I’m all for public accountability, however…
There was a letter in the paper (again, letter a day-athon at the moment), stating that the CST (and Malcolm Farry) must trust and accept the professional opinion of so called critics of the stadium. Which is a little two faced, as the stadium proposal has been put together by professionals, but the StS doesn’t want to accept these professional opinions, only theirs.
However last night the StS attended the Community Trust of Otago’s meeting which was meant to be about the Trust’s reporting of it’s operational and financial performance for the year. Instead the meeting was sidelined somewhat by the StS and it’s followers aiming questions at the Trust’s chairman Bill Thomson.
The StS called for “assurances the trust’s approval process of $10 million of funding towards the stadium would be transparent”. Does the StS imply from this that the processes of the OCT isn’t transparent, a very delicate claim to make indeed. Because by calling for transparency, they are assuming that there isn’t transparency at the moment. This I find highly offensive, and I would assume would be the same for members of the OCT.
Funny, just as members of the StS were calling for it’s professionals to be trusted, they were levelling somewhat less than trustworthy allegations at the OCT. How else can this be interpreted.
“Even after he attempted to steer the question and answer session away from the stadium, opponents continued to ask stadium-related questions – some of which rallied applause from those in the theatre” stated the ODT today, poor form folks, this world isn’t all about you guys, or me for that matter.