financing needs of New Zealand councils
https://www.lgfa.co.nz › sites › default › files › L…PDF
The New Zealand Local Government Funding Agency Ltd (LGFA) specialises in funding the New Zealand local government sector, the primary purpose being to …
ADAPTING TO NEW POWERS OF GENERAL COMPETENCE
http://www.mdl.co.nz › mckinley › files › resources PDF
“The Government considers that the present Local Government Act is too prescriptive in nature, and that local councils should have broader powers in.
Will it get built though? Look at the Cathedral, it’s still MIA.
Christchurch people were given the chance to have their say and 70 plus percent were for going ahead but because the result was not to John Minto and the 3 who voted against the stadium liking the vote was counted as a fraud. Ironically this puts them in Donald Trumps camp and his fight against the voting that booted him out.
In every arguement there are 2 sides and many arguements both for and against. I am not into sport or concerts so doubt if I will use the stadium but I do not swim either and I buy my own books so do not use libraries but I accept them being provided for the good of all. Chch is the biggest city in the South Island and to me it is only right to have a stadium to service all of the South Island. z Nelson is a long way from Dunedin.
I would point out the insurance money and government funds could not be spent on social housing even if the council wanted too. Social housing which is ungently needed should be funded by the government through taxes not locals through rates
Trevor – you pay for the stadium then. Perhaps there can be a special price for founders when using it – to pay double or triple and you get a seat named after you, you generous fellow.
Don’t be ridiculous Trevor 70% of what wanted it. A piddling number. How many people put submissions in in the poor area. The places where it got the votes was Cashmere, Fendalton and Halswell.
Lots of people didn’t even know about it, they were too busy making a crust. The Dunedin stadium is a huge cost on the city. And many of its citizens could never ever afford to go there.
This is totally incorrect.
I would point out the insurance money and government funds could not be spent on social housing even if the council wanted to.
The council had insurance on these and they got the dosh and spent it on other things. They are still 200 short of what they had before the earthquakes. Christchurch had the biggest number of council houses in the country.
The council was offered $50m by the insurance mob to fix Lancaster park they had their engineers saying it could be done for this. The Council said it couldn’t. The Council, who ultimately backed down from the amount the insurers owed by a considerable amount, should have got the insurers to underwrite it and have it fixed and we wouldn’t be in this fix.
Of course we need sports fields and everything like that but we are about to get a big muilti-use stadium as well.
Sport rules in Aotearoa!
Plus 1 to your comment.
I’m with you Trevor and the numbers don’t lie despite the arguments.
Exactly the same story here in Taranaki. Both the grandstands at Rugby Park condemned as earthquake risks but no one held accountable and no insurance. Regional council for some reason owns this facility and has just announced a rebuild budget blow out from $50m to $70m. Not a single blush, embarrassed face or apology. Forty percent of my regional council rates for the next 30 years will now go to support the few hundred people who will turn up 6 times a year to watch second division rugby.
Opposite coastline but same dumbness.. Gisborne Council had a list of 10 high priority sports projects. Tops were waka ama, field hockey and basketball- all super popular with young and brown & all historically ignored. Labour Govt & Shane Jones comes to town with $6mil. Guess what? new roof for rugby stadium so 100 people can stay dry watching 4x 3rd Div home games a year. Sickening cronyism.
Na this stadium is popular with the majority of the citizens and this city has suffered enough and deserves a stadium, everyone who lives here has to go to Dunedin or Auckland to see a concert or a proper test match.
Christchurch is a city of nearly half million people and deserves a major venue.
Rich and poor alike will be able to go to rugby games in the heart of the city. Delaying the stadium means half the CBD will continue to be an ugly dead zone of empty land waiting for the stadium to be built.
Delaying it further would mean it would cost even more in future.
I’m shit poor and am stoked about this moved.
It’s time the city had something that allowed them to have a little bit of fun.
The lack of the ability to hold major events has been a bummer for my generation and if you want young people to stay in Christchurch you need to have the kind of infrastructure a major city has…
It’s expensive but it should been built years ago and would have been cheaper… delaying it would make it more expensive.
Let working class people go see a rugby game or a concert. Jeez.
I’ll agree the corporate boxes and things are lame and they should have to contribute to the cost if they are going to have corporate boxes…. But I’m just happy this damn thing is gonna be built.
Doesn’t mean I don’t want more stadiums, state houses, council houses and affordable housing but I also want a stadium.
Let people have fun.
Well said
70% of chch wants it to go ahead so they can have concerts and sports events in their town.
Delaying it would have meant it cost more.
Also you’ll be hard pressed to find any millennials and gen z who don’t want this stadium to be built so they can attend concerts. The people who will be paying it off in future, want it.
Again let people have fun.
Rugby and concerts aren’t just for the rich. Golly.
Corey H That’s silly. The days of materialism are over. The days of pretence and style and mode are in – people rush around pretending they have all they could want and if they keep going quickly, talking quickly, then they don’t give room for doubt or unfashionable thought to creep in.
