John MacDonald: A rates referendum is a step too far

I don’t know what to make of the fact that thousands of people have put their name to this petition calling for the Christchurch City Council’s rates increase to be paused and put to a referendum.

I don’t know what to make of it for a couple of reasons.

First of all, I’m not a petition guy. Because I don’t think they achieve much.

It’s very easy to stick your name on something. But does it achieve anything? No.

The other reason I can‘t believe people are getting behind this, is that they seem to have forgotten what city councillors are elected to do.

They’re elected to make decisions. And one of the biggest decisions they have to make every year, is how they’re going to spend ratepayer money.

Which means that, quite a lot of the time, they get criticised left, right and centre.

Like yesterday, when I was ripping into the council for getting involved in this apparent bid for a second professional NRL rugby league team.

But I’m not starting a petition over it. Because, while I might think it’s not what the council should be getting involved in, I respect the fact that it’s the job of the councillors around the council table to make the decisions.

Just like it’s their job to decide how much of a rates increase they need to hit us with to make the city tick.

Tell that to James Pawson, though. He’s the guy behind the petition. Who is saying today that the 7.35 percent rates increase the council has signed-off on is a burden and people should get to have a say before being expected to pay up.

He’s dreaming. Just like the 7,000-plus people who have put their name to the petition in the past 48 hours. No doubt us talking about it this morning will get more people adding their names.

One of James’ particular concerns, is the council including $15 million in the budget for the Anglican cathedral reinstatement.

His introduction to the online petition describes this particular spend as “staggering”. Saying: “It raises critical questions around funding priorities and equity, especially in an economic climate where many residents are already facing financial hardships.”

He says: “The decision to allocate $15 million of ratepayer money to a project that should arguably be funded by the Anglican Church sends the wrong message to the people of Christchurch who are directly affected by this rates increase.”

What James doesn’t say in his petition blurb, is that the council’s $15 million is dependent on the government chipping-in the same amount. And we know that’s never going to happen.

Yes, Winston Peters has pledged $15 million if he’s part of the next coalition. But that’ll be forgotten about.

Just like he was going to be the first person to walk into the Pike River mine. Remember that promise?

And whether I agree with the council wanting to spend more on the cathedral or not, it comes down to the fact that it’s the job of the council to make these decisions.

What’s more, if the people signing this petition want a referendum on this rates increase because they’re brassed-off about more of their rates going into the cathedral or whatever, what happens next time there’s something they disagree with?

Have another referendum? No thank you.

LISTEN ABOVE

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:06):
You're listening to the Canterbury Mornings podcast with John McDonald
from News Talks AB.

Speaker 2 (00:12):
I've got to be honest with you, I don't quite
know what to make of the fact that thousands of
people have put their name to this petition calling for
the christ Church City Council's rates increase to be paused
and put to a referendum. Now, I don't know what
to make of it for a couple of reasons. First
of all, I'm not a petitioned guy. Why is that

(00:32):
because I don't think they achieve much. It's very easy
to stick your name on something, but does it achieve anything. No,
it doesn't. The other reason I can't believe people are
getting behind this is that they seem to have forgotten
what city councilors are elected to do. What are they
elected to do. They're elected to make decisions, and one

(00:53):
of the biggest decisions they have to make every year
is how they're going to spend rate payer money, which
means that quite a lot of the time, and not
to stay over budgets, but quite a lot of the
time they get criticized left right and see just like yesterday,
this time yesterday when I was ripping into them for
getting involved in this apparent bid for a second professional

(01:13):
NRL Rugby League team. But I'm not starting a petition
over it because you know, while I might think it's
not the job of a council to be getting involved
in that sort of thing, I do respect the fact
that it's the job of councilors around the council table
to make decisions on our behalf, just like it's their

(01:34):
job to decide how much of a rates increase they
need to hit us with to make the city tick.
Tell that though, to James Porson now. He's the guy
behind this petition and he's saying today that the seven
point three five percent rates increase the council has signed
off on is a burden and people should get to

(01:55):
have a say before being expected to pay up. Now
he's dreaming, just like the seven thousand plus people have
already put their name to the petition in the last
forty forty eight hours, and no doubt us talking about
this morning will get more people sticking their names on
it as well. One of James's particular concerns is the

(02:16):
council including fifteen million dollars in the budget for the
Anglican Cathedral reinstatement. Now, his introduction to the online petition
describes this particular spend as quote staggering. I'll share a
bit more of what he says. He says, quote it
raises critical questions about funding priorities and equity, especially in

(02:38):
an economic climate where many residents are already facing financial hardships.
He says, the decision to allocate fifteen million of ratepayer
money to a project that should arguably be funded by
the Anglican Church sends the wrong message to the people
of christ Church who are directly affected by this rate's increase.
End of quote. Now, this is not an argument about
the cathedral per se. This is an argument about where

(03:02):
the people should have a say, where the ratepayer should
have a more than they do other than voting every
three years. Now, what James doesn't say in his petition
blurb is that the council's fifteen million bucks is dependent
on the government shipping in the same amount, and we
know that that is never going to happen. Yes, Winston
Peters has pledged the same amount fifteen million if he's

(03:24):
part of the next coalition, but that'll be forgotten about,
just like he was going to be the first person
to walk into the Pike River. Mine may were that.
I think there's been a few people in there. He
still hasn't turned up. But let's get back to the
call for a referendum. Whether I agree with the council
wanting to spend more on the cathedral or not, it

(03:48):
comes down to the fact that it's the job of
the council to make these decisions. And what's more, if
the people signing this petition want a referend him on this,
rates increase because they're brassed off about more of their
rights going into the cathedral or whatever, or that just
don't like seven point three five percent or whatever. If

(04:08):
they want a referendum this time, what happens next time
there's something they disagree with, Have another referendum? No, thank you.

Speaker 1 (04:16):
Caterbory Mornings. For more from Catebory Mornings with John McDonald,
listen live to news Talks A'd be christ Church from
nine am weekdays, or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio.