Another injunction?

### ODT Online Sat, 25 Apr 2009
Judicial review sought
By Elspeth McLean and Rebecca Fox
Former Queenstown property developer Basil Walker is attempting to file an application in the High Court at Dunedin for a judicial review related to the Otago Regional Council’s involvement with the Otago stadium project.
Read more

See Public Notice (April 16, 2009)

Posted by Elizabeth Kerr

20 Comments

Filed under Economics, Geography, Hot air, Media, Politics, Site, Stadiums

20 responses to “Another injunction?

  1. Elizabeth

    ### ODT Online Sat, 25/04/2009 – 1:17pm.
    Comment by JM on Exactly

  2. KLK

    JM raises some good points, but I’m not sure they support his argument:

    Firstly, it really does not matter how many submissions are made against the Stadium if their quality is worthless. See the comments of the Judge regading the StS “analysis (or lackthereof) at the injunction hearing.

    Secondly, most people wanted a new stadium. They did actually want it. The fact they didn’t want to pay for it is not a suprise. There are few things you could ask NZ ratepayers to pay for that they would be happy to do so.

    Incidentally, on the odt.co.nz online poll, when asked if a line should be drawn in the sand and the city/region should support the Stadium from now on, 71% are in agreement that it should be supported.

  3. KLK, this has been the trend of the ODT online polls for the last week, something that is quite incredible.

  4. KBG

    How could a judge read over so many years of paper work in such a short time?
    His decision was made before the STS members even left for Christchurch
    The old boys network’ were always going to have their way

  5. KGB

    I’m almost as bad as the judge.
    After reading through all that paper work I’m so tired I forgot my own name

  6. KLK

    “Since when are the courts bound by a construction timeline ”

    My guess is injunction hearings are bound by timelines by their very nature. They are, typically, an 11th hour resort. Therefore, a decision needs to be made before a key event – in this case, the decision needed to be made before the signing of the contract on the Monday.

    Thats not to say that action could not have been taken after that key event, of course.

    “The other thing is that Justice Chisholm effectively said he didn’t have the expertise to work out what Nicola Holman’s affidavit was saying. Meaning he decided not to find out, by virtue of a rather arbitrary and if I may say artificial timeline.”

    I haven’t read the judges comments so I’d be keen on seeing exactly what he said, verbatim. I’d be surprised if a Judge admitted to a lack of expertise (having dealt with Judges, professionally of course). Is it possible that there was a lack of clarity in the StS submission (the figures, I mean). Because in comments I saw attributed to the Judge in the ODT, he stated that while figures were provided, there was no back up, analysis or workings (I’m paraphrasing there).

  7. KLK

    KGB wrote: “How could a judge read over so many years of paper work in such a short time?”

    I doubt he did, or had to. The hearing was about how the project under the construction agreement (and associated documentation) differs from that in the annual plan. Its really looking at the plan and then the end (or near the end) result. And its up to the StS to prove a “significant” change.

    “His decision was made before the STS members even left for Christchurch
    The old boys network’ were always going to have their way”

    I think conspiracy theories and “old boy” talk doesn’t do anyones argument any favours.

  8. KLK re:conspiracy theories, welcome to the world of the un-reasoned argument of KGB.

    In simple terms the Judge said that the injunction application didn’t even pass first base, meaning it was a complete waste of time and money, and costs are reserved.

    But what happens to the StS if costs can’t be met, are they just declared insolvent and the country has to meet the costs of the hearing, this wasn’t a hearing in front of a JP here in a library in Dunners, this was the big time?

  9. Jody

    KLK said “Firstly, it really does not matter how many submissions are made against the Stadium if their quality is worthless. See the comments of the Judge regading the StS “analysis (or lackthereof) at the injunction hearing.”

    The ORC clearly stated they would not commit funds to the stadium, unless they had a CLEAR indication of community support (it’s still on their website, if you want to check). Nevertheless, the ORC committed to the stadium, despite 12:1 opposition to the project at the annual plan consultations, and their own survey showing most ratepayers did not want to contribute to the stadium. Obviously there was no clear indication of public support. Can’t remember the DCC saying they would not commit to the stadium if the community didn’t want them to – perhaps they never intended to listen to the public?

