The Hall Monitor of Parliament can’t poke his sticky face into our affairs – thank goodness.

“In a response to a plea from Ratepayers and Householders Association chairman Syd Adie to help stop the stadium, Mr Hide said he was responsible for the legal framework in which councils operated, not their specific decisions or actions.”

From the ODT online today, Hide ‘unable to intervene’ on stadium.

“Therefore, I am unable to intervene in any decisions the councils make about the proposed stadium.”

Mr Hide has said he did not think it was the sort of infrastructure the Government should be supporting.

Of course he doesn’t, the free marketeer ideologue can’t see past his laissez-faire dogma. Meanwhile the Australian Government in it’s Infrastructure bail-out/spend-up inspired by the political/economic ideologies that must really annoy Mr Hide, Keynesian Economics, have deemed that a portion of the money they are giving to each state must be spent on stadium upgrades. Seems that Stadiums come under Infrastructure in OZ (no surprise really considering how much importance their national identity is defined by sporting achievement). I’ve argued that the definition of Infrastructure has shifted radically in the last fifty years, and is no longer restricted to the traditional roads, bridges etc.

So thank goodness that Mr Hide & Mr Aide can’t get their way, and here’s hoping that the new government has been looking across the Tasman to see where they are distributing money their Infrastructure stimulus package.


Filed under Economics, Hot air, Town planning

8 responses to “Phew!

  1. karetai

    I did say you can’t trust politicians.
    Once they’re elected they back track on everything they once promised.

  2. Hide didn’t promise to stop the stadium development, you’re just being silly!

  3. karetai

    No he didn’t promise that.
    But one of Act’s policies was
    “To reduce the rates burden on householders and businesses and ensure that local government focus on only those activities that cannot be done better by others”
    Eg-If Carisbrook is not good enough for rugby world cup games, why don’t the rich pricks pay for something better themselves when they’re perfectly capable of doing so?

  4. See there you go again all over the place. That may have been ACT’s policies, (blimey I can’t believe I’m defending a party I loath), but as possibly the most minor of the minor parties, ACT has sod all verging on next to nothing to offer the government (despite what teenage hard-on Roger Douglas may have been fostering come election night – sorry for being so crude). ACT may have promised much, but if you look at the track record (as much as I hate to admit it) the one who has delivered the most consistently was the very same person literally hounded with ‘lynch mob’ fever by Rodney Hide. Remember Peters was cleared of all allegations, while Hide was actually found to have been guilty. But if you want to moan about politics go over to Kiwiblog or The Standard or Frog Blog, this is about stadium development.

    Stadium development can’t be done better by the so called ‘rich pricks’ hence council and possibly government involvement.

    This whole development isn’t about rugby. One more time, it’s about finally taking the bull by the horns and developing something for the city which is more than rugby – get it, the more the merrier, and with the other sports already supporting it, codes other than rugby are getting excited by it.

    Carisbrook isn’t good enough for RWC games, Mongolia vs Angola maybe, but that would be about it, if at all in it’s current state. Take from that Dunedin (despite what Hamilton thinks) still the 4th major city in this county would have had no involvement in the biggest sporting event to hit this country outside of hosting either the Olympics or the Football World Cup (which we have no chance of hosting BTW). If you are prepared to let the city miss out on the billions of dollars and tens upon tens of thousands of visitors to this country, all for the sake of spite of the ‘rich pricks’, not to mention the hundreds of millions of people viewing around the world.

    CHCH would have been in a fine place if they had said for the 1974 Commonwealth games, we have a perfectly good Lancaster Park, why would we want to build a new stadium, and don’t bother with those architecturally & historically imporatant halls of residences, or the town hall. They’ve been such a burden to CHCH ever since…

    Seriously sometimes I wonder what the hell Dunedin has done to deserve it’s citizens…

    all too bloody depressing.

  5. Elizabeth

    Paul, as about to be reported in ODT tomorrow, some news: both the stadium plan change and the notice of requirement for harbour arterial link have been APPROVED.

  6. Thanks Elizabeth, give the hat tip credit to you. Gotta love the social web.

    Can’t say I’m not excited, but I do have my reservations. Fighting as some are to created this (and don’t get me wrong, this is big and expensive for the city), at the end of the day it is just a building. It’s the people who run the place which will determine if it’s a success, and dealing with people is infinitely more dangerous than supposed rising mean sea levels. I want this city dearly to have this facility, but only if the right people can be found to run the facility.

    Actually, stadium or not, I’d much rather see Anzac ave used radically differently than the current freight container corridor it currently is, this must be a good thing?

    So thanks Elizabeth.

  7. Elizabeth

    Hi Paul – been noting your posts on how the stadium “operation” will need to be managed…I completely agree! Something/some people/some lively agency is needed.

    No overt signs yet that the “business” will get the right quality profit-minded motivational footing along with the prolonged stamina to see this thing run successfully into the future.

    If it’s reckoned by suitably qualified experts that the stadium operation will boost overall business in the city long after its fledgling period – not performing as a drain on existing business and enterprise – then I’d hope we’re given excellent realistic projections before the thing gets built.

    Always optimistic for local business and development (no, really I am) but it’s mighty difficult to see at this time how the stadium will perform (plural activities!!!!!) to justify the outlay and ongoing expenditure.

    Let’s hope someone useful, strategic and believable has this all worked out, somewhere.
    All anybody wants to know is can the stadium perform and perform well into the long-term, a bolster to regional confidence and investment.

  8. Elizabeth

    The thing that makes me wonder… is why CST didn’t have a fully developed capital fundraising programme from early on, such that the need for public funding could have reduced rather than increased in this lead-up period – as a gesture of goodwill to the wider community that would encourage healthy voluntary discretionary spending each year into the future as the community supported the operation in all its multiplicity and diversity.

    If CST can’t arrange that, can it and or DCC instigate the right management model for when the thing is supposed to be up and running?

    Planning for a successful long-term future for the stadium should never be predicated on RWC 2011 (some say it is, some say it isn’t – the construction timeline definitely says it is). The dollars and cents of that just don’t ring true. If RWC is a just a ‘casual milestone’, like some sort of incentive to just get the building done, then the thinking and planning stratagem is way way too shallow for the real business to be sustainable.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s