Should SCIRT be sponsoring a Buskers Festival?

January 9th, 2013 at 10:00 am by David Farrar

I was astonished when in Wanaka to see a newspaper insert promoting the 2013 Buskers Festival in , that it was sponsored by , who got naming rights to it.

SCIRT is the Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Rebuild Team. I got briefed on their work earlier this year, and they seem to be doing a fine job. They are a fairly novel PPP involving five private firms (Downers, Fletchers, City Care, Fulton Hogan and McConnell Dowell) and three government entities (CCC, NZTA and CERA).

I think it is quite inappropriate for SCIRT to be sponsoring a festival and getting naming rights for it. It’s job is to repair the roads, the sewers, the infrastructure etc. Not to promote their brand.

If the five private companies involved in SCIRT want to sponsor a festival, then that is great and they should do so. But I don’t see it as as appropriate that SCIRt itself is sponsoring, let alone having the festival naming rights.

I’m not against either local or central govt making a contribution either, but that should be through MED or the CCC if they believe there is an economic payoff to such a contribution.

As I said, I think SCIRT seem to be doing a good job. but they should focus 100% on infrastructure and not be worrying about sponsorship, brand, or economic development. Stick to your knitting.

 

Tags: ,

18 Responses to “Should SCIRT be sponsoring a Buskers Festival?”

  1. Dave Guerin (32 comments) says:

    David, it is just the private companies doing it. The SCIRT website says:

    “The five construction companies in SCIRT are sponsoring the World Buskers festival in 2012. This perfectly complements the physical rebuilding we do in our core work. It all helps us get our city back to being a fantastic place to live.”
    http://strongerchristchurch.govt.nz/community/sponsorship

    [DPF: Even though it is their money, I don't think the SCIRT name should be used. It is a Government entity as a govt.nz domain]

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. dime (9,676 comments) says:

    huh? private companies using their own money to sponsor something and youre against it?

    am i on kiwiblog?

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. KiwiGreg (3,224 comments) says:

    “I’m not against either local or central govt making a contribution either,”

    …and yet you SHOULD be.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    And David when you are on the board of any of those five companies you’ll be able to tell them how to spend their money.

    There will be lots of ChCh people holidaying in QT and Wanaka and Twizel at this time as well

    And I might be wrong but alot of the ‘buskers’ at the Wanaka thingy will come to the Christchurch buskers thingy that they have every year and people will visit the ‘thing’ that is Christchurch and spend their money at Christchurch business’s.

    If private companies want to spend their money at a whore house thats fine, its theirs, what I begrudge is a couple of my tax dollars being put into a poxy museum called Te Papa in Wellington

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. PleaseThinkOfTheCatapults (7 comments) says:

    I think DFP, instead of going Lobster Red after his South Island holiday, has had a case of Grey Matter Overheating Syndrome.

    Normal programming to resume once said grey matter has been cooled by Wellington’s fine weather.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. dime (9,676 comments) says:

    “If private companies want to spend their money at a whore house thats fine”

    amen brother!

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Ross12 (1,279 comments) says:

    I don’t see anything wrong with this. It is not taking up any of their time ( only writing the cheque or putting the $s through on a computer). These companies will be part of the CHCh for quite along time time so why not help to put the city back on the cultural map , give the community something to help it feel “normal ” again and also all those people working for the companies who are from out of town will feel they contibuting abit more to the community. Its all a win , win for what is probably a small financial cost.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. RRM (9,667 comments) says:

    Out of interest, I wonder how much sponsorship is required to run a busker’s festival?

    One thing post-quake Chch is NOT short of, is pavement space, so the hireage of the venues must be pretty minimal cost.. :-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Pauleastbay (5,035 comments) says:

    [DPF: Even though it is their money, I don't think the SCIRT name should be used. It is a Government entity as a govt.nz domain]

    buts its not is a PPP, a email address means SFA.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. nocommentkiwi (35 comments) says:

    I’d hazard a guess that when it came to tendering or compiling the SCIRT’s private-entity component, the community-give-back factor would have played some role.

    I.e. some value would be assigned to companies who were willing to, as part of the SCIRT operation, sponsor or be involved with community events.

    From a black-and-white political ideology perspective, I understand some could be concerned, but when we’re talking about a long-term project which is going to be operating in a real community with real people you have to consider options to legitimise your brand and familiarise yourself (preferably favourable ways) with the clients (i.e. Chch residents).
    DPF, the focus on 100% infrastructure would be flawed, when you’re managing something of this scale you need to have considerations and pro-active approaches to a wide range of contingencies and respect for the power of advertising and community buy-in.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. scrubone (3,090 comments) says:

    I agree with DPF. SCIRT is there for a specific reason – to fix the infrastructure. If one of the component companies wants to sponsor, go for it. But this gives the appearance that SCIRT is diverting itself (and public funding) from it’s role. And while it is technicially a private company, it is very, very close to the council.

    In reality, what’s probably happened is that SCIRT has for some reason hired a marketing person who’s decided that this is a good idea. It’s not.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. scrubone (3,090 comments) says:

    Why would you want to promote the brand anyway? Everyone knows it (in Christchurch anyway and who would care outside?) and it’s only there for the duration of the fix.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. scrubone (3,090 comments) says:

    They are a fairly novel PPP involving five private firms (Downers, Fletchers, City Care, Fulton Hogan and McConnell Dowell) and three government entities (CCC, NZTA and CERA).

    Think some people are missing this bit.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. RRM (9,667 comments) says:

    Scrubs did you miss the bit on the website that says:

    The five construction companies in SCIRT are sponsoring the World Buskers festival in 2012. This perfectly complements the physical rebuilding we do in our core work. It all helps us get our city back to being a fantastic place to live.

    Poster #1 on this thread even pointed it out… ;-)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. bringbackdemocracy (416 comments) says:

    A company that mends broken sewers sponsoring a buskers festival.
    Sounds sort of appropriate.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. pq (728 comments) says:

    Whatever, the buskers festival is real fun. Some of it is so amateurish, some of it slick.
    You just drive ointo the park now, get out, make sure you don’t eat the food and have a good time .
    Thanks to whoever is underwriting this thing.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. joana (1,983 comments) says:

    Five private companies and the City Council..a bit of an overreaction..ACT ideology in all its narrow minded glory. Many CHCH rate payers would be happy to see the Buskers festival supported in this way..It cannot be a PPP and a ”govt entity” all at the same time.
    This is still a place in desperate need of cheering up..in desperate need of things to do , places to go…the young people especially feel this way.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. orewa1 (428 comments) says:

    Over-reaction – nothing to read here.

    BTW, as an occasional busker, can anyone tell me what private sector businesses are sponsoring whore houses? I’d like to solicit – I mean approach them to divert the money to busking instead.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.