    On what basis did the councils decide the submissions opposed to the stadium were worthless? These people followed the consultative process, and took the time to make a submission – unlike the many emailers that councillors have supposedly heard from. The council may not have agreed with some of the arguments presented, but in a situation where neither essential core services nor human rights are being affected, surely the ‘majority’ should rule? After all, we are talking about an entertainment venue that replicates existing venues, not whether we should be allowed to beat children or pump our raw sewerage into the sea. Therefore, if the majority of the community doesn’t want to pay for a new stadium – for whatever reason! – then the councils should have heeded their own words, and not committed to the project (unless they real evidence that that is what the majority of the public wanted – and not used the ‘silent majority’ to substantiate their position).

    Not sure of your last point – the judge was looking at a completely different aspect, with a different point of view.

    “Secondly, most people wanted a new stadium. They did actually want it. The fact they didn’t want to pay for it is not a suprise. There are few things you could ask NZ ratepayers to pay for that they would be happy to do so.”

    I disagree with your last sentence – I think the majority of NZ ratepayers are happy (or if not happy, at least resigned) to paying for essentials (roads, effluent treatment etc). It’s whether we want to pay for a ‘luxury’ item that is at issue. Furthermore, since the cost of essential services are escalating at an alarming rate, why then further burden the ratepayer with non-essential projects of such enormous cost? The public should have been allowed to vote.

    The ODT polls are so flawed that it is farcical to use them to support your position, whether you want the stadium or not.

    Anyway, I guess today the contract will be signed, and the stadium will be built. I hope that the pro-stadium people are right – I will be very happy to hear a few “I told you so’s” in 10-20 years time!!!

  10. KLK

    A figure of 12:1 submissions against a project isn’t relevant if the basis of that opposition is unreasonable. If that opposition is potential terrorist attacks, site contamination, and the possibility of the site floating off into the Harbour, among other fantasies. Surely you concede that there has to some level relevance. Some level of quality control….

    I’d be extremely disappointed with any elected representative in NZ that bowed in the face of bullsh!t (excuse my language). That’s not leadership. And in leadership, not all of the decisions are easy, or popular.

    But as for ratepayers not minding about paying, especially paying for essential services….that was a joke right? If there is one single thing that annoys the hell out of me, its the inevitable whingeing from the same demographic of ratepayers who object to rates increases of any size, before they even know what it might be spent on.

    $1.27p/wk for the average household and its going to break the bank. Come on…

  11. KGB

    Hi Elizabeth
    I know you and I have had our disagreements but in all honesty,if you had been the president of STS,do you think the outcome of this debacle could have been any different when so much was stacked against the peasants (the average ratepayers) right from the start?
    Leah McBey would have become Dunedin’s next Mayor,not Peter Chin, but she was driven away because of the actions of a group of past school yard bullies.
    I don’t care if Paul or KLK ridicule my claim but I do know that ‘the old boys network’ is still alive and thriving in Dunedin.

  12. KGB

    Malcolm Farry has got his way this time.
    This should more than make up for the humiliation he suffered at the 2004 local body elections.

  13. Leah McBey, thanks for that, I needed a dammed good laugh today, I’ve had to wipe the tears away to complete this reply.

    Hell I better alert the old boys network this was on the cards, now what was the combo, one smoke ball, three short smoke balls, one smoke balls – hope they see this in the late evening sky, either that or the cow living up the hill is having another rubbish burning night.

    Ridicule isn’t quite the word, pity comes to mind.

  14. KGB

    The tears run down my face faster than yours Paul when I remember the current mayor dressed in his wife’s wedding gown.
    When is he going to perform in her pyjamas?

  15. KGB

    Looking back through your posts Paul over the past year and considering that you are a well educated person it astounds me the way that you just attack everyone whether they’re right or wrong.
    It leaves me wondering just what sort of a human being you really are

    {Paul here – sorry not biting}.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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