As it happens, our Investigative Lead Rhys had been working on an investigation that landed at rather convenient timing...
Rhys has found that across just three major transport projects, at least $15.8 million has been spent on iwi and hapū resourcing, cultural monitoring, advisory roles and artwork.
The breakdown is pretty eye-watering:
- Ōtaki to North of Levin: $7.98 million on iwi and hapū resourcing, including $2.01 million on iwi adviser roles.
- Transport Rebuild East Coast: $3.54 million paid to iwi and hapū groups for cultural oversight and monitoring.
- Te Ara Tupua (Petone -Wellington walk and cycleway): $4.26 million for mana whenua sculptures and artwork.
Now, to be clear, nobody is suggesting that genuine cultural issues should simply be bulldozed over. If you are putting a motorway through a burial ground or another site of genuine cultural significance, of course there needs to be consultation and appropriate mitigation.
But that is quite different from allowing millions of dollars to disappear into standing advisory roles, cultural monitoring, reporting requirements and artwork simply because they have become baked into the way major projects are delivered.
Rhys' OIAs suggest roughly one percent of the budgets of these major projects is being swallowed up by these sorts of requirements.
And when New Zealand already spends comparatively heavily on infrastructure while getting comparatively poor results, every unnecessary layer matters.
Motorists pay plenty through fuel taxes, road-user charges, rates and tolls. Is it too much to expect that money to go towards roads that are safer, faster and more reliable, not millions of dollars of extras that do none of those things?
But that is quite different from allowing millions of dollars to disappear into standing advisory roles, cultural monitoring, reporting requirements and artwork simply because they have become baked into the way major projects are delivered.
Rhys' OIAs suggest roughly one percent of the budgets of these major projects is being swallowed up by these sorts of requirements.
And when New Zealand already spends comparatively heavily on infrastructure while getting comparatively poor results, every unnecessary layer matters.
Motorists pay plenty through fuel taxes, road-user charges, rates and tolls. Is it too much to expect that money to go towards roads that are safer, faster and more reliable, not millions of dollars of extras that do none of those things?
Jordan Williams is a constitutional and commercial lawyer who is Executive Director & Co-founder of the Taxpayers' Union. This article was sourced HERE
5 comments:
Act appears to be the only sensible party in NZ.
RNZ news covered this story, and naturally they were anti-ACT. They quote Bill McKay, an Auckland University senior lecturer in architecture and planning.
"I really feel, given the place of Māori as tangata whenua, when I'm driving down there and I see those two big pou on two sides of the road that I am entering someone's territory,"
That sums it up. This meritless "art" is gives us a constant message, largely subliminal, that this isn't our country. That "it is someone else's territory". That Maori should be the rulers.
All of our ancestors built this country and Maori have done nothing extra to be noted for. Their contributions come at huge cost with no benefit assessments showing the worth of the contribution.
One country, one people, one law, one parliament.
Two-of-everything countries just encourages division and disharmony. We don't want that do we?
MC
But, if they stick to just the 'knitting' (i.e. roads), won't the Maori economy suffer? And isn't the growth in the latter SO important to improving all those appalling statistics, which Maori lead?
How much did the ACT ferry cancellations cost us, for comparison?
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.