October 10, 2024 • 30 mins
Wellington City Council has voted to stop the controversial sale of its 34% share in the airport. The move has left a big question mark over the city's councils, with the long term plan now needing a re-think to plug a multi-million dollar hole left by the sale.
On this week's episode, Georgina speaks with Mayor Tory Whanau, who supported the sale, about the move and what's next, and she addresses her plans to run for re-election.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Kyoda, and welcome to On the Tiles, the Herald's politics podcast.
I'm your host Georgina Campbell and this is a local
edition episode. Wellington City Council has voted to stop the
controversial sale of its thirty four percent share in the airport.
The sale has divided the council and cast its usual
(00:23):
voting blocks to one site. Some of the strongest opposition
to selling has come from Labor councilors their local party,
arguing the airport is a strategic public asset critical to
the city's economy. It has cost meyr Torifano crucial support
after three left leaning councilors publicly withdrew their unconditional backing
(00:44):
of her policies. The council's too Manifenua representatives have also
accused some counselors of deliberately excluding Ewie voices from being
heard jepardizing their relationship. Today, on On the Tiles we're
joined by Lindon met Tory Farno to discuss the vote,
what it means for her mauralty and what's next. Kyoda, Tori,
(01:12):
and thanks so much for joining us on the podcast.
Speaker 2 (01:15):
I thank you for having me.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
I wanted to first ask at what point did you
realize that you didn't have the numbers to withstand this
opposition to the airport sale.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
I think it had been somewhat clear just over the
last perhaps two weeks that we'd lost the support, you know,
certainly lost the support of the sale. And you know,
I think that's why at the end of the vote yesterday,
at the end of the meeting, I very much accepted it.
(01:51):
And look, it was good to have a democratic a
democratic process to do that. And now we can just
move forward.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
And it seems like there was quite a lot happening
right up to the last minute. Labor Counselor Ben McNulty
talked about this in his speech at the meeting, and
he also mentioned that, you know, they put a partial
sale on the table. Why did you reject that?
Speaker 2 (02:19):
No, So, so to be very clear, a partial sale
has been on the table since before the long term
plan had already been signed off. This had this had
been offered by my office, and this was offered again
about two weeks ago. So we put that on the table.
We wrote up a proposal to see if see if
(02:40):
it was feasible. But uh, and and and that, and
it always it always is right, But then we really
had to focus on the notice of motion to get
that pulled at the request of also Mana Fenua. So yeah,
to be clear, there was always an option, but in
the past it hadn't been taken up.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Okay. So even though it appears both parties may have
been open to a partial sale towards the end of
this kind of drawn out saga, that just didn't happen or.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
Didn't happen, which indicated to me that actually it probably
wasn't actually the preferred outcome in the end. I think
you know, there was a strong campaign to avoid the
sale overall, and that's fine, and that one and there
were those of us who did want to include the
(03:33):
sale in our long term plan because it created a
solid financial strategy. There were always going to be chats
like in the middle to be like, okay, can we
find a middle ground. But at the end of the day,
I don't think it was wanted enough for it to
warrant an outcome. And that's okay, We've made a decision
and we're going to stick with that and just now
(03:55):
get on off the work.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
And you really championed this sale. How damaging is it
for your mayoralty to lose the thoat.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
I don't. I don't see it as damaging, I said,
as a as a bit of a blow. Yes, the
decision was very disappointing. At the end of the day.
What I want is a successful long term plan that
delivered delivers the best outcomes for Wellington City. So and
and my big priorities have always been, you know, water, infrastructure, transport,
(04:25):
climate action and housing, those big things. When it came
to the long term plan, it made sense to manage
our risk and cover our insurance shortfall, to sell our
shares and recycle it into essentially a self insurance fund.
And and that that provided us with steady footing to
(04:46):
be able to deliver a long term plan, stay, stay
financially prudent and not increase rates any further that they
already are. We will have to go back to the
drawing board a bit as a result of yesterday. But
again I remain committed to Wellington City and finding the
best outcomes for them.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
But isn't your long term plan about to unravel? Because
when you say we're now going to have to go
back to the drawing board a bit, Council officials have
indicated that that bit could be six hundred million dollars
worth of cuts to capital spending.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
Absolutely, So I think the next steps from here are
we as a council and we as a city need
to decide what level of risk we're willing to carry
when it comes to future events and the state of
our financial strategy. Then we'll have to decide again what
are our key priorities for the city. For me, it's water, infrastructure,
(05:45):
transport and climate action and housing. And then we'll need
to look at our entire capital program and be like, well,
how can we still deliver those things but make these
significant cuts. At this stage it's looking to be between
four hundred and six hundred million. Look, that's going to
be a really challenging process, but that's why I'm calling
on all counselors. You know, we really have to come
(06:07):
together and manage that through while still delivering the best
for well event city. It'll be hard, I make absolutely,
I have no doubt about that, but this is what
council has decided, so we'll have to move on with it.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
What sort of things are on the chopping block in
terms of those.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Cuts, nothing yet, but I think we won't know that
until we've received advice around our level of risk and
insurance and the true impact of not selling off our shares.
That information will likely come back to us in December.
(06:46):
It will then need to go back out for consultation again.
There's quite a there's quite a bit. There's a bit
of a process that now needs to be put together
before we make those calls. But we will be getting
onto that right away.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
Surely be pretty gutting though to you know, have have
recently in an interview with me that at least I
can recall that, you know, to talk about the long
term Plan and how great it was and how it
delivered for Wellington. It must be pretty gutting to then
have to make cuts to it, isn't it?
Speaker 2 (07:16):
It is? It is gutting, and it's one that I'm
very disappointed in because I genuinely believe that that long
term Plan we got to a really good place. We
had we had a solution to fix our insurance problem.
