Channel 9: "Lifting the lid"

### Channel 9 Online March 30, 2009 – 7:18pm
The Great Stadium Debate: Episode 6

Channel 9 covered the recent Stop The Stadium organised speeches made at the Dunedin Town Hall on Sunday, March 29th as part of its “Great Stadium Debate” series.

This event became Episode 6 in the series and was titled “Lifting the Lid” on the Otago Stadium.

View

DVD copies of the coverage are available from the station. Call (03) 474-7474 to reserve your copy.

Stadium contract

### ODT Online Mon, 6 Apr 2009
Stadium contract may be days away

By Mark Price

A conditional contract to build the $198 million Awatea St stadium could be signed within days.

Carisbrook Stadium Trust chairman Malcolm Farry said yesterday the trust would meet today to consider the contract it had been negotiating since February with Hawkins Construction.

Read More Online Here…

Read more

Citywide referendum called for

UPDATE
### ODT Online Poll Mon, 6 Apr 2009
Should there be a referendum to decide the fate of the stadium?
Yes/No/Not sure Link

### ODT Online Mon, 6 Apr 2009
Demands for Dunedin stadium vote

By Chris Morris

There were calls for a city-wide referendum to decide the fate of the planned Otago Stadium after howls of protest were directed at the project during a public meeting in Port Chalmers, Dunedin, last night.

Read More Online Here…

Read more

****

### ODT Online Mon, 6 Apr 2009
Faith in council well down: survey

By Mark Price

Public confidence in the Dunedin City Council’s decision-making ability has fallen sharply in the latest quality of life survey, and the proposed Awatea St stadium appears to have been a factor.

Read More Online Here…

Full report

The myths and misinformation continues to reign.

Over the weekend, both personally and in public (the Port Chalmers meeting) issues raised by the public as reasons why the stadium shouldn’t be built were voiced, despite the simple fact that they have no grasp on reality.

The first two related to the foundations of the stadium. One claimed the land was reclaimed and thus was prone to extra risk (unlike any other structure in and around the harbour area built on reclaimed land) and the other claimed that old Water of Leith soaked Limestone foundations wouldn’t sustain the heavy structure with a massively heavy glass roof.

Then once again at the public meeting held by Cr Noone at Port Chalmers last night. Sure it was only one of a series of issues raised by the public, but the mere fact that it was raised at all shows that the massive campaign of mis/disinformation that was waged by the STS prior to xmas really has paid off. It was again suggested at the meeting that the area was prone to sea level rising as a result of global warming.

Where we got this rubbish we all know, and what a massive disservice that did to the community, why this rubbish is allowed to continue is possibly a failure of the media. It certainly isn’t the job of the CST to debunk all of the myths out there, otherwise they would have to have a full time employee working over time to rebuke this utter rubbish.

FOR THE RECORD. The most extreme scenario from NIWA is as follows. In 90 years time, there is a 10% chance that MSL will rise in the order of 50-75cm. Yes that is a large amount, but considering that is still well below the average 2m above MSL of the site, this is hardly the number 1 reason not to build the stadium. The general consensus of NIWA scientists is that in 50 years time the MSL will be in the order of 20-35cm above present MSL. These figures are subject to change, but in all reality if there is anything like the 1m sea level rise predicted by the anti-stadium crowd, sorry a stadium in the wrong place is the very least of our problems – take for instance whole nations decimated and hundreds of kilometres of NZ coastline changed in the least.

The only reason I bring these up again and again, is that these individuals hold these to be truths, when in fact they aren’t. It’s all very well opposing something on exceedingly strong feelings and facts, but to base opposition on the Chicken Little theory is daft.

So, of the so called majority who are supposedly against the stadium, who else is basing their opinions on they myths and misinformation that is circulating.

NO a public referendum on the matter is not the way forward, as suggested at the meeting. You are all aware of my opinion of such referenda;

1) There was an election fought over the very issue of the stadium, I at least voted so, if you didn’t sorry your fault, you can’t expect extra democracy.
2) There simply is too much bullshit and hype out there for any sane let alone informed decisions to be made, like the myths of the poo on the beaches and the rising sea levels (don’t forget the terrorists).
3) These are exceedingly inefficient ways in which to run government. They leave the door open for any pressure group to hijack and dominate the political agenda at the expense of other council programmes.
4) They are no more than a slice of public opinion here and now. Like the title this forum suggests, if this stadium is a success, what would such poll show?

Of course the myths continue with this so called “Low Risk” rates revolt. Believe that pork pie all you like, the problem is that in the wonderful world of accounting, being short of payment is short of payment. It makes no distinction between withholding money against the stadium, or road improvements, rubbish collection or even cleaning up Poo on the beaches. If you continue to believe the bullshit that this is a low risk option, you are sorely misinformed or a complete and utter bloody idiot. If you are short in your rates, they make no distinction between your so called noble political cause and that of a bad debtor

Calling all Dunedin City councillors

Cr Andrew Noone bravely took up the challenge to appear at the Port Chalmers public meeting.

It is rumoured that a meeting will be held in South Dunedin.

We invite all Councillors to hold public meetings in their Wards, to explain their stance on the stadium project to constituents.

Nothing more, nothing less. Let’s get to the heart of it.