You might recall that 18 months ago they asked the government for $60 million. They got a no. So this time, they’re targeting Christchurch ratepayers. They say they’ve stopped any meaningful fundraising and they’re asking ratepayers to plug the gap — a gap of about $45 million. This will now go out to consultation. If ratepayers say yes, the additional cost will simply be added to rates. Whatever your rates are now, expect that cost on top.
I don’t rate the Anglicans’ chances here because rates in Christchurch — like everywhere in the country — are already at record highs. And in Christchurch, they’re proposed to rise another 8% this year. On top of that, the Canterbury Museum has also just asked for another $260 million for its rebuild. There is not a lot of spare money around.
I have to say, as I did 18 months ago, I still find it slightly cheeky of the Anglicans to do this when they own $3 billion worth of assets in this country alone. And that valuation was done six years ago — with inflation, they almost certainly own more now. There is enough there to pay for the entire reconstruction of the cathedral, not just the first stage they’re talking about.
Every year the Anglicans spend trying to find someone else to pay for the restoration of their church, public appetite to restore it must surely diminish. Because every year that passes, more new venues open in Christchurch. Whether small — restaurants, bars, shops — or large, like the convention centre or the new stadium, the city is rebuilding. It’s becoming increasingly beautiful and increasingly fun.
I know the cathedral can’t be replaced by a stadium or a convention centre or a shop. It has a special place for Christchurch. But the Anglicans risk that special place being diluted every single time another special place opens up.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and commentator who hosts Newstalk ZB's Drive show. This article was sourced from Newstalk ZB.
5 comments:
They should just pull it down. it was always a squat ugly building.
It'll get rebuilt when the Anglicans pay for it themselves.
The facts are these. The Anglicans voted to pull down the cathedral and build a new one using the insurance money. 80% of them voted for this. However Mr Burdon and Mr Anderton took them to court. The court ruled they had to restore the old building. This is where we are now. Restoring the old building is hugely expensive and the Anglican church simply cannot afford it. If they had been left to get on with it they likely would have a new cathedral by now and it would have cost the ratepayers and the taxpayers nothing. It would have been financed out of the insurance money.
Heather, to understand "your" dilemma, you need to return (by research) to the weeks following said earthquake, and the controversies that followed over said Cathedral. I am sure a research assistant could conduct a 'deep dive' into the archives of Christchurch Press and other NZ related MSM.
This 'deep dive' needs to include the people who where involved, and the division between 2 groups of the same Church.
A "spat" that became very public.
Also to look at who the members of the Anglican Church, Christchurch "procured, from the named & notable" to assist in 'their endeavor's' to both gain MSM attention, money and if available free advice & help to remove debris, plan, then rebuild.
Heather at this point, one of your staff should ring Gerry Brownlee and ask him if he is available to be interviewed on this subject.
If he agrees, start with "lame duck" questions, than ask him to explain -
- who from the Anglican Church (ChCh) prevailed upon him for money
- of the $11 million dollars handed to said group what have they done with it.
- has he at any time, followed up on that magnanimous handout, to see what they have spent it on?
Sadly Jim Anderton is no longer with us, but if he was, in an interview you should ask him - " Who bent your arm to support the Anglican Church in their endeavors to rebuild the Cathedral"?
Maybe he was interviewed, if so it must be on record.
Also look at how quickly (and but what endeavors - the who/whom/how) a 'cardboard cutout' was planned and built so that the Cathedral congregation had a place to Worship.
Who paid for that?
As an example of - "talent, ability, dexterity, having access to money, people" why did the Catholic Cathedral in Christchurch, also damaged during that earthquake, suddenly have a rebuild that restored that building back to a functioning entity, without nay 'dramas' over what had happened, and what they achieved.
In the meantime.......................
I have simple solution. Offer the site to the Roman Catholics – they have yet to rebuild their cathedral, and the Square would be the perfect spot while sparing the Anglicans having to contribute!
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.