It was at a risk appetite that we were comfortable with,
and we were still delivering on our key priorities. You know,
(07:42):
we'll have to change some of those things now moving forward,
but I'm still I'm still confident we can come up
with a solution.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
Can you just outline what does happen now, you know,
in terms of it's a long term plan amendment that happens, right,
Are you able to outline how that works?
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Yeah, we'll know that for certain next week our officers
and legal team you know, will be going through that.
I to mind what I believe to be the next
steps are you know, through audit and risk? How do
we determine our risk appetite? What does that mean in
terms of what we need to consult on. We will
(08:25):
need to consult again on the airport shares and of
course what are the areas where our public would like
to see cuts? Things like that.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
And I think some counselors believe that you know, the
extent of the cuts between four hundred and six hundred
million dollars that that could be required has sort of
been weaponized as a way to support the position of
selling the shares and that actually it will be far
less than that. What would you say to that.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
I would say that's absolutely incorrect. So that that figure
has been you know, brought up with by our officers
something that we can work at with based on the
information that we have right now. If it's lower then
that that would be wonderful. But based on our current budget,
we have some of the best you know, people in
(09:20):
finance in our country. I'm certain that they've come up
with the right figure. They were not using that to
weaponize this process. They have genuine concerns about our you know,
whether it's our legislative requirements, delivering a successful long term plan.
I think, you know, using the term weaponizing and so
forth that that people have is not correct.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
The sale has divided the council. One councilor described the
temperature as being nuclear in June. You've also lost crucial
support over it. Was it worth it?
Speaker 2 (10:01):
It has been a really difficult few weeks. Absolutely, you know,
we had got into a good place at the end
of June, and look, some counselors had changed their position
on things, on some of the decisions within the long
term plan, which has led to the outcome today. That's okay.
The thing about the airport, Saul, that this is this
(10:24):
has been a really big issue for some of our counselors,
and one a very emotional one, one that's conflicted with
their values, and one where has generated some public attention
as well, you know, a couple of us said it
yesterday in our speeches that as a result of that,
(10:44):
as a result of those tensions, as a result of
our relationship with Mana Fenua, I don't think we've been
the best versions of ourself ourselves, sorry, and it has
caused tension, but it's quite funny. So well, it's not funny.
I mean, it's quite interesting that, you know, I woke
up today Yesterday was a very challenging and difficult decision,
(11:07):
and it was it was disappointing, but I woke up
today almost with a weight off my shoulders, and you know,
I've accepted the democratic outcome. I think this is probably
the most difficult decision that some of our counselors have
had to make, but I'm going to respect it. And
what I'm keen to do now is first really clarify
(11:30):
what the next steps are. Two, rebuilding our relationship with
Manifena and our EWE leaders. It is absolutely crucial for me.
And three how to wear as a collective now deal
with the difficult decision of finding the best cuts which
won't impact our city negatively. I think we can do that.
I've already had some I've already had a conversation with
(11:53):
Counselor McNulty for instance, and said, hey, you know it's
time for us now to regroup next week, let's do that,
and you know he's on board with that as well.
So I do I have optimism, I have some I
do think we can actually, you know, we've gone through
this really difficult process together and tensions will high, but
(12:13):
I think we can now reflect, learn from this and
come back together.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
And when you say that, you've accepted it just the
way that the process works to amend the long term plan. Essentially,
there are going to be more votes on the airport
sale issue. Yeah, is it your intention to in future
vote to keep the shares as opposed to voting to
(12:39):
sell them, given that that is reflective of the council's
majority position.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
Like unless that majority changed, which you know, I'm not
sure that it will. I'm going to respect where we're
sitting at currently, and that's why I'm supportive of officers
going away to do the work on what does this
mean in terms of soul when our insurance issue, what
cuts do we need to make to our program? And
how do we get this consultation period done as soon
(13:07):
as possible. Yeah, I respect democracy, I accept where the
vote has landed, and I'm just going to I want
to work in good faith to ensure that now that
that difficult decision is done, we have to get back
on board and ensure that we're still investing in other
(13:29):
things like like our pipes, you know, like let's go
Willington of apologies, Courtney Place and social housing. So still
being able to invest in those good things that really
build our city as well as our community initiatives. So
kind of looking for those cuts is going to be
hard work, but we have to do it together.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
In Former Willington mayor Dame Carrey Prenda Gast told Nick
Mals on new stort zb's Willington Morning Show this morning
that she thinks Wellington City Council has reached the threshold
for government intervention. You know, she thought a Crown observer
would be appropriate. Do you agree with her?
Speaker 2 (14:10):
Now?
Speaker 1 (14:11):
I din't.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
And again it's a very high bar to breach something
like that. We would have to have not met our
legislative requirements. We're not not even close to that yet.
That is usually the thing that brings in an observer
or a commissioner. You know, no no, you know, amount
(14:32):
of public campaigning or trying to you know, convince the
minister to do that that that that's not what brings
them in.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
Are you still committed to a second term?
Speaker 2 (14:45):
Yes, i am. I'm not really, you know, I'm actually
less focused on the election. However, you know, now that
we're dealing with, you know, a change to our long
term plan, I just want to get this right and
I just want to make sure that we're still delivered
the best outcomes for Wellington City and I believe we
can do that.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
Are you worried though about what the legacy of your
first term will be?
Speaker 2 (15:09):
Of course, you know it's been it's been a difficult
couple of years. But again, you know, for this last year,
I'm just going to be superfi focused, hyper focus on
delivering a successful long term plan. Yes, it's had a
pause and we've had to delay it, but we can
still get there, you know, with proceeding with the airport shares.
(15:32):
How do we stall uh you know, filler now or
maintain you know, some form of self insurance and still
investing in the best things of Wellington City. It is
a challenging task, but certainly one that I'm up for.
Speaker 1 (15:48):
And finally just thinking about when you reach the end
of that process, it will be election time. What success
do you plan to take to voters next year? Given
you know, you've had the reading cinema d or fall over,
You've had the airport shares sale fall over, that's now
going to require hundreds of millions of dollars to be
(16:08):
cut from the long term plan. Yeah, what success do
you plan to take to voters?
Speaker 2 (16:14):
Yeah? So there have still been some, you know, ones
that I'm really proud of, and like, first of all,
I do want to say, you know, I think Wellington City,
you know, with and some media outlets and some very
vocal people are in the public have been talking negatively
about our city relentlessly for a long time. You know,
(16:38):
I just don't think that's acceptable anymore. I'm out on
the ground a lot, I talk a lot with the
public and you know, people who don't really engage with
the council processes or submissions or media at all. I
had one woman this morning walking up who came up
to me, gave me a hug and just saying how
how proud she is of the city. I'm proud of
(17:00):
the city. I love the sea I think it's fantastic,
and I think over the last couple of weeks we
really see it humming in its best self. We've had
a world of wearable arts. We've got the Wellington Jazz
Festival at the moment, and we've got a large number
of events coming up and people out and about and
it's been great. We've had difficult times like any other
place in this country and in the world, but we've
(17:23):
got to stop talking badly about our city because our
city is wonderful. And some of the things that I'm
going to be proud of are things like, you know,
progressing our cycle away network even further and faster and
under budget. We've cut eighty million dollars from our cycleway
budget yet still delivered over twenty six kilometers of cycle ways.
(17:45):
I'm very proud of that. Even though the government was
not supportive let's get Willington moving, I was still able
to retain the work on the Golden Mile, and the
funding and construction of that is going to start and
of next year. I have invested one point eight billion
dollars into our water infrastructure, the highest ever. It's going
(18:07):
to be a difficult decade or so to get everything
fixed and replaced. But again we're playing catch up. Previous
councils have not invested enough money into our pipes and
of course the District Plan. The District Plan was a
very very difficult process and a difficult decision, but as
a result of passing that through, we've now enabled tens
(18:28):
of thousands of homes in this city. What I want
to remind Willington of is we're in a transition phase.
You know, we're pushing through a lot of change, and
all that change and transition is for the betterment of
our city. Yes it's going to be difficult, Yes it's
going to create tensions, but this is what change is like.
And you know, hand on heart, I believe in our
(18:53):
long term plan. With or without the airport, I will
still want to achieve the same things. But yes, I've
made mistake in the past, but I'm someone who learns
from them and moves on because at the end of
the day, all I care about is Wellington City.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Thanks so much for joining us, Tory Mayor of Wellington,
thanks for having me. We are going to take a
quick break before hearing what counselors said at the tense
meeting to kill the sale. Welcome back to On the
Tiles local edition. Here's what some Wellington City councilors had
(19:29):
to say about the controversial sale. Labor Councilor Nurdin abdur
Rahman was behind the notice of motion to stop it.
Speaker 3 (19:36):
When I stood for council, I did so with a
promise to protect public ownership. I'm sure something similar for
most of my Labor and Green counselors around at seven today.
I intend to keep that promise.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
Counselor Sarah Free didn't support the notice of motion to
stop the sale, calling it cynical.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
This is the dirtiest politics I've been involved in since
I've been on this council.
Speaker 1 (20:00):
It is dirty and I'm sorry, but I have to
say that. Labor Councilor Rebecca Matthews said EWE voices should
have been included and urged the vote to be called off.
Please please please withdraw this.
Speaker 2 (20:14):
I'm very sorry that we are here today.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
Counselor Tony Randall says it's been rough for everyone.
Speaker 4 (20:20):
Relations as being broken in some things I mean said
that are going to be difficult to unsay, but we've
made a democratic decision in the council has to move.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
On Green Party MALDI wart Counselor Niko Weineda said the
nosus of motion was worded in a way that disenfranchised
the Council's MALDI partners.
Speaker 4 (20:37):
EWE have been used as a football for the past month,
which is totally contrary to the Mamma enhancing principles which
underlie our Parker head At partnership. I want to make
that exceedingly clear, and in making it clear, I want
to accept my own share of the responsibility for this
(20:59):
month and the way that this has come to us.
But I again I repeat, it is not too late
to do the right thing.
Speaker 1 (21:08):
We are now joined by Labor Councilor Ben McNulty to
discuss what happened behind the scenes to stop the sale.
Kilder Ben, thanks so much for joining us on the
podcast problem.
Speaker 5 (21:20):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 2 (21:21):
Johanna.
Speaker 1 (21:22):
Firstly, let's start with why you oppose the sale.
Speaker 5 (21:26):
Yeah, I mean, the fundamental thing here is that no
one has any opposition to setting up a disaster resilience fund.
But it came down to by selling this asset, we
would change the airport into a liquid asset that could
be drawn down upon once and yet with nonustream so
the airport's the third largest source of revenue in the council.
(21:49):
It consistently outperforms the market, with a eleven percent average
return over the last decade, compared to about an eight
percent return which was projected in the market. So by
selling the setset, we were essentially putting it into a
position in which the capital would be taken away should
an event happen, and then there would be no revenue
stream to council. And I saw that as leaving council
(22:09):
actually worse off in the long term and leaving the
city worse off.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
What did you do to try and get the issue
voted on again? Because at some point it became clear
that there was no longer majority support for this, right, Yeah.
Speaker 5 (22:28):
We go back to June, when the long term plan
was passed. It was already public that a majority of
councilors opposed the sale. At that point, councilor Calbert Randall
and you Young had come out and made clear that
they no longer supported the sale. I understand why with
the short time frame in June, it wasn't able to
(22:49):
be relitigated. But nonetheless, the long term plan was passed
in June despite one of its key pillars being the
sale of the airport actually not having the support of
a majority of councilors. So this was always going to
be relitigated because you've essentially put something through with our
a majority behind it. Post that we had a break
(23:10):
in July, a recess, it's one of the luxuries of
a job. We got back together at the beginning of
August and said, well, we need to bring this decision
back to the table on that basis. Initially we tried
to bring this to the LTP Committee with what we
called a notice apprefication. The lawyers went away and we
had to get external legal device and they said, actually
(23:30):
that can't do that. You have to bring it into council.
