- Wellington City Council has stopped the sale of its 34% share in the airport.
- The Long Term Plan will have to be amended which could involve significant cuts to capital spending.
- It’s the second significant loss Mayor Tory Whanau has suffered this year after the Reading Cinemas deal was also killed.
Wellington Mayor Tory Whanauis faced with cutting up to $600 million from her 10-year budget after the city council voted to stop the controversial sale of its airport shares.
Last week, Wellington City Council killed the sale of its 34% share in the airport, with one councillor saying it was the “dirtiest politics” she had been involved with.
It’s a significant loss for Whanau who championed the sale and planned her 10-year-budget around it. The sale has divided the council, cost the mayor crucial support and comes after her plan
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talks at b seven.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Minutes past ten. Welcome back has promised. Tory Faro, Willington Mayor,
joins us in the studio. A lot of text, a
lot of comment that you might not come in, that
you have arrived, or credit to you. How you doing.
I'm all right, I mean, let's talk about Thursday. I
know you reasonably well from the show we've done probably
(00:34):
ten of these. You looked out of sorts. You didn't
look yourself, you looked uncomfortable. How big a blow was
that day to you? Toriy Faro?
Speaker 3 (00:47):
Yeah, it was a setback, and I think and there
were several reasons as to why. So of course, you know,
all I've ever wanted was a successful long term plan.
We'd sign that off a couple of months ago. Now
we will have to go back and redo part of it.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Why do you have to go back and so because.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
The airport shares were a significant part of the financial
part of it basically helped hold it up. Now that
that's being removed, we have to go back and redo
our financial strategy.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
You'd just explained to me and the listeners are holding
it up because that money supposedly was going to an
international green fund not to be touched by the council.
Then suddenly there's all this talk about why we need
to change things so.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
That PITH was going to be set up as a
form of self insurance for our city. So currently we
have two point six billion dollars of as sets that
we can't ensure because we're an earthquake prone city. So
setting up that PIF was a way to have a
form of insurance in the event of a disaster, and
that was a crucial part of the financial strategy, which
(01:54):
was also part of the long term plan. Now that
that's not happening, we'll have to go back and go, Okay,
do we still want to hold up a form of
self insurance? Yes, well to do that, that will now
have to find the money from elsewhere.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
So where does that leave us?
Speaker 3 (02:12):
So that leaves us now worth reviewing our entire capital
program at the moment based on the current risk that
we want to carry, and with the assumption that we
do want to a form of self insurance, will still
need to raise or find between four hundred to six
hundred million dollars that will have to come from our
(02:33):
capital program. So we'll have to go back up to
consultation and figure out, well, what are the areas where
people are comfortable with making those cuts.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
I still don't get that six hundred million dollars when
you weren't going to get the money from the airport shares.
Speaker 3 (02:46):
We were going to get about you know, four hundred
million is the initial establishment, but then it would increase
in value over time.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
But you weren't going to use that.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
We weren't going to use it.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
So why do you need it now? And otherwise you're going.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
To cut things, So we still need that form of
self insurance, right, Yeah, but.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
If that's still in shares of the airport, so that
makes no difference. You either had it in an investment
or sure, or you've got an investment at the airport. Yes,
if something turned to crap and you needed to get
it out, you could sell your shares in the airport
urgently and get the money out.
Speaker 4 (03:19):
Then.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Plus you're getting interest on that money, probably more or
equally as much as you would on that fund that
you were looking at.
Speaker 3 (03:25):
So what if there was a disaster and the airport
had been destroyed. You know, we wouldn't be able to
take the money from it. So so if I go
kind of go back so that the problem we were
trying to solve is self insurance, so that in the
event of a disaster we could rebuild some of our city.
Because the airport was our biggest asset, it was easier
(03:46):
to recycle the value of those shares into the self
insurance fund. We can't do that anymore. I've accepted that.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
So going back to this fund, are you still going
to invest in this fund by making cuts?
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Well, that depends on the level of risk now that
we're willing to carry. So we are going to go back,
possibly through the Audit and Risk Committee, and go, okay,
do we still want to be able to rebuild the
city in the event of an accident? Do we want
to increase our risk of it? That will determine the
amount that we need. If so, we'll need to get
that money from elsewhere, which is our capital program.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
Okay, you've had a few days to think about this
and talk to a few people. What are we going
to cut? What are you going to cut? What do
you think we're going to lose?
Speaker 3 (04:28):
I can't predetermine what those will be, and when you've
got a gut feeling of what you're going to lose.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Would we lose well, for instance, I know that we's
been a fortune on well would we get rid of well?
Would we say, you know, it's no longer as well
something that we can invest in.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
What I would say is everything is going to be
an option, whether we take little bits from here or
another big asset or our ground leases.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
Can you give us some examples on that?
Speaker 3 (04:52):
So one example is selling all our ground leases. Another
example is reducing our social housing. Another one someone.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Suggested you should get rid of your social housing a
while ago. I'm told I was the only person in
the world that wanted you to do that.
Speaker 3 (05:06):
Well, I believe there might have been three of you eventually,
but look, you know that might be an option now. Unfortunately,
certainly not what I wanted. But if we want to
be able to ensure our city, we have to seriously
look at that.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Surely there would be a little difference with what would
happen to an airport under an earthquake, then would happen
to your social housing under an earthquake? You see what
I'm saying. Either investment was just going to be just
as big a risk. So why have you not thought
about selling your social housing and let the government do it?
Speaker 3 (05:36):
So we've had in the past, but as we've seen,
you know, the government's put their social housing program on hold.
You know, we still want to be able to provide.
It's been our counsel's call to have social Council housing
and be able to provide for our Willington tenants. That's
a commitment and it's certainly one that's important to me.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
So just cutting to the chase, you could possibly, under
one of these plans sell your social housing.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
It might be it's not what I want to do.
But as I said, everything's on the table now.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
How much do we lose a year in social housing?
Speaker 3 (06:09):
I'd have to come back to you about that.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
I'm not quite I remember the figure a million dollars
a week? Am I right? Or am I wrong?
Speaker 3 (06:15):
That I've never heard of that figure before.
Speaker 2 (06:17):
I'll go back and get okay, and listeners, please make
sure I've just heard that somewhere, that it's a significant amount.
You know, how much does the Council spend in a
year on social housing?
Speaker 3 (06:27):
I have we have what we put in our entire
capital program is about half a billion dollars half a billion,
that's that, and.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
We could sell that. Someone told me, and rightly or
wrongly correct me if I'm wrong. Someone told me that
we could sell our social housing for the same value
as we sell the shares and run into the airport.
Speaker 3 (06:47):
We could.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
So one is costing you a lot of money, one
of you is actually getting you a return and investment return.
How does that not make pretty damn good sense.
Speaker 3 (06:58):
Well, like I say, there's everything's going to be on
the table, including that I would prefer not to sell
our homes for our most vulnerable, and the government government
would have to be willing to buy it as well.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
I've been told that one other things that you're absolutely
non negotiable on is the Golden Mile. Absolutely so, no
matter what happens over the next twelve months, no matter
how bad a situation we are in as a city,
over the next twelve months, the Golden Mile is non
negotiable and starts working. It's going to get completed at
a cost about one hundred and forty million to us.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
Yes, so three, I'd say three areas are non negotiables
for me. Water, So at one point eight billion dollars
into water, infrastructure and then eventually the regional model absolutely
cannot change. Two is transport and the Golden Mile that
is co funded at the moment, So if we lose
that project, we lose millions of dollars.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
So one of you went to the government and said, look,
you've told us to pull our heads in. We don't
have the you know, we want to be smart here.
Can you keep your funding in place for five years
for us to get back on our feet. Would you
be prepared to do that?
