Posts tagged CCC
Yesterday the Christchurch City Council released its draft plan for the development of Christchurch post the recent earthquakes.
If you click on the link above you will get an online flip page style book, or if you prefer something you can download, here’s the pdf version of the CCC plan.
Let’s cut to the chase here:
This document ROCKS! (and not in a bad, earthquake way, excuse the unintended pun). I strongly recommend any Christchurch resident reads it and gives feedback.
IMHO, it’s the right balance of vision (it gives us all something to think/look forward to) with some practical now stuff.
To balance off my praise for the CCC, I give a HUGE brick bat to Gerry Brownlee, who has been the ONLY poor performer out of ALL the agencies and people involved in the earthquake recovery:
- CCC have done a good job (and a great job on this plan)
- EQC an average job (too slow, but OK)
- The Government have done a good job (with a very fair compensation package to red zoners who can’t rebuild). Key, in particular, has come across as very reasonable and level headed.
- CERA have done a good job – getting the right CE was probably half of that!
But Browlee has performed poorly. Why? Because less than one week prior to announce the compensation packages for homeowners that were not able to rebuild their homes, he arrogantly refused to give ANY idea of when info would come out on it. Instead of saying I can not confirm an exact date, but we hope to have information out to those effected in a matter of weeks, not months. But no, he just said I know, but I am not telling you, it’s complex. (Note: I have paraphrased here, he didn’t say these exact words) Can you say Arrogant Prick any louder, Gerry?
However, Earthquake Recovery Minister Gerry Brownlee called the plan “a pretty big wish list”.
Gee, thanks Gerry, that was constructive! (in case you missed it, that was me being sarcastic).
Contrast this with how Key responded:
Prime Minister John Key is a fan of light rail for earthquake-hit Christchurch but he’s less clear on who should pay for the city’s $2 billion rebuild plan.
To to a degree, both are right, coz they say the same message, but in totally different ways. There’s a lot not costed in the plan. The CCC says about half will be paid for by the Council (ie ratepayers) and half by a mix of Government and private investment. So yes, the issue of where the money comes from needs to be answered at some stage. But notice how Key’s message is Yes, but … and Gerry says No, unless … even though they have a similar message of who’s gonna pay?. Gerry you could learn so much from your leader!
Anyway, back to the plan, it rocks, read it and give feedback.
Black and White Version: The CCC have the right mix of vision and practicality in their latest plan. The challenge will be funding it, but now is the best time to try for things like this.
Today the Christchurch Press reported Chch door open for asset sales, and quoted ChCh Central Labour MP was today on National Radio saying that the ‘sale of assets must be stopped’. The Press reported:
A legal loophole means city ratepayers’ stakes in Christchurch City Holdings Ltd’s (CCHL) assets – including electricity company Orion New Zealand, Christchurch International Airport Ltd, Lyttelton Port Co, Red Bus and City Care – could be sold to help pay for the estimated more than $20b rebuild of the central business district.
Well it’s all just rubbish. Here’s what wrong with this story:
- The headline is misleading. This is no open door. The door was never closed. There is also no loophole. The Council can, if it chooses, sell any asset it owns, and has always been able to do this. There is no new provision that the CERA act creates that didn’t already exist.
- Labour are trying to make a story put of this by trying to ‘block CERA from forcing sales’, yet the Minister for Earthquake Recovery (Gerry Browlee) is VERY clear that it’s a CCC decision, not CERA. Mayor Parker (both Browlee and Parker were also interviewed on National Radio this morning) agrees and says the Council aren’t even considering this, and if they did it would be done with full community consultation.
- The Government and the Council are both clear on their roles here. Only a Labour MP (and the ChCh press) seam to think there is an issue.
The Press should know better that running such a misleading headline (that or just being stupid and falling for the spin from an MP).
While it’s not my intention to make this post about the merits or otherwise of selling such assets (my gut reaction would say keep em), it was interesting to note that the CCC has $2 billion in assets, that reportedly returned $600 million over the last 10 years. So that’s $60 million a year, or a return of 3% (that’s simplistic, since I have assumed the asset’s value was $2 billion throughout the last 10 years, and its very likely that the assets have increased in value over the period). Based on that I might suggest that at the very least this issue is looked at and the question of are they a good investment?, earthquake or not, is asked. The problem with ideological approaches of don’t sell or always sell is that such questions aren’t asked. IMHO, asking that question would be a far more interesting and valuable story.
Black and White Version: Just coz an MP says it’s true, doesn’t make it so. Media need to do their job and RESEARCH before printing misleading headlines.
True to form, this post is VERY Black and White.
I now have proof that Jim Anderton, Christchurch Mayoral Candidate, is breaking the election rules, and all over the place. And while some may think the rules around advertising and signage and advertising are trivial, Jim has been playing the political game for over 40 years now – he knows the rules and is knowingly breaking them. (As an aside, he was one of those that supported the draconian measures introduced by the Labour Government – the Electoral Finance Act 2007). I even found (quite easily) that Jim’s party has broken the rules on this before.
Anyway, here’s the details:
Sumner beach is probably Christchurch’s nicest, if not at least most popular beach.
The Christchurch City Council (CCC) has, in my view, quite sensibly placed restrictions on where dogs can be on the beach, giving a relatively small area of dog free beach, around where the lifeguards patrol, and leaving at least three quarters of it as “dog friendly” where owners can walk their dog. However, there is a wee issue, as pointed out by this article in the Christchurch Press. (more…)