The notice of motion was drafted and yesterday was when
it was finally hurt. But it was actually the fourth attempt,
because we did try twice. At the end of June
we tried to notice sepreification and then yesterday it was
the fourth attempt to bring a decision to talk about
the sale on the table.
Speaker 1 (23:49):
And what was your reaction to the notice of motion
passing yesterday?
Speaker 5 (23:54):
It's just relief. I don't think you know. I've been
pretty upfront that This is a horrific process for anyone
involved in Certainly, temperature at the council table at the
end of journey was pretty nuclear. I was incredibly angry,
a number of other councils were incredibly angry across this issue,
(24:16):
and has not been a healthy working environment. It's the
safe way to put this. So more than anything, it's
just a relief that we've finally been able to let
the pressure out from that valve, realize that the majority
is not there for the sale, and now we can
actually start to have a discussion about what we do next.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
Yes, and I want to get to that, but first
of all, I wanted to talk about some of the
comments that have been made around how the way that
this notice of motion was written and it being criticized
for disenfranchising Mildi voices and the two Mani Fenua representatives
on the council wrote to council is expressing this concern.
(25:00):
It's quite a complicated thing to explain, but you know,
this is essentially because the Teromnifenure representatives who both support
the sale, have voting rights at a committee level, but
not a council level. Why were you comfortable still supporting
the notice of motion in light of everything that they said.
Speaker 5 (25:17):
What I came back to yesterday was the airport is
a strategic asset, so that's a legal definition, and when
you have a strategic asset, it is only a council
decision that allows for that asset to be divested. And
you didn't have a majority of support. So the notice
of motion was always brought on the fact that it held.
(25:38):
You know, that was the case in Jennets still the
case of today. So the notice of motion was always
based on the fact that this sale could not proceed
and to continue to council down that road of resources, time, effort,
money and energy was actually an inefficient use of our resources.
Now at the same time, I worked diligently and speak
(25:59):
to that around trying to not bring the notice of
motion and looking at alternatives. So I and others approached
the mayor and said, can we negotiate because we don't
want to have to have this debate on the heard
the hurt that this is causing. We put a partial
sale on the table, even though with the numbers to stop.
But we put that partial sale on the table and said, look,
(26:20):
is this a way through? We said how about we
kick this for top three year, you know, let this
be next year's election issue, so that maybe a public
mandate approach. You could include it on the referendum or
just find a way to put it on ice. We did,
or you'd ask the chair of the Long Templane Committee
if she wanted to be involved in drafting the notice
of motion. Up until Wednesday, I was trying to see
(26:43):
could we actually withdraw yesterday's notice of motion and bring
a fresh one to a council meaning the following week.
So everything that I could do, and this I wasn't
just working on, behalf of myself at other signatories of
the motion to look at alternatives and look for a
road off whils still holding true to the principles that
(27:03):
we were elected on. I did.
Speaker 1 (27:06):
Was it worth it, though the damage that's been caused
to your relationship with Manifenoa to get this asset sale
off the table?
Speaker 5 (27:13):
I'm not sure. I have to see how that plays out. Obviously,
yesterday I asked that they remain at the table and
that they hold our feet to the fire. I certainly
have reached out and looked at how we've tried to
do things in an alternative way so that we wouldn't
cause that damage. But at the same time, this is
(27:34):
the legal framework in which we operate. It only the
Council can get rid of the airport. The Council since
June has said we do not want to get rid
of the airport, and proceeding down that road would have
only created essentially a more convoluted process. And I don't
know that the final decision that there wouldn't have been
hurt regardless given their support in the committee. I don't
(27:58):
know if we have avoided a situation in which there
wasn't hurt, given that Council was the one that had
to make that decision regardless.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
Let's get to what happens next. Basically, the fallout of
stopping the sale is that the long term Plan needs
to be amended, and Council officials have warned that hundreds
of millions of dollars in capital spending may need to
be cut from the budget. What are you comfortable was
being cut?
Speaker 5 (28:25):
I need to start with I have questions on that
assertion to begin with, because we have to remember that
in March of this year, a long term Plan consultation
documents said by no sale of the airport shares, there
would be no impact on councils levels of service. Six
months later, the cuts are now six hundred million dollars.
(28:45):
It is my view that some of the advice has
been weaponized to try and scare counselors into needing to
seeing the case of needing to retain the airport shares.
So the first thing we actually do now is have
a fresh look at the advice. We'll have the Mayor's
office and our stuff obviously working in the interest of
(29:05):
reducing any scope of cuts whatsoever. Something that came through
last week was the office field at the General's disagreeing
with the whole assertion on which the resilience funders based,
which was that we need a one in one thousand
year resilience event. They said, that's appropriate if you're an
insurance company. That's not appropriate if you are a local
body authority. So I think, Georgina, there's actually a lot
(29:28):
of work we need to do in the first instance
around truly ascertaining what the risk is and what the
heather and we need to establish within our long term planners,
and then we can get down to that next point
of conversation. But we are well off that.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
Thanks so much for joining us. Been really appreciate it.
Speaker 5 (29:46):
Thank you, Jordan.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
Thanks for listening to this episode of On the Tiles
Local edition. For more politics, news and opinion, head to
enzit herold dot co dot nzet. You can follow this
podcast on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks
to my producer Ethan Sills. This episode was edited by
m z Emmy Sound Engineers and you can catch us
(30:09):
again next Friday for more On the Tiles
Kyoda, and welcome to On the Tiles, the Herald's politics podcast.
I'm your host Georgina Campbell and this is a local
edition episode. Wellington City Council has voted to stop the
controversial sale of its thirty four percent share in the airport.
