For that was also the very day the Prime Minister was due to make his first major address on local government to the annual conference of Local Government New Zealand - the body which represents all the country's local authorities - at the Wellington City Council's new Takina Conference and Exhibition Centre, just a few hundred metres away. Moreover, the theme of his address was that Councils need to "rein in the fantasies" and get "back to the basics" of collecting rubbish and fixing pipes and potholes. Councils had to return to “reality” he said, adding that “the days of (government) handouts” are over because ratepayers “are sick of white elephants.”
The Prime Minister also spoke in detail about Local Water Done Well, the government's recently announced national water upgrading government plan to replace the former Labour Government's Three Waters scheme. His remarks could not have been clearer, and more pointed, and his target more obvious. Coming on top of the Minister of Transport’s remarks to a Wellington Chamber of Commerce breakfast that same morning where he “congratulated” his audience for making the “arduous journey” into Wellington City, past leaking pipes, and an “infestation of speed bumps”, the Prime Minister’s comments confirm the government’s general disdain for the left-wing Wellington City Council and its current leadership. But whether the Council will heed, or even listen to, the government’s messages remains to be seen.
Certainly, the Prime Minister’s “back to basics” message will strike a chord with ratepayers in Wellington and elsewhere who are facing large rates increases over the next few years. They are likely to welcome a renewed focus on fixing potholes and pipes, and better waste collection services, ahead of more inner-city speed bumps and raised pedestrian crossings.
But, to mix a metaphor, it is not all a one-way street. While ratepayers generally want to see less Council indulgence and a greater focus on getting the basics right, they do not expect that to mean the government withdraws completely from any role for Councils to support the development of local amenities or services. At the Local Government Conference, the Prime Minister reaffirmed the government’s intention to remove once more the promotion of the “four well-beings” – social, environmental, economic and cultural – from local government’s mandate. These had been put in place by the Clark Labour-led Government, removed under the previous National-led Government, then restored under the last Labour-led Government.
However, that should not mean that those well-beings are to be ignored completely. By default, if nothing else, the responsibility for upholding these now shifts back to central government. The Prime Minister and his colleagues cannot allow the abolition of the well-beings as local government responsibilities to also mean that they are to be ignored by central government. Yet that now appears very likely to be what will happen.
Culture and heritage looks set to be the first area where this will occur. Our system of classification for buildings and items of heritage significance is a national, not regional, one. So, maintaining and upgrading buildings and items of national heritage interest ought to be the responsibility of central government, not hard-pressed local ratepayers. But that is not happening, nor is the government showing any interest in honouring our national heritage classification system.
In Wellington, for example, a significant contributor to the sharp rates increases has been the blow-out in the costs of restoring the city’s earthquake-risk Town Hall. Some, like the increasingly heritage-sceptic Housing Minister, have questioned the Town Hall’s heritage value, but so long as the building retains national heritage status, the responsibility for funding its restoration should not be falling as heavily as it is on Wellington ratepayers, while the government sits idly by.
It is the same with Christchurch Cathedral. This iconic building in the heart of the city is one of the country’s best-known buildings. It is a long standing image of Christchurch and the quest to secure its restoration became a symbol of the city’s resilience to come back after the devastating earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. But now the project is being mothballed indefinitely because of a funding shortfall of $85 million, which the government is refusing to meet. Christchurch Cathedral has been a central feature of the city’s life since construction began in 1864 – so it is hardly a “white elephant.” But the government’s short-sighted decision calls into question its commitment to upholding national heritage classification and protection standards. After all, in the grand scheme of government finances $85 million, possibly advanced by way of suspensory loan over many years, is not a large amount.
Beyond that and arguably more worryingly, the government’s refusal to act also sends a clear message that at least so far as culture and heritage is concerned this government has no interest in upholding the well-being responsibility it is about to remove from local government. That raises the far more important question whether it will be similarly uninterested when it comes to upholding the social, economic, and environmental well-beings it is about to remove as well.
As with its wider reforms, the government narrow focus on getting to know the true cost of various services risks it overlooking unwisely their wider value and benefit
Peter Dunne, a retired Member of Parliament and Cabinet Minister, who represented Labour and United Future for over 30 years, blogs here: honpfd.blogspot.com - Where this article was sourced.
The Prime Minister also spoke in detail about Local Water Done Well, the government's recently announced national water upgrading government plan to replace the former Labour Government's Three Waters scheme. His remarks could not have been clearer, and more pointed, and his target more obvious. Coming on top of the Minister of Transport’s remarks to a Wellington Chamber of Commerce breakfast that same morning where he “congratulated” his audience for making the “arduous journey” into Wellington City, past leaking pipes, and an “infestation of speed bumps”, the Prime Minister’s comments confirm the government’s general disdain for the left-wing Wellington City Council and its current leadership. But whether the Council will heed, or even listen to, the government’s messages remains to be seen.
Certainly, the Prime Minister’s “back to basics” message will strike a chord with ratepayers in Wellington and elsewhere who are facing large rates increases over the next few years. They are likely to welcome a renewed focus on fixing potholes and pipes, and better waste collection services, ahead of more inner-city speed bumps and raised pedestrian crossings.