Speaker 3 (08:02):
And that no, because in that case we're kicking the
can down the road. We'll leave it.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
Everyone agrees that you're just you're the one that's telling
us we're in trouble.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
So I didn't say we were in trouble. I said
that we have to go back to look at look
at that, look at our books, and see how else
we can put up some self insurance. A lot of
our people need our streets to be redesigned to be
friendly towards pedestrians, bikes, public transport. That is happening. If
we leave it, it's much more.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
So I'm perfectly clear on this. You would be prepared
if you have to selling social housing that either you
said you would look at it.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
I said, everything's on the table.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
You'd said Golden miles not on the table.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
Well that's because that's something that I strongly campaigned on.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
Well, then you can't have you can't be sitting on
the fences there mayor I need to know you are
if all things turned to custard, you were prepared to
sell the social housing, But if all things turn to custard,
you're not prepared to stop on the Golden Mile.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
I am currently not prepared to sell our social housing.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
Okay, So but you said it was on the table. Well,
everything's on the table with gold Miles, not Golden Miles.
Not it's on the table. But I'm not going to
let it happen. Okay. But you said to us that
you weren't going to let the sale not happen in
the airport, and what happened, Yeah, exactly, So you lost
your vote. You've lost you've lost the majority. So if
the majority comes to you tomorrow and says we don't
(09:27):
want the Golden Mile, what happens then so well.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
Then I would lose it. But I'm confident that that's
not good.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
You were confident on the airport cheers.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
I was but then three councilors just changed their minds.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
So so it's this is you personally saying that the
Golden Mile can't go ahead, not the Willington City Council,
and you as maya saying it can't go ahead. Yes, okay,
so I've got that perfectly clear. Yes, So if that's
another vote that you take, if you take, if you
take this and take it to council, and and the
council turn you down what she did to be fair
on the on the airport.
Speaker 3 (09:57):
Sales, because I would have to accept that, because that's democracy.
But but what I'm saying, I guess perhaps this is
a more accurate way to say it. Eye will fight
tooth and nail to keep our water, to keep the
Golden Mile, and actually to keep social housing. Did you
not understand I'm just one vote.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
Did you fight for fight, hammer and nail to your
expression to sell the shares in the airport?
Speaker 3 (10:22):
Yes, yep.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
You weren't there for the week that the final week
of the discussions. You weren't at council, were you?
Speaker 3 (10:29):
I was working from home, okay, so.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
Who I was doing the negotiation the final negotiations on there?
Speaker 3 (10:34):
So my office and I have very talented staff, so
at different levels it was you know it's me, it's
them talking to different people and negotiating a way forward.
You know we didn't get there and it's okay, we
just now have to go back to the drawing board.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
Why are you so hell bent when you see what's
happening in Thornton, when you see what's happened in Island
Bay twenty years ago or fifteen years ago, to do
what you want to do with the Golden Mile.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
Because I believe in these transformative projects. Yes are difficult,
and yes I am sorry that businesses have suffered as
a result, but this is what changes like when you
look overseas transport projects like this, they generate the sort
of difficult and it does create a bit of a division.
But once it's finished, once it's settled in, people wonder
(11:26):
why we didn't do it sooner.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Wellington Morning is Willington Mayor Tory Fano in the studio
from ten to eleven o'clock. You can call and ask
a question shortly and will text this question through and
if we think it's a really good question, we'll ask.
If it's not, we won't. Tory. You campaign on the
unity and bringing the council together. This is the most
bitter vote and years. I mean I was watching you.
(11:50):
Your body language wasn't good. I didn't think it was good.
Speaker 3 (11:54):
So I would totally disagree with Okay, I think I
was all calm, collected.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
Okay, well, let's call calm and collected, but with no
passion or no energy like you normally have. Do you
think because of this vote that you person have failed.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
I wouldn't say failed. I would say it's a setback
because again I was always focused on a successful long
term plan and we got there. We now have to
take parts of it back. But you know, to be honest,
I wake up the next day feeling okay about Do you.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
Go to work the next day? Yeah? Did you how
much blame gave?
Speaker 4 (12:31):
Well?
Speaker 2 (12:31):
I mean, you know, it was a pretty major knot.
Oh no, No, I mean it was the first time
I've watched council meeting for three and a half hours.
It was a pretty major knock. It was brutal. It
was brutal.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
No, No, I had media interviews the next day, just
got back into work.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
How much do you take it personally?
Speaker 3 (12:49):
It's policy, so I don't take it personally.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
But it's you wanting. You are the face of Wellington.
It was what you wanted to achieve, yes, and it
didn't happen. So how can you not take that personally?
Speaker 3 (13:00):
So I wanted to achieve a successful long term plan
that is now paused, but I'm confident we're going to
get a successful long term plan again.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
How many of the counselors have you personally talked to
since that vote?
Speaker 3 (13:15):
I would say I've spoken to all the Labor Greens
and a couple of other counselors. Okay, i'd say most
of them.
Speaker 2 (13:25):
You have, And what's their reaction been.
Speaker 3 (13:27):
It's so you know, I contacted, especially the ones where
it's been tense for a while in our Labor Green camp.
I got in touch with them and said, hey, you know,
no hard feelings. I accept the vote. What I'm keen
to do is focus on how we move forward to
get the most successful long term plan possible.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
Do you think you'll get them back on board?
Speaker 3 (13:46):
Yes, absolutely, Well, we've already agreed to meet later this week.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
Okay, some are telling me and privately that they won't
get back on board and this is a major rift.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Do you not agree that's not the vibe. Yeah, that's
not the reaction that I got on Friday.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
What do you did You have you heard from anyone
in government? No? Sam and Brown hasn't called. No, No
one from government's called. Are you concerned with your relations
what about a year email?
Speaker 4 (14:16):
No?
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Nothing, no contact? Are you concerned that your relationship with
a cordition government now is even on the shakier grounds?
Been basically that they said everything's on hold until they
till they get this vote. Now this volk's been through.
Do you think that you might see something from them?
Speaker 3 (14:31):
Ah, I'm not expecting anything.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
You're not, No, Yeah, I mean.
Speaker 3 (14:37):
Because we're still we're still following our legislative process.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
Right.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
But it's a mess. I mean it's not it's not
a mess. Tory. I watched that. I watched that. It's
a mess.
Speaker 3 (14:48):
No, it's not a mess.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
You do not have a long term plan. No, and
your counsel is at very best agitated.
Speaker 3 (14:57):
So let me say this, the the airport decision was
probably the most difficult decision we've made all term. And
it's it's.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
What more difficult, moreicult than reading?
Speaker 3 (15:07):
Yeah? Absolutely, And because this one has generated a lot
of tensions, emotions, external campaigning, so naturally it was always
going to be uncomfortable making such a serious decision, but
I cheered counsel through respectfully knowing that there would be
those tensions. My focus was to keep it, you know,
(15:30):
in control, without without so much lashing with the vote lost.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
But what confuses me as a Wellingtonian is that you
really struggled to find your success the way you want it.
You really wanted reading Cinnamons deal to go ahead. Fail
didn't get it through. Not you personally failed, but it
didn't go through personal struggles. The airport deal, you know,
it's not looking that great, is it.
Speaker 3 (15:56):
So if we do look at my successes, if I may,
of course, so I've accelerated the cycleway network over twenty
six kilometers, eighty million dollars under budget. It in our
long term plan. I passed the district Plan, which has
always been a very difficult project. So we've enabled tens
of thousands new homes in the city. And I've also
(16:17):
you know, even though the government wanted to completely remove
let's get willing to moving, I was able to retain
the Golden Mile through negotiation.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
See for me, proud of that?
Speaker 3 (16:26):
Can I just so one more thing, just one more thing.
One point eight billion dollars into water infrastructure, the most
we've invested.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
Okay, we give you that. I'll give you that as
a win. Cycle Way walkable things probably slight wind but
wasn't set up by you. It was all designed before you.
But not that popular. Really, it's at all are.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Amongst people who want cycle ways? Probably not with your audience.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Well, it's not about my audience. It's about my people.
It's the people of Wellington. It's you know, how popular
do you think it is on Thorndon right now?
Speaker 3 (16:56):
Well, it's it's in again, we're in construction.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
I want you to be honest here. I mean, how
popular do you think those cycle ways are in Thorndon
right now?
Speaker 3 (17:06):
Be popular until the program's finished?
Speaker 2 (17:08):
Well do we know ine there by the time the
program's finished, there'll be no businesses there. They're all go
collapse and broken gone.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
Okay, Nick, you don't need to yell.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
I wasn't yelling. Yes, I was getting emotion. You can't,
all right, So I apologize.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
If you thought I was yelling at you. No, like again,
like I keep saying, you know, when you're building cycle ways,
when you're rebuilding streets. They are not popular at the
time of construction and transition, but eventually when it's done,
people really appreciate them. This happens everywhere all over the world.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
Right now, the people in Thornton are really struggling. You're
going to get rid of that problem, and you're gonna
have no one in there. You're gonna have everybody leaving
and go, and then you're going to start on Wellington
on the Golden Mile, and then they're all be wiped
out and gone as well.
Speaker 3 (17:55):
You're making some really strong assumptions of what's going.
Speaker 2 (17:58):
To happen based on what we're seeing. Tori. I'm not
pulling this out on my backside, and you know now
you even I've got rental places closing down, and.
Speaker 3 (18:09):
Now what I'm saying this is this is unfortunately one
of the downsides in a natural part of transition. But
I look, I know it's not popular. That's not why
I got the.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
How does that change from there to the Golden Mile.
You say I'm making accusations about Golden Mile. I'm a
businessman on that Golden mine. I know what damage that's
going to do. And I'm not yelling at I'm being
very emotionally quite correct on it, and you know.
Speaker 3 (18:32):
We'll continue to work with our local businesses to make
it as least painful as possible. But you know, I
since I campaigned to become mayor, and ever since I've
been the mayor, I've never waivered on my support for
that program and I'm not going to change my mind.
Speaker 2 (18:47):
We're alive with Wellington Mayor Tory Farno Tory. I want
to ask you about some business stuff. Let's, you know,
talk the business in the city. Bordeaux Bakery has shut down. Yes,
I believe they hadn't really changed with the times and
they didn't adapt in my view, but the owner said
their revenue was down by sixty to seventy percent after
they start work started on Thornton Care the car parks
were removed. It's just another business blaming the council's decisions
(19:12):
when closing, and there has been too many of them.
Speaker 3 (19:15):
Yeah, there's been a couple and a couple well, you know,
I mean that we've seen be quite.
Speaker 2 (19:21):
I think we're close to a couple, doesn't you know
when you actually boil it down. A lot of them
have said car parking stop. There changes all changes have
prevented them from trading profitably.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
Yeah, and I am you know. It is a real
shame and very unfortunate that that happens. But again, so
you know, the changes in the streets and the car
parks are one factor. There are still all these other factors,
like public service cuts in general economic downturn. So it's
a perfect storm for some of these businesses, and.
Speaker 2 (19:53):
Surely the council should be doing something to actually ease that.
Surely the council's ability to actually keep them trading by
letting them people park out the front of them and
making it easier for people to get them. Surely that
something in the council could do. Yes, we all agree
that things are tough in Wellington, but surely you should
be on their side, not against them.
Speaker 3 (20:12):
So I'm not against them. I'm for our Wellington people
and a lot of our people want more effective public transport,
safe cycle ways and walkable streets. During construction, yes, it's
going to take out a number of car parks and
it's unfortunate, but this is where the world is going,
this is where other cities are going, and it is
hard and I fully acknowledge that, but again, this is just,
(20:37):
you know, one of those downsides of when you change, When.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
You put your head on your pillar and try and
get to sleep at night, do you actually think to yourself,
maybe we as a council have gone too far on
removing car parks in the city.
Speaker 3 (20:49):
I don't, You don't because the thing is, you know,
and I've talked to a lot of the workers on
the ground in those managing these major construction projects. If
you keep pausing them, it even becomes more expensive. You know,
you're paying those contract fears, you're delaying it while inflation
(21:10):
is going up. It just becomes a significantly more expensive
project and becomes much more painful for businesses. In the
long term. We just have to get it done as
quickly as possible, like a band aid, and then accept change.
But this is this is what's happening.
Speaker 2 (21:26):
Band aid. You don't need. No band aid. You need
you need a little bit more than band aid, I
would suggest, But anyway, let's move on. The council has
a policy to remove graffiti both or public and private buildings.
It came out a few weeks ago that some councilors
on your council asked for the pro Palestine graffiti to
remain up and you seem to be supportive of that. Really,
(21:51):
so you're okay with graffiti or my building.
Speaker 3 (21:54):
So I'm okay when it comes to that. There's a
difference between you know, you know, like a.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
Pro act or a pro New Zealand first to a
pro Palestinian no no, no.
Speaker 3 (22:06):
No no. So offices it is to their discretion what
they remove, and graffiti should absolutely be removed if it's
explicit racist and harmful to particular groups. The thing about
Wellington City.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
You're Palestine Sport.
Speaker 3 (22:22):
You and I have a different view. I would say
when it comes to graffiti. I'm a huge fan of
street art and graffiti art. I think it's wonderful and
I think it adds to the diversity of our city
and our city's art scene. So yes, I am generinely
supportive of it.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
So you're okay with people putting graffiti on the front
of my business or other business people's business.
Speaker 3 (22:43):
I think if someone is trying to make an artistic statement,
and these pieces of graffiti aren't targeting one of your bars,
so to speak, we're talking about spaces in the public
area that are actually made for public art. That's where
most of it is going.
Speaker 2 (23:01):
I do support that, so that's okay. When I mean,
if you walk past, go back to the council, walk
past one moment, and you'll see it. You'll see it
quite graphically because today I haven't painted over it, So
that's okay.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
I'm not talking about tagging, like general tagging on private buildings.
I'm talking about public art, which is what you asked
me about.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
Okay, So this Palestine flags is okay? Yes, yes, I
think it's okay on private buildings.
Speaker 3 (23:28):
H No, I think they're on public land.
Speaker 2 (23:32):
What if it was on a private building, well, I.
Speaker 3 (23:35):
Think a conversation needs to be had with the owner
of that building.
Speaker 2 (23:41):
Okay, So you think that's okay, I'm just trying to
work out a conversation, you know. I mean, surely, if
someone's putting stuff on a private building, legally that should
be arrested. And fine, I think that's that's How would
you like it if someone went past your house today?
I'm going to ask.
Speaker 3 (23:59):
You to calm down just a little bit more. Sorry,
I'm just asking you question and I'm trying to answer
the questions.
Speaker 2 (24:04):
So can I ask the question, Ye, someone went past
your house? You live in a pretty you know front
on house place place area and tagged your house. That's okay.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
Palestine, I know, I told you.
Speaker 2 (24:16):
What about they put a Palestine flaglan.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
No, So when it comes to private property, you know,
we really ought to keep that. That's not okay because
it's actually the owner that needs to clean that up.
What we're that wasn't really the original question though. We're
talking about public art on on public land and council
areas where political art is put up. I'm okay with that.
When it comes to tagging private property, that's that's completely different.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
Okay. At the airport vote, I don't want to harp
back onto this, but it's something that's sort of in
the back of my mind. Last Thursday, there was a
lot of talk about the Council's relationship with Manafa Manipenua.
There are two unelected Manafena representatives who have voting rights
on the Council committee but not the full council. One
of them holding Hohire from Taranakinfarnu, said that the airport
(25:04):
vote could have ir repair damaged the relationship with the council.
Can't just take a short break. I want you to
think about that. And I'll come back with with your answer. Please,
Sorry Tory, I had to take a break, but I
want to know how damaged the relationship between the Council
and EWE is because there was some pretty scathing comments
after Thursday, wasn't it?
Speaker 3 (25:26):
Yes, and probably even up to the meeting. So I've
been meeting with our taco headir EWIE leaders and our
POI WE you know, constantly up until this point and
that made it very clear not to exclude our po
we we from that decision because it was a major
LTP decision. They expressed, you know, the damage that it
(25:47):
has done to the relationship. So my next priority is
to is to repair it, and I think it's repairable.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
Do you want to see the situation where they both
have voting on the full council?
Speaker 3 (26:00):
I would love to see that.
Speaker 2 (26:02):
What do you think the people who wanting and would
say to that it went to a referendum, which we
are told it's.
Speaker 3 (26:07):
Going to it's going to referend him.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
So when.
Speaker 3 (26:12):
The Mardi ward went to consultation, you know, way back
when it had a ninety six percent support level. So
for Wellington City in particular, they are hugely supportive of
EWE representation when it comes to legislation and it means
that we're meeting our obligations as a treaty partner.
Speaker 2 (26:29):
Are you just saying that because that you order, your
vote with the airport would have gone through if they
had the chance to vote.
Speaker 3 (26:34):
Oh, absolutely not. It's nothing to do with the airport.
You know, let's let's not forget I too am tongue Difenoa.
I have always been and a supportive of honoring tatidity
and this is I've been quite proud actually up until
last week, you know that was that was a bit
of a dip. But we can we can get back
on track. I've actually always been proud of how the
(26:55):
Wellington City Council has handled working with EWE.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Okay, let's go to a couple of quick calls and
some questions. Please, Peter, you have a question for mea
Tory find it?
Speaker 5 (27:04):
I do?
Speaker 1 (27:05):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (27:05):
How much worry are we spending or have we spent
so far on cycle lanes prosperience roughly?
Speaker 3 (27:15):
Ah, God should have to go back and remind myself. Okay,
I know in the long term plan we've allocated about
one hundred and ten million dollars.
Speaker 2 (27:25):
Plus what we've already spent, plus what.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
We've spent I just don't have at the top of
my head.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
Okay, thanks Peter Glenn.
Speaker 5 (27:33):
Nick, Hello, I won't cause you're mayor, because you're not
my mayor. And when you're going to start getting rid
of the six hundred and ninety dead beat stuff members
you got, the you're so bloated and stuff you can't
get anything done, I'm.
Speaker 3 (27:46):
Going to cut you off there. That's incredibly rude and
unacceptable to talk about our stuff like that.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
I agree, Amella Amelia, good.
Speaker 4 (27:54):
Morning, Hi Nick, Good morning, Tory, Good morning. The question
I've got is Newtown to the city is a blueprint
for failure of our patients, patients, residents, businesses throughout the city.
How is the city council going to compensate the businesses
when they're losing tenants that are part of commercial precincts
(28:17):
three point seven times the rate of residences. How are
you going to gain that back in the city that's
going downhill?
Speaker 3 (28:26):
So the question is compensating businesses. We're not going to
do that.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
You said you're looking at compensating businesses in Thornton, but.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
No, I wasn't going to no, I wasn't.
Speaker 4 (28:37):
I'll take that on board. I'll take that on board.
But if you've got businesses from Newtown right down to
the Golden Master to Thornton closing down, who are responsible
for paying three point seven times the rates of residence, is,
how are you going to get that money back when
the city is going down help? That's my question.
Speaker 3 (28:58):
So the city is not going downhill. I need to
push against that. There are thousands and thousands of residents
who love the cycle way along Adelaide Road. We've heard
from residents from Newtown who like the way the new
parking structure has been set up. Yes, we know that businesses,
some businesses have struggled with these changes, but again, this
(29:23):
is what change looks like. This is what we're going
to do to the city.
Speaker 2 (29:26):
Well we have a city left, yes we.
Speaker 3 (29:28):
Do, because we have an amazing city.
Speaker 2 (29:30):
But we know we looked at the fast forward track
that the government's taking. Eight thousand properties been built. None
of them were in our CBD, none of them. So
there's going to be all these houses being built all out.
This whole plan was based on us all living in
the city. Yes, but we're not.
Speaker 3 (29:46):
Yes, and that's because we need to, you know, I
think and.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
The government's plan is to let to fast forward all
these places in plummeton obey.
Speaker 3 (29:56):
And that's fine. But with our plan, with Council's plan
to move the city forward, you know, we are We
still currently have a forecast of around about fifty thousand
people moving to Wellington over the next city years. We
do need to build more homes to make them more affordable,
and we need to change our streets to make them
much more people friendly.
Speaker 2 (30:15):
You know.
Speaker 3 (30:15):
We just recently had a Japanese delegation with the mayor
of Sakai Heir who thinks our city is wonderful. A
lot of international people think our city is wonderful.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
It is a beautiful city. There is no question that
it's a beautiful city. That's what we're doing to it.
I just take a break, Can I just take a break? Book? Sorry,
and then you can come back and have so twelve
minutes to eleven yesterday on Q and A, the Mayor
of christ Church said that twenty five percent of their
total revenue taken from from rates is on debt repaying
(30:47):
what's ours.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
Our debt at the moment is about two billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (30:52):
And what is what percentage of our you know, our
rates bill is directed to repaying the debt debt.
Speaker 3 (30:59):
Well so in terms of our debt, we usually keep
it at about two hundred and twenty five percent of
the rates that we bring in. Okay, in terms of
you know, from the actual rates bill, I'd have to
come back to you.
Speaker 2 (31:13):
Okay. Is it like a figure that you've seen before? Yeah?
Is it major? Is it scary? I mean I thought
twenty five percent in christ Is, would you know, almost
double the population of Wellington was extremely high?
Speaker 3 (31:26):
Ah? No, Sorry, what's your question?
Speaker 2 (31:31):
I'm just saying, do you think it's high at the
debt level that we're doing, and what percentage of our
council money, our rates money is just used just straight
on recuperating paying debt.
Speaker 3 (31:39):
No, I think you know, debt funding a lot of
projects over time is actually kind of necessary, especially when
you look at our water infrastructure. We don't really have
a choice. But it's also we're lucky that we've got
the legislation in place to allow us to do that.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
Okay, do you think you could get someone to come
back to sure our listeners would know, would love to
know what percentage of it is.
Speaker 3 (32:01):
Yeah, I just I've just text my team now, but okay, yeah,
I'll come back a.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
Quick one before we let you go. I started the
show by saying, you said that when you were first,
when we first met before, when you were standing for Mayorty,
your great asset was building a team. And actually, you know,
being part of a really united team. That is not
what I saw under any description on Thursday. That looked
(32:30):
like the most fab I don't know, I mean, it
was just it was scary, my scariest.
Speaker 3 (32:35):
Yes, it's very intense. I think you know, a truly
unified council for Wellington City is not possible. I think
a majority is, but not the entire council.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
Do you think that you can do a better job
than you're doing right now and uniting them?
Speaker 3 (32:50):
Absolutely, And that's what I did on Friday in terms
of rebuilding relationships back with student councilors, and that's what
I'm focused on.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
Toriy Faro willing to mere thanks for taking the time
out and fronting for the show today. Appreciate it. Good
luck with building that unity in that ansome It scared me.
Speaker 1 (33:10):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
You're listening to the Wellington Mornings podcast with Nick Mills
from News Talks at b seven.
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Minutes past ten. Welcome back has promised. Tory Faro, Willington Mayor,
joins us in the studio. A lot of text, a
lot of comment that you might not come in, that
you have arrived, or credit to you. How you doing.
I'm all right, I mean, let's talk about Thursday. I
know you reasonably well from the show we've done probably
(00:34):
ten of these. You looked out of sorts. You didn't
look yourself, you looked uncomfortable. How big a blow was
that day to you? Toriy Faro?
Speaker 3 (00:47):
Yeah, it was a setback, and I think and there
were several reasons as to why. So of course, you know,
all I've ever wanted was a successful long term plan.
We'd sign that off a couple of months ago. Now
we will have to go back and redo part of it.
Speaker 2 (01:05):
Why do you have to go back and so because.
Speaker 3 (01:08):
The airport shares were a significant part of the financial
part of it basically helped hold it up. Now that
that's being removed, we have to go back and redo
our financial strategy.
Speaker 2 (01:19):
You'd just explained to me and the listeners are holding
it up because that money supposedly was going to an
international green fund not to be touched by the council.
Then suddenly there's all this talk about why we need
to change things so.
Speaker 3 (01:33):
That PITH was going to be set up as a
form of self insurance for our city. So currently we
have two point six billion dollars of as sets that
we can't ensure because we're an earthquake prone city. So
setting up that PIF was a way to have a
form of insurance in the event of a disaster, and
that was a crucial part of the financial strategy, which
(01:54):
was also part of the long term plan. Now that
that's not happening, we'll have to go back and go, Okay,
do we still want to hold up a form of
self insurance? Yes, well to do that, that will now
have to find the money from elsewhere.
Speaker 2 (02:10):
So where does that leave us?
Speaker 3 (02:12):
So that leaves us now worth reviewing our entire capital
program at the moment based on the current risk that
we want to carry, and with the assumption that we
do want to a form of self insurance, will still
need to raise or find between four hundred to six
hundred million dollars that will have to come from our
(02:33):
capital program. So we'll have to go back up to
consultation and figure out, well, what are the areas where
people are comfortable with making those cuts.
Speaker 2 (02:40):
I still don't get that six hundred million dollars when
you weren't going to get the money from the airport shares.
Speaker 3 (02:46):
We were going to get about you know, four hundred
million is the initial establishment, but then it would increase
in value over time.
Speaker 2 (02:56):
But you weren't going to use that.
Speaker 3 (02:58):
We weren't going to use it.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
So why do you need it now? And otherwise you're going.
Speaker 3 (03:01):
To cut things, So we still need that form of
self insurance, right, Yeah, but.
Speaker 2 (03:06):
If that's still in shares of the airport, so that
makes no difference. You either had it in an investment
or sure, or you've got an investment at the airport. Yes,
if something turned to crap and you needed to get
it out, you could sell your shares in the airport
urgently and get the money out.
Speaker 4 (03:19):
Then.
Speaker 2 (03:19):
Plus you're getting interest on that money, probably more or
equally as much as you would on that fund that
you were looking at.
Speaker 3 (03:25):
So what if there was a disaster and the airport
had been destroyed. You know, we wouldn't be able to
take the money from it. So so if I go
kind of go back so that the problem we were
trying to solve is self insurance, so that in the
event of a disaster we could rebuild some of our city.
Because the airport was our biggest asset, it was easier
(03:46):
to recycle the value of those shares into the self
insurance fund. We can't do that anymore. I've accepted that.
Speaker 2 (03:52):
So going back to this fund, are you still going
to invest in this fund by making cuts?
Speaker 3 (03:57):
Well, that depends on the level of risk now that
we're willing to carry. So we are going to go back,
possibly through the Audit and Risk Committee, and go, okay,
do we still want to be able to rebuild the
city in the event of an accident? Do we want
to increase our risk of it? That will determine the
amount that we need. If so, we'll need to get
that money from elsewhere, which is our capital program.
Speaker 2 (04:20):
Okay, you've had a few days to think about this
and talk to a few people. What are we going
to cut? What are you going to cut? What do
you think we're going to lose?
Speaker 3 (04:28):
I can't predetermine what those will be, and when you've
got a gut feeling of what you're going to lose.
Speaker 2 (04:33):
Would we lose well, for instance, I know that we's
been a fortune on well would we get rid of well?
Would we say, you know, it's no longer as well
something that we can invest in.
Speaker 3 (04:41):
What I would say is everything is going to be
an option, whether we take little bits from here or
another big asset or our ground leases.
Speaker 2 (04:50):
Can you give us some examples on that?
Speaker 3 (04:52):
So one example is selling all our ground leases. Another
example is reducing our social housing. Another one someone.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Suggested you should get rid of your social housing a
while ago. I'm told I was the only person in
the world that wanted you to do that.
Speaker 3 (05:06):
Well, I believe there might have been three of you eventually,
but look, you know that might be an option now. Unfortunately,
certainly not what I wanted. But if we want to
be able to ensure our city, we have to seriously
look at that.
Speaker 2 (05:21):
Surely there would be a little difference with what would
happen to an airport under an earthquake, then would happen
to your social housing under an earthquake? You see what
I'm saying. Either investment was just going to be just
as big a risk. So why have you not thought
about selling your social housing and let the government do it?
Speaker 3 (05:36):
So we've had in the past, but as we've seen,
you know, the government's put their social housing program on hold.
You know, we still want to be able to provide.
It's been our counsel's call to have social Council housing
and be able to provide for our Willington tenants. That's
a commitment and it's certainly one that's important to me.
Speaker 2 (05:54):
So just cutting to the chase, you could possibly, under
one of these plans sell your social housing.
Speaker 3 (06:00):
It might be it's not what I want to do.
But as I said, everything's on the table now.
Speaker 2 (06:05):
How much do we lose a year in social housing?
Speaker 3 (06:09):
I'd have to come back to you about that.
Speaker 2 (06:11):
I'm not quite I remember the figure a million dollars
a week? Am I right? Or am I wrong?
Speaker 3 (06:15):
That I've never heard of that figure before.
Speaker 2 (06:17):
I'll go back and get okay, and listeners, please make
sure I've just heard that somewhere, that it's a significant amount.
You know, how much does the Council spend in a
year on social housing?
Speaker 3 (06:27):
I have we have what we put in our entire
capital program is about half a billion dollars half a billion,
that's that, and.
Speaker 2 (06:36):
We could sell that. Someone told me, and rightly or
wrongly correct me if I'm wrong. Someone told me that
we could sell our social housing for the same value
as we sell the shares and run into the airport.
Speaker 3 (06:47):
We could.
Speaker 2 (06:49):
So one is costing you a lot of money, one
of you is actually getting you a return and investment return.
How does that not make pretty damn good sense.
Speaker 3 (06:58):
Well, like I say, there's everything's going to be on
the table, including that I would prefer not to sell
our homes for our most vulnerable, and the government government
would have to be willing to buy it as well.
Speaker 2 (07:09):
I've been told that one other things that you're absolutely
non negotiable on is the Golden Mile. Absolutely so, no
matter what happens over the next twelve months, no matter
how bad a situation we are in as a city,
over the next twelve months, the Golden Mile is non
negotiable and starts working. It's going to get completed at
a cost about one hundred and forty million to us.
Speaker 3 (07:28):
Yes, so three, I'd say three areas are non negotiables
for me. Water, So at one point eight billion dollars
into water, infrastructure and then eventually the regional model absolutely
cannot change. Two is transport and the Golden Mile that
is co funded at the moment, So if we lose
that project, we lose millions of dollars.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
So one of you went to the government and said, look,
you've told us to pull our heads in. We don't
have the you know, we want to be smart here.
Can you keep your funding in place for five years
for us to get back on our feet. Would you
be prepared to do that?
Speaker 3 (08:02):
And that no, because in that case we're kicking the
can down the road. We'll leave it.
Speaker 2 (08:06):
Everyone agrees that you're just you're the one that's telling
us we're in trouble.
Speaker 3 (08:11):
So I didn't say we were in trouble. I said
that we have to go back to look at look
at that, look at our books, and see how else
we can put up some self insurance. A lot of
our people need our streets to be redesigned to be
friendly towards pedestrians, bikes, public transport. That is happening. If
we leave it, it's much more.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
So I'm perfectly clear on this. You would be prepared
if you have to selling social housing that either you
said you would look at it.
Speaker 3 (08:42):
I said, everything's on the table.
Speaker 2 (08:43):
You'd said Golden miles not on the table.
Speaker 3 (08:45):
Well that's because that's something that I strongly campaigned on.
Speaker 2 (08:48):
Well, then you can't have you can't be sitting on
the fences there mayor I need to know you are
if all things turned to custard, you were prepared to
sell the social housing, But if all things turn to custard,
you're not prepared to stop on the Golden Mile.
Speaker 3 (09:01):
I am currently not prepared to sell our social housing.
Speaker 2 (09:04):
Okay, So but you said it was on the table. Well,
everything's on the table with gold Miles, not Golden Miles.
Not it's on the table. But I'm not going to
let it happen. Okay. But you said to us that
you weren't going to let the sale not happen in
the airport, and what happened, Yeah, exactly, So you lost
your vote. You've lost you've lost the majority. So if
the majority comes to you tomorrow and says we don't
(09:27):
want the Golden Mile, what happens then so well.
Speaker 3 (09:29):
Then I would lose it. But I'm confident that that's
not good.
Speaker 2 (09:32):
You were confident on the airport cheers.
Speaker 3 (09:34):
I was but then three councilors just changed their minds.
Speaker 2 (09:37):
So so it's this is you personally saying that the
Golden Mile can't go ahead, not the Willington City Council,
and you as maya saying it can't go ahead. Yes, okay,
so I've got that perfectly clear. Yes, So if that's
another vote that you take, if you take, if you
take this and take it to council, and and the
council turn you down what she did to be fair
on the on the airport.
Speaker 3 (09:57):
Sales, because I would have to accept that, because that's democracy.
But but what I'm saying, I guess perhaps this is
a more accurate way to say it. Eye will fight
tooth and nail to keep our water, to keep the
Golden Mile, and actually to keep social housing. Did you
not understand I'm just one vote.
Speaker 2 (10:15):
Did you fight for fight, hammer and nail to your
expression to sell the shares in the airport?
Speaker 3 (10:22):
Yes, yep.
Speaker 2 (10:24):
You weren't there for the week that the final week
of the discussions. You weren't at council, were you?
Speaker 3 (10:29):
I was working from home, okay, so.
Speaker 2 (10:31):
Who I was doing the negotiation the final negotiations on there?
Speaker 3 (10:34):
So my office and I have very talented staff, so
at different levels it was you know it's me, it's
them talking to different people and negotiating a way forward.
You know we didn't get there and it's okay, we
just now have to go back to the drawing board.
Speaker 2 (10:52):
Why are you so hell bent when you see what's
happening in Thornton, when you see what's happened in Island
Bay twenty years ago or fifteen years ago, to do
what you want to do with the Golden Mile.
Speaker 3 (11:04):
Because I believe in these transformative projects. Yes are difficult,
and yes I am sorry that businesses have suffered as
a result, but this is what changes like when you
look overseas transport projects like this, they generate the sort
of difficult and it does create a bit of a division.
But once it's finished, once it's settled in, people wonder
(11:26):
why we didn't do it sooner.
Speaker 2 (11:27):
Wellington Morning is Willington Mayor Tory Fano in the studio
from ten to eleven o'clock. You can call and ask
a question shortly and will text this question through and
if we think it's a really good question, we'll ask.
If it's not, we won't. Tory. You campaign on the
unity and bringing the council together. This is the most
bitter vote and years. I mean I was watching you.
(11:50):
Your body language wasn't good. I didn't think it was good.
Speaker 3 (11:54):
So I would totally disagree with Okay, I think I
was all calm, collected.
Speaker 2 (11:58):
Okay, well, let's call calm and collected, but with no
passion or no energy like you normally have. Do you
think because of this vote that you person have failed.
Speaker 3 (12:09):
I wouldn't say failed. I would say it's a setback
because again I was always focused on a successful long
term plan and we got there. We now have to
take parts of it back. But you know, to be honest,
I wake up the next day feeling okay about Do you.
Speaker 2 (12:26):
Go to work the next day? Yeah? Did you how
much blame gave?
Speaker 4 (12:31):
Well?
Speaker 2 (12:31):
I mean, you know, it was a pretty major knot.
Oh no, No, I mean it was the first time
I've watched council meeting for three and a half hours.
It was a pretty major knock. It was brutal. It
was brutal.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
No, No, I had media interviews the next day, just
got back into work.
Speaker 2 (12:45):
How much do you take it personally?
Speaker 3 (12:49):
It's policy, so I don't take it personally.
Speaker 2 (12:52):
But it's you wanting. You are the face of Wellington.
It was what you wanted to achieve, yes, and it
didn't happen. So how can you not take that personally?
Speaker 3 (13:00):
So I wanted to achieve a successful long term plan
that is now paused, but I'm confident we're going to
get a successful long term plan again.
Speaker 2 (13:10):
How many of the counselors have you personally talked to
since that vote?
Speaker 3 (13:15):
I would say I've spoken to all the Labor Greens
and a couple of other counselors. Okay, i'd say most
of them.
Speaker 2 (13:25):
You have, And what's their reaction been.
Speaker 3 (13:27):
It's so you know, I contacted, especially the ones where
it's been tense for a while in our Labor Green camp.
I got in touch with them and said, hey, you know,
no hard feelings. I accept the vote. What I'm keen
to do is focus on how we move forward to
get the most successful long term plan possible.
Speaker 2 (13:45):
Do you think you'll get them back on board?
Speaker 3 (13:46):
Yes, absolutely, Well, we've already agreed to meet later this week.
Speaker 2 (13:50):
Okay, some are telling me and privately that they won't
get back on board and this is a major rift.
Speaker 3 (13:54):
Do you not agree that's not the vibe. Yeah, that's
not the reaction that I got on Friday.
Speaker 2 (14:05):
What do you did You have you heard from anyone
in government? No? Sam and Brown hasn't called. No, No
one from government's called. Are you concerned with your relations
what about a year email?
Speaker 4 (14:16):
No?
Speaker 2 (14:17):
Nothing, no contact? Are you concerned that your relationship with
a cordition government now is even on the shakier grounds?
Been basically that they said everything's on hold until they
till they get this vote. Now this volk's been through.
Do you think that you might see something from them?
Speaker 3 (14:31):
Ah, I'm not expecting anything.
Speaker 2 (14:34):
You're not, No, Yeah, I mean.
Speaker 3 (14:37):
Because we're still we're still following our legislative process.
Speaker 1 (14:42):
Right.
Speaker 2 (14:42):
But it's a mess. I mean it's not it's not
a mess. Tory. I watched that. I watched that. It's
a mess.
Speaker 3 (14:48):
No, it's not a mess.
Speaker 2 (14:50):
You do not have a long term plan. No, and
your counsel is at very best agitated.
Speaker 3 (14:57):
So let me say this, the the airport decision was
probably the most difficult decision we've made all term. And
it's it's.
Speaker 2 (15:05):
What more difficult, moreicult than reading?
Speaker 3 (15:07):
Yeah? Absolutely, And because this one has generated a lot
of tensions, emotions, external campaigning, so naturally it was always
going to be uncomfortable making such a serious decision, but
I cheered counsel through respectfully knowing that there would be
those tensions. My focus was to keep it, you know,
(15:30):
in control, without without so much lashing with the vote lost.
Speaker 2 (15:34):
But what confuses me as a Wellingtonian is that you
really struggled to find your success the way you want it.
You really wanted reading Cinnamons deal to go ahead. Fail
didn't get it through. Not you personally failed, but it
didn't go through personal struggles. The airport deal, you know,
it's not looking that great, is it.
Speaker 3 (15:56):
So if we do look at my successes, if I may,
of course, so I've accelerated the cycleway network over twenty
six kilometers, eighty million dollars under budget. It in our
long term plan. I passed the district Plan, which has
always been a very difficult project. So we've enabled tens
of thousands new homes in the city. And I've also
(16:17):
you know, even though the government wanted to completely remove
let's get willing to moving, I was able to retain
the Golden Mile through negotiation.
Speaker 2 (16:24):
See for me, proud of that?
Speaker 3 (16:26):
Can I just so one more thing, just one more thing.
One point eight billion dollars into water infrastructure, the most
we've invested.
Speaker 2 (16:31):
Okay, we give you that. I'll give you that as
a win. Cycle Way walkable things probably slight wind but
wasn't set up by you. It was all designed before you.
But not that popular. Really, it's at all are.
Speaker 3 (16:44):
Amongst people who want cycle ways? Probably not with your audience.
Speaker 2 (16:48):
Well, it's not about my audience. It's about my people.
It's the people of Wellington. It's you know, how popular
do you think it is on Thorndon right now?
Speaker 3 (16:56):
Well, it's it's in again, we're in construction.
Speaker 2 (17:00):
I want you to be honest here. I mean, how
popular do you think those cycle ways are in Thorndon
right now?
Speaker 3 (17:06):
Be popular until the program's finished?
Speaker 2 (17:08):
Well do we know ine there by the time the
program's finished, there'll be no businesses there. They're all go
collapse and broken gone.
Speaker 3 (17:14):
Okay, Nick, you don't need to yell.
Speaker 2 (17:15):
I wasn't yelling. Yes, I was getting emotion. You can't,
all right, So I apologize.
Speaker 3 (17:19):
If you thought I was yelling at you. No, like again,
like I keep saying, you know, when you're building cycle ways,
when you're rebuilding streets. They are not popular at the
time of construction and transition, but eventually when it's done,
people really appreciate them. This happens everywhere all over the world.
Speaker 2 (17:38):
Right now, the people in Thornton are really struggling. You're
going to get rid of that problem, and you're gonna
have no one in there. You're gonna have everybody leaving
and go, and then you're going to start on Wellington
on the Golden Mile, and then they're all be wiped
out and gone as well.
Speaker 3 (17:55):
You're making some really strong assumptions of what's going.
Speaker 2 (17:58):
To happen based on what we're seeing. Tori. I'm not
pulling this out on my backside, and you know now
you even I've got rental places closing down, and.
Speaker 3 (18:09):
Now what I'm saying this is this is unfortunately one
of the downsides in a natural part of transition. But
I look, I know it's not popular. That's not why
I got the.
Speaker 2 (18:19):
How does that change from there to the Golden Mile.
You say I'm making accusations about Golden Mile. I'm a
businessman on that Golden mine. I know what damage that's
going to do. And I'm not yelling at I'm being
very emotionally quite correct on it, and you know.
Speaker 3 (18:32):
We'll continue to work with our local businesses to make
it as least painful as possible. But you know, I
since I campaigned to become mayor, and ever since I've
been the mayor, I've never waivered on my support for
that program and I'm not going to change my mind.
Speaker 2 (18:47):
We're alive with Wellington Mayor Tory Farno Tory. I want
to ask you about some business stuff. Let's, you know,
talk the business in the city. Bordeaux Bakery has shut down. Yes,
I believe they hadn't really changed with the times and
they didn't adapt in my view, but the owner said
their revenue was down by sixty to seventy percent after
they start work started on Thornton Care the car parks
were removed. It's just another business blaming the council's decisions
(19:12):
when closing, and there has been too many of them.
Speaker 3 (19:15):
Yeah, there's been a couple and a couple well, you know,
I mean that we've seen be quite.
Speaker 2 (19:21):
I think we're close to a couple, doesn't you know
when you actually boil it down. A lot of them
have said car parking stop. There changes all changes have
prevented them from trading profitably.
Speaker 3 (19:31):
Yeah, and I am you know. It is a real
shame and very unfortunate that that happens. But again, so
you know, the changes in the streets and the car
parks are one factor. There are still all these other factors,
like public service cuts in general economic downturn. So it's
a perfect storm for some of these businesses, and.
Speaker 2 (19:53):
Surely the council should be doing something to actually ease that.
Surely the council's ability to actually keep them trading by
letting them people park out the front of them and
making it easier for people to get them. Surely that
something in the council could do. Yes, we all agree
that things are tough in Wellington, but surely you should
be on their side, not against them.
Speaker 3 (20:12):
So I'm not against them. I'm for our Wellington people
and a lot of our people want more effective public transport,
safe cycle ways and walkable streets. During construction, yes, it's
going to take out a number of car parks and
it's unfortunate, but this is where the world is going,
this is where other cities are going, and it is
hard and I fully acknowledge that, but again, this is just,
(20:37):
you know, one of those downsides of when you change, When.
Speaker 2 (20:40):
You put your head on your pillar and try and
get to sleep at night, do you actually think to yourself,
maybe we as a council have gone too far on
removing car parks in the city.
Speaker 3 (20:49):
I don't, You don't because the thing is, you know,
and I've talked to a lot of the workers on
the ground in those managing these major construction projects. If
you keep pausing them, it even becomes more expensive. You know,
you're paying those contract fears, you're delaying it while inflation
(21:10):
is going up. It just becomes a significantly more expensive
project and becomes much more painful for businesses. In the
long term. We just have to get it done as
quickly as possible, like a band aid, and then accept change.
But this is this is what's happening.
Speaker 2 (21:26):
Band aid. You don't need. No band aid. You need
you need a little bit more than band aid, I
would suggest, But anyway, let's move on. The council has
a policy to remove graffiti both or public and private buildings.
It came out a few weeks ago that some councilors
on your council asked for the pro Palestine graffiti to
remain up and you seem to be supportive of that. Really,
(21:51):
so you're okay with graffiti or my building.
Speaker 3 (21:54):
So I'm okay when it comes to that. There's a
difference between you know, you know, like a.
Speaker 2 (22:01):
Pro act or a pro New Zealand first to a
pro Palestinian no no, no.
Speaker 3 (22:06):
No no. So offices it is to their discretion what
they remove, and graffiti should absolutely be removed if it's
explicit racist and harmful to particular groups. The thing about
Wellington City.
Speaker 2 (22:19):
You're Palestine Sport.
Speaker 3 (22:22):
You and I have a different view. I would say
when it comes to graffiti. I'm a huge fan of
street art and graffiti art. I think it's wonderful and
I think it adds to the diversity of our city
and our city's art scene. So yes, I am generinely
supportive of it.
Speaker 2 (22:39):
So you're okay with people putting graffiti on the front
of my business or other business people's business.
Speaker 3 (22:43):
I think if someone is trying to make an artistic statement,
and these pieces of graffiti aren't targeting one of your bars,
so to speak, we're talking about spaces in the public
area that are actually made for public art. That's where
most of it is going.
Speaker 2 (23:01):
I do support that, so that's okay. When I mean,
if you walk past, go back to the council, walk
past one moment, and you'll see it. You'll see it
quite graphically because today I haven't painted over it, So
that's okay.
Speaker 3 (23:12):
I'm not talking about tagging, like general tagging on private buildings.
I'm talking about public art, which is what you asked
me about.
Speaker 2 (23:20):
Okay, So this Palestine flags is okay? Yes, yes, I
think it's okay on private buildings.
Speaker 3 (23:28):
H No, I think they're on public land.
Speaker 2 (23:32):
What if it was on a private building, well, I.
Speaker 3 (23:35):
Think a conversation needs to be had with the owner
of that building.
Speaker 2 (23:41):
Okay, So you think that's okay, I'm just trying to
work out a conversation, you know. I mean, surely, if
someone's putting stuff on a private building, legally that should
be arrested. And fine, I think that's that's How would
you like it if someone went past your house today?
I'm going to ask.
Speaker 3 (23:59):
You to calm down just a little bit more. Sorry,
I'm just asking you question and I'm trying to answer
the questions.
Speaker 2 (24:04):
So can I ask the question, Ye, someone went past
your house? You live in a pretty you know front
on house place place area and tagged your house. That's okay.
Speaker 3 (24:13):
Palestine, I know, I told you.
Speaker 2 (24:16):
What about they put a Palestine flaglan.
Speaker 3 (24:18):
No, So when it comes to private property, you know,
we really ought to keep that. That's not okay because
it's actually the owner that needs to clean that up.
What we're that wasn't really the original question though. We're
talking about public art on on public land and council
areas where political art is put up. I'm okay with that.
When it comes to tagging private property, that's that's completely different.
Speaker 2 (24:40):
Okay. At the airport vote, I don't want to harp
back onto this, but it's something that's sort of in
the back of my mind. Last Thursday, there was a
lot of talk about the Council's relationship with Manafa Manipenua.
There are two unelected Manafena representatives who have voting rights
on the Council committee but not the full council. One
of them holding Hohire from Taranakinfarnu, said that the airport
(25:04):
vote could have ir repair damaged the relationship with the council.
Can't just take a short break. I want you to
think about that. And I'll come back with with your answer. Please,
Sorry Tory, I had to take a break, but I
want to know how damaged the relationship between the Council
and EWE is because there was some pretty scathing comments
after Thursday, wasn't it?
Speaker 3 (25:26):
Yes, and probably even up to the meeting. So I've
been meeting with our taco headir EWIE leaders and our
POI WE you know, constantly up until this point and
that made it very clear not to exclude our po
we we from that decision because it was a major
LTP decision. They expressed, you know, the damage that it
(25:47):
has done to the relationship. So my next priority is
to is to repair it, and I think it's repairable.
Speaker 2 (25:55):
Do you want to see the situation where they both
have voting on the full council?
Speaker 3 (26:00):
I would love to see that.
Speaker 2 (26:02):
What do you think the people who wanting and would
say to that it went to a referendum, which we
are told it's.
Speaker 3 (26:07):
Going to it's going to referend him.
Speaker 2 (26:08):
So when.
Speaker 3 (26:12):
The Mardi ward went to consultation, you know, way back
when it had a ninety six percent support level. So
for Wellington City in particular, they are hugely supportive of
EWE representation when it comes to legislation and it means
that we're meeting our obligations as a treaty partner.
Speaker 2 (26:29):
Are you just saying that because that you order, your
vote with the airport would have gone through if they
had the chance to vote.
Speaker 3 (26:34):
Oh, absolutely not. It's nothing to do with the airport.
You know, let's let's not forget I too am tongue Difenoa.
I have always been and a supportive of honoring tatidity
and this is I've been quite proud actually up until
last week, you know that was that was a bit
of a dip. But we can we can get back
on track. I've actually always been proud of how the
(26:55):
Wellington City Council has handled working with EWE.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
Okay, let's go to a couple of quick calls and
some questions. Please, Peter, you have a question for mea
Tory find it?
Speaker 5 (27:04):
I do?
Speaker 1 (27:05):
Yeah?
Speaker 5 (27:05):
How much worry are we spending or have we spent
so far on cycle lanes prosperience roughly?
Speaker 3 (27:15):
Ah, God should have to go back and remind myself. Okay,
I know in the long term plan we've allocated about
one hundred and ten million dollars.
Speaker 2 (27:25):
Plus what we've already spent, plus what.
Speaker 3 (27:27):
We've spent I just don't have at the top of
my head.
Speaker 2 (27:29):
Okay, thanks Peter Glenn.
Speaker 5 (27:33):
Nick, Hello, I won't cause you're mayor, because you're not
my mayor. And when you're going to start getting rid
of the six hundred and ninety dead beat stuff members
you got, the you're so bloated and stuff you can't
get anything done, I'm.
Speaker 3 (27:46):
Going to cut you off there. That's incredibly rude and
unacceptable to talk about our stuff like that.
Speaker 2 (27:52):
I agree, Amella Amelia, good.
Speaker 4 (27:54):
Morning, Hi Nick, Good morning, Tory, Good morning. The question
I've got is Newtown to the city is a blueprint
for failure of our patients, patients, residents, businesses throughout the city.
How is the city council going to compensate the businesses
when they're losing tenants that are part of commercial precincts
(28:17):
three point seven times the rate of residences. How are
you going to gain that back in the city that's
going downhill?
Speaker 3 (28:26):
So the question is compensating businesses. We're not going to
do that.
Speaker 4 (28:31):
You said you're looking at compensating businesses in Thornton, but.
Speaker 3 (28:35):
No, I wasn't going to no, I wasn't.
Speaker 4 (28:37):
I'll take that on board. I'll take that on board.
But if you've got businesses from Newtown right down to
the Golden Master to Thornton closing down, who are responsible
for paying three point seven times the rates of residence, is,
how are you going to get that money back when
the city is going down help? That's my question.
Speaker 3 (28:58):
So the city is not going downhill. I need to
push against that. There are thousands and thousands of residents
who love the cycle way along Adelaide Road. We've heard
from residents from Newtown who like the way the new
parking structure has been set up. Yes, we know that businesses,
some businesses have struggled with these changes, but again, this
(29:23):
is what change looks like. This is what we're going
to do to the city.
Speaker 2 (29:26):
Well we have a city left, yes we.
Speaker 3 (29:28):
Do, because we have an amazing city.
Speaker 2 (29:30):
But we know we looked at the fast forward track
that the government's taking. Eight thousand properties been built. None
of them were in our CBD, none of them. So
there's going to be all these houses being built all out.
This whole plan was based on us all living in
the city. Yes, but we're not.
Speaker 3 (29:46):
Yes, and that's because we need to, you know, I
think and.
Speaker 2 (29:49):
The government's plan is to let to fast forward all
these places in plummeton obey.
Speaker 3 (29:56):
And that's fine. But with our plan, with Council's plan
to move the city forward, you know, we are We
still currently have a forecast of around about fifty thousand
people moving to Wellington over the next city years. We
do need to build more homes to make them more affordable,
and we need to change our streets to make them
much more people friendly.
Speaker 2 (30:15):
You know.
Speaker 3 (30:15):
We just recently had a Japanese delegation with the mayor
of Sakai Heir who thinks our city is wonderful. A
lot of international people think our city is wonderful.
Speaker 2 (30:23):
It is a beautiful city. There is no question that
it's a beautiful city. That's what we're doing to it.
I just take a break, Can I just take a break? Book? Sorry,
and then you can come back and have so twelve
minutes to eleven yesterday on Q and A, the Mayor
of christ Church said that twenty five percent of their
total revenue taken from from rates is on debt repaying
(30:47):
what's ours.
Speaker 3 (30:48):
Our debt at the moment is about two billion dollars.
Speaker 2 (30:52):
And what is what percentage of our you know, our
rates bill is directed to repaying the debt debt.
Speaker 3 (30:59):
Well so in terms of our debt, we usually keep
it at about two hundred and twenty five percent of
the rates that we bring in. Okay, in terms of
you know, from the actual rates bill, I'd have to
come back to you.
Speaker 2 (31:13):
Okay. Is it like a figure that you've seen before? Yeah?
Is it major? Is it scary? I mean I thought
twenty five percent in christ Is, would you know, almost
double the population of Wellington was extremely high?
Speaker 3 (31:26):
Ah? No, Sorry, what's your question?
Speaker 2 (31:31):
I'm just saying, do you think it's high at the
debt level that we're doing, and what percentage of our
council money, our rates money is just used just straight
on recuperating paying debt.
Speaker 3 (31:39):
No, I think you know, debt funding a lot of
projects over time is actually kind of necessary, especially when
you look at our water infrastructure. We don't really have
a choice. But it's also we're lucky that we've got
the legislation in place to allow us to do that.
Speaker 2 (31:55):
Okay, do you think you could get someone to come
back to sure our listeners would know, would love to
know what percentage of it is.
Speaker 3 (32:01):
Yeah, I just I've just text my team now, but okay, yeah,
I'll come back a.
Speaker 2 (32:05):
Quick one before we let you go. I started the
show by saying, you said that when you were first,
when we first met before, when you were standing for Mayorty,
your great asset was building a team. And actually, you know,
being part of a really united team. That is not
what I saw under any description on Thursday. That looked
(32:30):
like the most fab I don't know, I mean, it
was just it was scary, my scariest.
Speaker 3 (32:35):
Yes, it's very intense. I think you know, a truly
unified council for Wellington City is not possible. I think
a majority is, but not the entire council.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
Do you think that you can do a better job
than you're doing right now and uniting them?
Speaker 3 (32:50):
Absolutely, And that's what I did on Friday in terms
of rebuilding relationships back with student councilors, and that's what
I'm focused on.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
Toriy Faro willing to mere thanks for taking the time
out and fronting for the show today. Appreciate it. Good
luck with building that unity in that ansome It scared me.
Speaker 1 (33:10):
For more from Wellington Mornings with Nick Mills, listen live
to news talks It'd be Wellington from nine am weekdays,
or follow the podcast on iHeartRadio
Popular Podcasts
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
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Therapy Gecko
An unlicensed lizard psychologist travels the universe talking to strangers about absolutely nothing. TO CALL THE GECKO: follow me on https://www.twitch.tv/lyleforever to get a notification for when I am taking calls. I am usually live Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays but lately a lot of other times too. I am a gecko.