The sale has divided the council and cast its usual
(00:23):
voting blocks to one site. Some of the strongest opposition
to selling has come from Labor councilors their local party,
arguing the airport is a strategic public asset critical to
the city's economy. It has cost meyr Torifano crucial support
after three left leaning councilors publicly withdrew their unconditional backing
(00:44):
of her policies. The council's too Manifenua representatives have also
accused some counselors of deliberately excluding Ewie voices from being
heard jepardizing their relationship. Today, on On the Tiles we're
joined by Lindon met Tory Farno to discuss the vote,
what it means for her mauralty and what's next. Kyoda, Tori,
(01:12):
and thanks so much for joining us on the podcast.
Speaker 2 (01:15):
I thank you for having me.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
I wanted to first ask at what point did you
realize that you didn't have the numbers to withstand this
opposition to the airport sale.
Speaker 2 (01:28):
I think it had been somewhat clear just over the
last perhaps two weeks that we'd lost the support, you know,
certainly lost the support of the sale. And you know,
I think that's why at the end of the vote yesterday,
at the end of the meeting, I very much accepted it.
(01:51):
And look, it was good to have a democratic a
democratic process to do that. And now we can just
move forward.
Speaker 1 (01:58):
And it seems like there was quite a lot happening
right up to the last minute. Labor Counselor Ben McNulty
talked about this in his speech at the meeting, and
he also mentioned that, you know, they put a partial
sale on the table. Why did you reject that?
Speaker 2 (02:19):
No, So, so to be very clear, a partial sale
has been on the table since before the long term
plan had already been signed off. This had this had
been offered by my office, and this was offered again
about two weeks ago. So we put that on the table.
We wrote up a proposal to see if see if
(02:40):
it was feasible. But uh, and and and that, and
it always it always is right, But then we really
had to focus on the notice of motion to get
that pulled at the request of also Mana Fenua. So yeah,
to be clear, there was always an option, but in
the past it hadn't been taken up.
Speaker 1 (03:01):
Okay. So even though it appears both parties may have
been open to a partial sale towards the end of
this kind of drawn out saga, that just didn't happen or.
Speaker 2 (03:13):
Didn't happen, which indicated to me that actually it probably
wasn't actually the preferred outcome in the end. I think
you know, there was a strong campaign to avoid the
sale overall, and that's fine, and that one and there
were those of us who did want to include the
(03:33):
sale in our long term plan because it created a
solid financial strategy. There were always going to be chats
like in the middle to be like, okay, can we
find a middle ground. But at the end of the day,
I don't think it was wanted enough for it to
warrant an outcome. And that's okay, We've made a decision
and we're going to stick with that and just now
(03:55):
get on off the work.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
And you really championed this sale. How damaging is it
for your mayoralty to lose the thoat.
Speaker 2 (04:04):
I don't. I don't see it as damaging, I said,
as a as a bit of a blow. Yes, the
decision was very disappointing. At the end of the day.
What I want is a successful long term plan that
delivered delivers the best outcomes for Wellington City. So and
and my big priorities have always been, you know, water, infrastructure, transport,
(04:25):
climate action and housing, those big things. When it came
to the long term plan, it made sense to manage
our risk and cover our insurance shortfall, to sell our
shares and recycle it into essentially a self insurance fund.
And and that that provided us with steady footing to
(04:46):
be able to deliver a long term plan, stay, stay
financially prudent and not increase rates any further that they
already are. We will have to go back to the
drawing board a bit as a result of yesterday. But
again I remain committed to Wellington City and finding the
best outcomes for them.
Speaker 1 (05:06):
But isn't your long term plan about to unravel? Because
when you say we're now going to have to go
back to the drawing board a bit, Council officials have
indicated that that bit could be six hundred million dollars
worth of cuts to capital spending.
Speaker 2 (05:22):
Absolutely, So I think the next steps from here are
we as a council and we as a city need
to decide what level of risk we're willing to carry
when it comes to future events and the state of
our financial strategy. Then we'll have to decide again what
are our key priorities for the city. For me, it's water, infrastructure,
(05:45):
transport and climate action and housing. And then we'll need
to look at our entire capital program and be like, well,
how can we still deliver those things but make these
significant cuts. At this stage it's looking to be between
four hundred and six hundred million. Look, that's going to
be a really challenging process, but that's why I'm calling
on all counselors. You know, we really have to come
(06:07):
together and manage that through while still delivering the best
for well event city. It'll be hard, I make absolutely,
I have no doubt about that, but this is what
council has decided, so we'll have to move on with it.
Speaker 1 (06:21):
What sort of things are on the chopping block in
terms of those.
Speaker 2 (06:24):
Cuts, nothing yet, but I think we won't know that
until we've received advice around our level of risk and
insurance and the true impact of not selling off our shares.
That information will likely come back to us in December.
(06:46):
It will then need to go back out for consultation again.
There's quite a there's quite a bit. There's a bit
of a process that now needs to be put together
before we make those calls. But we will be getting
onto that right away.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
Surely be pretty gutting though to you know, have have
recently in an interview with me that at least I
can recall that, you know, to talk about the long
term Plan and how great it was and how it
delivered for Wellington. It must be pretty gutting to then
have to make cuts to it, isn't it?
Speaker 2 (07:16):
It is? It is gutting, and it's one that I'm
very disappointed in because I genuinely believe that that long
term Plan we got to a really good place. We
had we had a solution to fix our insurance problem.
It was at a risk appetite that we were comfortable with,
and we were still delivering on our key priorities. You know,
(07:42):
we'll have to change some of those things now moving forward,
but I'm still I'm still confident we can come up
with a solution.
Speaker 1 (07:50):
Can you just outline what does happen now, you know,
in terms of it's a long term plan amendment that happens, right,
Are you able to outline how that works?
Speaker 2 (08:01):
Yeah, we'll know that for certain next week our officers
and legal team you know, will be going through that.
I to mind what I believe to be the next
steps are you know, through audit and risk? How do
we determine our risk appetite? What does that mean in
terms of what we need to consult on. We will
(08:25):
need to consult again on the airport shares and of
course what are the areas where our public would like
to see cuts? Things like that.
Speaker 1 (08:36):
And I think some counselors believe that you know, the
extent of the cuts between four hundred and six hundred
million dollars that that could be required has sort of
been weaponized as a way to support the position of
selling the shares and that actually it will be far
less than that. What would you say to that.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
I would say that's absolutely incorrect. So that that figure
has been you know, brought up with by our officers
something that we can work at with based on the
information that we have right now. If it's lower then
that that would be wonderful. But based on our current budget,
we have some of the best you know, people in
(09:20):
finance in our country. I'm certain that they've come up
with the right figure. They were not using that to
weaponize this process. They have genuine concerns about our you know,
whether it's our legislative requirements, delivering a successful long term plan.
I think, you know, using the term weaponizing and so
forth that that people have is not correct.
Speaker 1 (09:44):
The sale has divided the council. One councilor described the
temperature as being nuclear in June. You've also lost crucial
support over it. Was it worth it?
Speaker 2 (10:01):
It has been a really difficult few weeks. Absolutely, you know,
we had got into a good place at the end
of June, and look, some counselors had changed their position
on things, on some of the decisions within the long
term plan, which has led to the outcome today. That's okay.
The thing about the airport, Saul, that this is this
(10:24):
has been a really big issue for some of our counselors,
and one a very emotional one, one that's conflicted with
their values, and one where has generated some public attention
as well, you know, a couple of us said it
yesterday in our speeches that as a result of that,
(10:44):
as a result of those tensions, as a result of
our relationship with Mana Fenua, I don't think we've been
the best versions of ourself ourselves, sorry, and it has
caused tension, but it's quite funny. So well, it's not funny.
I mean, it's quite interesting that, you know, I woke
up today Yesterday was a very challenging and difficult decision,
(11:07):
and it was it was disappointing, but I woke up
today almost with a weight off my shoulders, and you know,
I've accepted the democratic outcome. I think this is probably
the most difficult decision that some of our counselors have
had to make, but I'm going to respect it. And
what I'm keen to do now is first really clarify
(11:30):
what the next steps are. Two, rebuilding our relationship with
Manifena and our EWE leaders. It is absolutely crucial for me.
And three how to wear as a collective now deal
with the difficult decision of finding the best cuts which
won't impact our city negatively. I think we can do that.
I've already had some I've already had a conversation with
(11:53):
Counselor McNulty for instance, and said, hey, you know it's
time for us now to regroup next week, let's do that,
and you know he's on board with that as well.
So I do I have optimism, I have some I
do think we can actually, you know, we've gone through
this really difficult process together and tensions will high, but
(12:13):
I think we can now reflect, learn from this and
come back together.
Speaker 1 (12:18):
And when you say that, you've accepted it just the
way that the process works to amend the long term plan. Essentially,
there are going to be more votes on the airport
sale issue. Yeah, is it your intention to in future
vote to keep the shares as opposed to voting to
(12:39):
sell them, given that that is reflective of the council's
majority position.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
Like unless that majority changed, which you know, I'm not
sure that it will. I'm going to respect where we're
sitting at currently, and that's why I'm supportive of officers
going away to do the work on what does this
mean in terms of soul when our insurance issue, what
cuts do we need to make to our program? And
how do we get this consultation period done as soon
(13:07):
as possible. Yeah, I respect democracy, I accept where the
vote has landed, and I'm just going to I want
to work in good faith to ensure that now that
that difficult decision is done, we have to get back
on board and ensure that we're still investing in other
(13:29):
things like like our pipes, you know, like let's go
Willington of apologies, Courtney Place and social housing. So still
being able to invest in those good things that really
build our city as well as our community initiatives. So
kind of looking for those cuts is going to be
hard work, but we have to do it together.
Speaker 1 (13:52):
In Former Willington mayor Dame Carrey Prenda Gast told Nick
Mals on new stort zb's Willington Morning Show this morning
that she thinks Wellington City Council has reached the threshold
for government intervention. You know, she thought a Crown observer
would be appropriate. Do you agree with her?
Speaker 2 (14:10):
Now?
Speaker 1 (14:11):
I din't.
Speaker 2 (14:11):
And again it's a very high bar to breach something
like that. We would have to have not met our
legislative requirements. We're not not even close to that yet.
That is usually the thing that brings in an observer
or a commissioner. You know, no no, you know, amount
(14:32):
of public campaigning or trying to you know, convince the
minister to do that that that that's not what brings
them in.
Speaker 1 (14:41):
Are you still committed to a second term?
Speaker 2 (14:45):
Yes, i am. I'm not really, you know, I'm actually
less focused on the election. However, you know, now that
we're dealing with, you know, a change to our long
term plan, I just want to get this right and
I just want to make sure that we're still delivered
the best outcomes for Wellington City and I believe we
can do that.
Speaker 1 (15:03):
Are you worried though about what the legacy of your
first term will be?
Speaker 2 (15:09):
Of course, you know it's been it's been a difficult
couple of years. But again, you know, for this last year,
I'm just going to be superfi focused, hyper focus on
delivering a successful long term plan. Yes, it's had a
pause and we've had to delay it, but we can
still get there, you know, with proceeding with the airport shares.
(15:32):
How do we stall uh you know, filler now or
maintain you know, some form of self insurance and still
investing in the best things of Wellington City. It is
a challenging task, but certainly one that I'm up for.
Speaker 1 (15:48):
And finally just thinking about when you reach the end
of that process, it will be election time. What success
do you plan to take to voters next year? Given
you know, you've had the reading cinema d or fall over,
You've had the airport shares sale fall over, that's now
going to require hundreds of millions of dollars to be
(16:08):
cut from the long term plan. Yeah, what success do
you plan to take to voters?