But, to mix a metaphor, it is not all a one-way street. While ratepayers generally want to see less Council indulgence and a greater focus on getting the basics right, they do not expect that to mean the government withdraws completely from any role for Councils to support the development of local amenities or services. At the Local Government Conference, the Prime Minister reaffirmed the government’s intention to remove once more the promotion of the “four well-beings” – social, environmental, economic and cultural – from local government’s mandate. These had been put in place by the Clark Labour-led Government, removed under the previous National-led Government, then restored under the last Labour-led Government.
However, that should not mean that those well-beings are to be ignored completely. By default, if nothing else, the responsibility for upholding these now shifts back to central government. The Prime Minister and his colleagues cannot allow the abolition of the well-beings as local government responsibilities to also mean that they are to be ignored by central government. Yet that now appears very likely to be what will happen.
Culture and heritage looks set to be the first area where this will occur. Our system of classification for buildings and items of heritage significance is a national, not regional, one. So, maintaining and upgrading buildings and items of national heritage interest ought to be the responsibility of central government, not hard-pressed local ratepayers. But that is not happening, nor is the government showing any interest in honouring our national heritage classification system.
In Wellington, for example, a significant contributor to the sharp rates increases has been the blow-out in the costs of restoring the city’s earthquake-risk Town Hall. Some, like the increasingly heritage-sceptic Housing Minister, have questioned the Town Hall’s heritage value, but so long as the building retains national heritage status, the responsibility for funding its restoration should not be falling as heavily as it is on Wellington ratepayers, while the government sits idly by.
It is the same with Christchurch Cathedral. This iconic building in the heart of the city is one of the country’s best-known buildings. It is a long standing image of Christchurch and the quest to secure its restoration became a symbol of the city’s resilience to come back after the devastating earthquakes of 2010 and 2011. But now the project is being mothballed indefinitely because of a funding shortfall of $85 million, which the government is refusing to meet. Christchurch Cathedral has been a central feature of the city’s life since construction began in 1864 – so it is hardly a “white elephant.” But the government’s short-sighted decision calls into question its commitment to upholding national heritage classification and protection standards. After all, in the grand scheme of government finances $85 million, possibly advanced by way of suspensory loan over many years, is not a large amount.
Beyond that and arguably more worryingly, the government’s refusal to act also sends a clear message that at least so far as culture and heritage is concerned this government has no interest in upholding the well-being responsibility it is about to remove from local government. That raises the far more important question whether it will be similarly uninterested when it comes to upholding the social, economic, and environmental well-beings it is about to remove as well.
As with its wider reforms, the government narrow focus on getting to know the true cost of various services risks it overlooking unwisely their wider value and benefit
Peter Dunne, a retired Member of Parliament and Cabinet Minister, who represented Labour and United Future for over 30 years, blogs here: honpfd.blogspot.com - Where this article was sourced.
7 comments:
While it is important for the government to fund heritage projects, it is a question of degree. There needs to be limits. Jacindanomics, where you just throw money down black holes doesn't work. The problem with the Wellington town hall are the huge cost blow outs, from $30M in 2012 to $330M last year and rising. The building has little merit or use apart from acoustics. Why should the taxpayer be saddled with that? It's the same with the Christchurch Anglican cathedral. A fake copy of European gothic cathedrals with little merit. It's only significance was that it happened to be built in the square. Even the Church, the owners, wanted to replace it but haven't been allowed. The Catholic Cathedral, which had far greater architectural merit is being replaced. Sad earthquakes happen but that's reality, like Coventry cathedral being bombed. It's like damaging a car. It's always good to maintain, but if you have an accident and the costs of repairs are too much, you write it off.
And yet they keep voting these clowns in.
The ChCH cathedral needs an honest conversation with costs made public . A stone wall that is as long as a rugby field and 3 stories high would cost under nine million dollars at 150% of the current contractual rate . The cathedral needs to deliver to Parliament a breakdown of the costs to "close in and complete the stonework " and visual appearance Obviously steel and concrete will be required as the stone work is completed . BUT Do not throw the baby out with the bathwater because consultants fees are raping a church.
Only 2 days after Luxon's request Wellington CC is announcing a cycleway down Courtney Place. No, they haven't listened. Time for a Commissioner.
Have long thought that Christchurch could easily follow Berlin's wonderful example. After the events of WWII, the Kaiser Wilhelm Memorial Church on Breitscheidplatz is one of Berlin's most famous landmarks. The ruin of the old church has been converted into a war memorial. It sits alongside the new buildings. Doing this in Christchurch would be a great way to pay homage to the poor souls that lost everything in the earthquake and have a beautiful new facility. Instead, all we have seen is bickering - testament to today's NZ???
CHCH lad here. I know no-one that wants to keep the cathedral.
Didn't the owners of the Cathedral want to bulldoze it after the earthquake, but we're taken to court and lost?
Post a Comment