HOWEVER decent people can only ignore the plight of others struggling for a certain time. And climate change …. and the collapse of world economies overloaded with debt that is printed on rags but strangely debt must be repaid even if people have to donate human blood. That’s a pretty picture. No you and comfortably off or indeed uncomfortable, sports or arts fans can’t have anything they want, when the money to buy their perquisites comes from withholding necessities of life from poor people, denying them respect, support and opportunity! That way came The French Revolution.
Do you hear the people sing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1q82twrdr0U
Attend to The Castle in the Cloud dreams before dreamy extravagances like stadiums. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IT-UxMalodk
Empty Chairs at Empty Tables https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0BM-Q3BDrkw
Don’t bring reasons logic into it Corey , you’ll cluster fuck a few here.
70% of christchurch want the stadium
WRONG WRONG WRONG
I don’t know how you can make this ridiculous statement, no body knows how many people want the stadium because there was no referendum.
70% of a tiny number of submissions.
Again let people have fun. Rugby and concerts aren’t just for the rich. Golly.
That’s so Corey. And why would do you need to say that? The stadium IS being built, this post is about borrowing more money still to make it as waterproof as the one in Dunedin already is. And the question is raised as to why they can’t have the only covered stadium in the lower South Island, as there won’t be enough business for two to be profitable or even to cover costs.
So don’t make the poor people go without, let them, support them, to put on their own concerts and fun, then everyone has a time of pleasure. I understand there is unused land in the red zone. If that is not being used what a wasted opportunity. Let the City Council take that notional $150 million and let out funds for those who want to organise a participatory concert for the hard-up. Two a year say with $500,000 allocated for each to be paid out of current funds, not in debt that is loaded onto the future. That would give 150 years of concerts. Now wouldn’t that be good for your children’s children.
‘
I’ve seen Maiden twice in the Horncastle Arena. A larger stadium is not neccessary, it’s not like it’ll drive ticket prices down substantially
I asked the other day about whether the reason the rates i Grey District were hiked astronomically was that Grey District had caved to Christchurch City’s demand that other districts chip in as well. I yet to receive a reply
We know Minto prefers to spend his time outside the stadium fighting the police rather than watching the game. However in this case I agree with him. Christchurch will soon consist of a stadium, a conference center and lots of car parks.
Christchurch ratepayers are now saddled with more debt to fund this vanity project with a massive lifetime carbon footprint, at a time when the economic and human impacts of climate disruption are becoming ever more serious. Not convinced? Ask the global science community, central banks, investors, the insurance industry, even NATO and the Pentagon. We are running into serious trouble. Much of Europe is experiencing massive wildfires as I write this. Sydney has flooded 4 times in the last 18 months… I could go on, but clearly rugby fans, the tourism industry and a bunch of short-sighted councillors prioritise entertainment above their kids’ future.
This I’m exaggerating? The USA’s Directorate of National Intelligence recently released the report “Global Trends 2040”. Looking to the 2030s and 2040s, it sees a world ravaged by climate change, which will disrupt food supplies, result in the hoarding of food and a global famine that will result in widespread civil unrest and propel mass migration.
p. 118 et seq: “A wave of unrest spreads across the globe, protesting governments’ inability to meet basic human needs and bringing down leaders and regimes.”
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/NIE_Climate_Change_and_National_Security.pdf
https://www.dni.gov/files/ODNI/documents/assessments/GlobalTrends_2040.pdf
Yup and don’t think anyone believes that there is such a thing as a “fixed price”. For the councillors to vote to progress the stadium but kick the can down the road for the next council to figure out how to pay for it is shameful. And only now is the council approaching neighbouring councils to assist with funding this stadium. Why should they? They didn’t vote to progress the stadium build. It’s not their responsibility and has nothing to do with them!
I hope voters realise that this stadium will cost every man, woman and child in Christchurch more than $1500 each and vote to hold the council responsible for this.
Sure, Christchurch needs a stadium to be taken seriously as a major New Zealand city, but why does a stadium in one of the driest parts of New Zealand need a roof? The mind boggles.
John, money-where-mouth, why don’t you stand in the upcoming elections on a policy to reverse the decision? As several have correctly commented, the 70% figure is based on a small and likely unrepresentative sample, so you might be surprised how well you’d do.
Debt! Worldwide in financially astute countries and ….Christchurch NZ!!
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2022/07/18/another-warning-from-the-financial-times/
DEBT!
Debt
Deb
De
D – poof.
It doesn’t usually diminish so simply and quietly.
Listen tonight – money and politics to Bernard Hickey, Damien Grant, Thomas Coughlan and all.
https://thedailyblog.co.nz/2022/07/18/live-7-30pm-tonight-the-working-group-weekly-political-podcast-with-bernard-hickey-thomas-coughlan-damien-grant/
Stadiums never make money, even in major metropolises. Neither do libraries or art galleries or museums; they’re cultural assets. Whether you think they’re worth the spending is a matter of your priorities.
Comments are closed.