Speaker 2 (16:14):
Yeah? So there have still been some, you know, ones
that I'm really proud of, and like, first of all,
I do want to say, you know, I think Wellington City,
you know, with and some media outlets and some very
vocal people are in the public have been talking negatively
about our city relentlessly for a long time. You know,
(16:38):
I just don't think that's acceptable anymore. I'm out on
the ground a lot, I talk a lot with the
public and you know, people who don't really engage with
the council processes or submissions or media at all. I
had one woman this morning walking up who came up
to me, gave me a hug and just saying how
how proud she is of the city. I'm proud of
(17:00):
the city. I love the sea I think it's fantastic,
and I think over the last couple of weeks we
really see it humming in its best self. We've had
a world of wearable arts. We've got the Wellington Jazz
Festival at the moment, and we've got a large number
of events coming up and people out and about and
it's been great. We've had difficult times like any other
place in this country and in the world, but we've
(17:23):
got to stop talking badly about our city because our
city is wonderful. And some of the things that I'm
going to be proud of are things like, you know,
progressing our cycle away network even further and faster and
under budget. We've cut eighty million dollars from our cycleway
budget yet still delivered over twenty six kilometers of cycle ways.
(17:45):
I'm very proud of that. Even though the government was
not supportive let's get Willington moving, I was still able
to retain the work on the Golden Mile, and the
funding and construction of that is going to start and
of next year. I have invested one point eight billion
dollars into our water infrastructure, the highest ever. It's going
(18:07):
to be a difficult decade or so to get everything
fixed and replaced. But again we're playing catch up. Previous
councils have not invested enough money into our pipes and
of course the District Plan. The District Plan was a
very very difficult process and a difficult decision, but as
a result of passing that through, we've now enabled tens
(18:28):
of thousands of homes in this city. What I want
to remind Willington of is we're in a transition phase.
You know, we're pushing through a lot of change, and
all that change and transition is for the betterment of
our city. Yes it's going to be difficult, Yes it's
going to create tensions, but this is what change is like.
And you know, hand on heart, I believe in our
(18:53):
long term plan. With or without the airport, I will
still want to achieve the same things. But yes, I've
made mistake in the past, but I'm someone who learns
from them and moves on because at the end of
the day, all I care about is Wellington City.
Speaker 1 (19:08):
Thanks so much for joining us, Tory Mayor of Wellington,
thanks for having me. We are going to take a
quick break before hearing what counselors said at the tense
meeting to kill the sale. Welcome back to On the
Tiles local edition. Here's what some Wellington City councilors had
(19:29):
to say about the controversial sale. Labor Councilor Nurdin abdur
Rahman was behind the notice of motion to stop it.
Speaker 3 (19:36):
When I stood for council, I did so with a
promise to protect public ownership. I'm sure something similar for
most of my Labor and Green counselors around at seven today.
I intend to keep that promise.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
Counselor Sarah Free didn't support the notice of motion to
stop the sale, calling it cynical.
Speaker 2 (19:56):
This is the dirtiest politics I've been involved in since
I've been on this council.
Speaker 1 (20:00):
It is dirty and I'm sorry, but I have to
say that. Labor Councilor Rebecca Matthews said EWE voices should
have been included and urged the vote to be called off.
Please please please withdraw this.
Speaker 2 (20:14):
I'm very sorry that we are here today.
Speaker 1 (20:16):
Counselor Tony Randall says it's been rough for everyone.
Speaker 4 (20:20):
Relations as being broken in some things I mean said
that are going to be difficult to unsay, but we've
made a democratic decision in the council has to move.
Speaker 1 (20:28):
On Green Party MALDI wart Counselor Niko Weineda said the
nosus of motion was worded in a way that disenfranchised
the Council's MALDI partners.
Speaker 4 (20:37):
EWE have been used as a football for the past month,
which is totally contrary to the Mamma enhancing principles which
underlie our Parker head At partnership. I want to make
that exceedingly clear, and in making it clear, I want
to accept my own share of the responsibility for this
(20:59):
month and the way that this has come to us.
But I again I repeat, it is not too late
to do the right thing.
Speaker 1 (21:08):
We are now joined by Labor Councilor Ben McNulty to
discuss what happened behind the scenes to stop the sale.
Kilder Ben, thanks so much for joining us on the
podcast problem.
Speaker 5 (21:20):
Thank you very much.
Speaker 2 (21:21):
Johanna.
Speaker 1 (21:22):
Firstly, let's start with why you oppose the sale.
Speaker 5 (21:26):
Yeah, I mean, the fundamental thing here is that no
one has any opposition to setting up a disaster resilience fund.
But it came down to by selling this asset, we
would change the airport into a liquid asset that could
be drawn down upon once and yet with nonustream so
the airport's the third largest source of revenue in the council.
(21:49):
It consistently outperforms the market, with a eleven percent average
return over the last decade, compared to about an eight
percent return which was projected in the market. So by
selling the setset, we were essentially putting it into a
position in which the capital would be taken away should
an event happen, and then there would be no revenue
stream to council. And I saw that as leaving council
(22:09):
actually worse off in the long term and leaving the
city worse off.
Speaker 1 (22:13):
What did you do to try and get the issue
voted on again? Because at some point it became clear
that there was no longer majority support for this, right, Yeah.
Speaker 5 (22:28):
We go back to June, when the long term plan
was passed. It was already public that a majority of
councilors opposed the sale. At that point, councilor Calbert Randall
and you Young had come out and made clear that
they no longer supported the sale. I understand why with
the short time frame in June, it wasn't able to
(22:49):
be relitigated. But nonetheless, the long term plan was passed
in June despite one of its key pillars being the
sale of the airport actually not having the support of
a majority of councilors. So this was always going to
be relitigated because you've essentially put something through with our
a majority behind it. Post that we had a break
(23:10):
in July, a recess, it's one of the luxuries of
a job. We got back together at the beginning of
August and said, well, we need to bring this decision
back to the table on that basis. Initially we tried
to bring this to the LTP Committee with what we
called a notice apprefication. The lawyers went away and we
had to get external legal device and they said, actually
(23:30):
that can't do that. You have to bring it into council.
The notice of motion was drafted and yesterday was when
it was finally hurt. But it was actually the fourth attempt,
because we did try twice. At the end of June
we tried to notice sepreification and then yesterday it was
the fourth attempt to bring a decision to talk about
the sale on the table.
Speaker 1 (23:49):
And what was your reaction to the notice of motion
passing yesterday?
Speaker 5 (23:54):
It's just relief. I don't think you know. I've been
pretty upfront that This is a horrific process for anyone
involved in Certainly, temperature at the council table at the
end of journey was pretty nuclear. I was incredibly angry,
a number of other councils were incredibly angry across this issue,
(24:16):
and has not been a healthy working environment. It's the
safe way to put this. So more than anything, it's
just a relief that we've finally been able to let
the pressure out from that valve, realize that the majority
is not there for the sale, and now we can
actually start to have a discussion about what we do next.
Speaker 1 (24:35):
Yes, and I want to get to that, but first
of all, I wanted to talk about some of the
comments that have been made around how the way that
this notice of motion was written and it being criticized
for disenfranchising Mildi voices and the two Mani Fenua representatives
on the council wrote to council is expressing this concern.
(25:00):
It's quite a complicated thing to explain, but you know,
this is essentially because the Teromnifenure representatives who both support
the sale, have voting rights at a committee level, but
not a council level. Why were you comfortable still supporting
the notice of motion in light of everything that they said.
Speaker 5 (25:17):
What I came back to yesterday was the airport is
a strategic asset, so that's a legal definition, and when
you have a strategic asset, it is only a council
decision that allows for that asset to be divested. And
you didn't have a majority of support. So the notice
of motion was always brought on the fact that it held.
(25:38):
You know, that was the case in Jennets still the
case of today. So the notice of motion was always
based on the fact that this sale could not proceed
and to continue to council down that road of resources, time, effort,
money and energy was actually an inefficient use of our resources.
Now at the same time, I worked diligently and speak
(25:59):
to that around trying to not bring the notice of
motion and looking at alternatives. So I and others approached
the mayor and said, can we negotiate because we don't
want to have to have this debate on the heard
the hurt that this is causing. We put a partial
sale on the table, even though with the numbers to stop.
But we put that partial sale on the table and said, look,
(26:20):
is this a way through? We said how about we
kick this for top three year, you know, let this
be next year's election issue, so that maybe a public
mandate approach. You could include it on the referendum or
just find a way to put it on ice. We did,
or you'd ask the chair of the Long Templane Committee
if she wanted to be involved in drafting the notice
of motion. Up until Wednesday, I was trying to see
(26:43):
could we actually withdraw yesterday's notice of motion and bring
a fresh one to a council meaning the following week.
So everything that I could do, and this I wasn't
just working on, behalf of myself at other signatories of
the motion to look at alternatives and look for a
road off whils still holding true to the principles that
(27:03):
we were elected on. I did.
Speaker 1 (27:06):
Was it worth it, though the damage that's been caused
to your relationship with Manifenoa to get this asset sale
off the table?
Speaker 5 (27:13):
I'm not sure. I have to see how that plays out. Obviously,
yesterday I asked that they remain at the table and
that they hold our feet to the fire. I certainly
have reached out and looked at how we've tried to
do things in an alternative way so that we wouldn't
cause that damage. But at the same time, this is
(27:34):
the legal framework in which we operate. It only the
Council can get rid of the airport. The Council since
June has said we do not want to get rid
of the airport, and proceeding down that road would have
only created essentially a more convoluted process. And I don't
know that the final decision that there wouldn't have been
hurt regardless given their support in the committee. I don't
(27:58):
know if we have avoided a situation in which there
wasn't hurt, given that Council was the one that had
to make that decision regardless.
Speaker 1 (28:06):
Let's get to what happens next. Basically, the fallout of
stopping the sale is that the long term Plan needs
to be amended, and Council officials have warned that hundreds
of millions of dollars in capital spending may need to
be cut from the budget. What are you comfortable was
being cut?
Speaker 5 (28:25):
I need to start with I have questions on that
assertion to begin with, because we have to remember that
in March of this year, a long term Plan consultation
documents said by no sale of the airport shares, there
would be no impact on councils levels of service. Six
months later, the cuts are now six hundred million dollars.
(28:45):
It is my view that some of the advice has
been weaponized to try and scare counselors into needing to
seeing the case of needing to retain the airport shares.
So the first thing we actually do now is have
a fresh look at the advice. We'll have the Mayor's
office and our stuff obviously working in the interest of
(29:05):
reducing any scope of cuts whatsoever. Something that came through
last week was the office field at the General's disagreeing
with the whole assertion on which the resilience funders based,
which was that we need a one in one thousand
year resilience event. They said, that's appropriate if you're an
insurance company. That's not appropriate if you are a local
body authority. So I think, Georgina, there's actually a lot
(29:28):
of work we need to do in the first instance
around truly ascertaining what the risk is and what the
heather and we need to establish within our long term planners,
and then we can get down to that next point
of conversation. But we are well off that.
Speaker 1 (29:43):
Thanks so much for joining us. Been really appreciate it.
Speaker 5 (29:46):
Thank you, Jordan.
Speaker 1 (29:47):
Thanks for listening to this episode of On the Tiles
Local edition. For more politics, news and opinion, head to
enzit herold dot co dot nzet. You can follow this
podcast on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts. Thanks
to my producer Ethan Sills. This episode was edited by
m z Emmy Sound Engineers and you can catch us
(30:09):
again next Friday for more On the Tiles
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com