How about funding neither?

May 27th, 2014 at 7:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald reported:

The has money for the Parnell cathedral and Lopdell House in Titirangi but no money to upgrade marae, says Independent Maori Statutory Board member John Tamihere.

I’ve got an idea.

How about ratepayers don’t fund either, and instead the Anglican Church funds the Holy Trinity Cathedral and Ngati Whatua fund local marae?

Mr Tamihere criticised the “tyranny of the majority around the council table” for funding projects like Parnell cathedral while ignoring spending on marae.

Fair enough. So do neither.

Tags:

24 Responses to “How about funding neither?”

  1. Manolo (14,031 comments) says:

    John Tamihere, a wet Labour parasite, always looking for easy money!

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. OneTrack (3,218 comments) says:

    Neither? The socialists on the council didn’t even think of that option.

    But, of course, they will go for both.

    Vote: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. radvad (772 comments) says:

    Hear hear DPF

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. duggledog (1,583 comments) says:

    Hear hear. It’s like they have no concept of where the money comes from it’s simply a tap to turn on at will. How many billions are Maori TM worth collectively, isn’t it something like 50bn?

    Pay for it yourself! And as far as the Anglican church goes, while I consider myself an Anglican they must have tons of assets, land etc. Congregations are down but come on. Fund it yourselves.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. Akaroa (580 comments) says:

    ‘….How about ratepayers don’t fund either,…”

    An elegant, blindingly obvious and simple solution!

    Hear, hear!!

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. mjw (399 comments) says:

    Well put dpf.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. CrazyIvan (90 comments) says:

    Excellent idea dpf.

    I’m really annoyed when people complain about the “tyranny of the majority.” What they really mean is that they only like democracy when the voting decisions go their way.

    Vote: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. igm (1,413 comments) says:

    Excellent idea DPF. I didn’t realise Tamihere had slithered into a statutory board rort. Once a leeching Labourite, always a leeching Labourite. Look at them all around the country in ratepayer-funded positions of self-indulgence.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. Unity (609 comments) says:

    Great idea DPF as the others have said. They have plenty of money from fraudulent settlements. Let them fund their own upgrades. Why should the rest of us do it. I;m sure the Anglicans can do likewise.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. mikemikemikemike (331 comments) says:

    But we should keep funding walking tracks and libraries though right? – Just because neither of those items is of interest to you DPF does not mean there is not significant interest from a wide section of the community that you are not a part of.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 13 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. peterwn (3,299 comments) says:

    And Lopdell House can be sold off and returned to its original purpose as Titirangi Hotel. It became unsustainable as a hotel when west Auckland areas voted ‘dry’ years ago and it fell into Government hands.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. duggledog (1,583 comments) says:

    “The Auckland Council has money”

    Let me just correct that. “The ratepayer has money” is what they meant to say.

    Mike – I go to my local library reasonably regularly; there are often more ladies working there than there are patrons!

    Vote: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. mikemikemikemike (331 comments) says:

    @duggledog – you sure that’s a library, or just a place where there are lots of ‘bored librarians’ ;)

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. grumpy (270 comments) says:

    Fund neither. As we have found out in Christchurch, over a hundred years of funding the cathedral counts for nothing when a Canadian, here for 5 minutes, wants to pull it down.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. freedom101 (509 comments) says:

    No wonder council rates just keep going up. This has been powered by Labour’s amendment to the Local Government Act, giving councils powers of “General Competence”. This lines up with H1’s views on the role of government, which she memorably said is “whatever I say it is” (similar to “by definition, the Prime Minister cannot leak”).

    When you allow a bunch of local politicians to spend money on whatever they want, guess what – you get ever increasing rates and debt, as night follows day. Why are we surprised?

    This is a cautionary tale for anyone thinking of voting Labour or Green this election.

    Vote: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. trout (944 comments) says:

    The Government has already distributed millions of dollars to Iwi for upgrade and maintenance of marae. Double dipping anyone? Incidentally marae buildings did not exist before colonial settlement; in this regard they have no more cultural value or status than the many community halls and churches built in rural areas. And yes, the ratepayers have no responsibility for funding the Parnell cathedral.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. ChardonnayGuy (1,211 comments) says:

    Tamihere a “Labour” parasite? How? He’s not a member of the party anymore (thank Gd!!!) and will hopefully never be selected as a candidate for that, or any other party, again. He’s a loose cannon with a self-serving agenda and should be treated as such, however well his particular UMA is governed.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. calendar girl (1,262 comments) says:

    MMMM@8:14am. Logic is absent from that comment, deliberately so I imagine.

    An Anglican church property and a Maori marae are privately-owned, the first intended to be used and controlled by adherents to a particular religious faith, the second by local members of a particular ethnicity.

    Walking tracks and libraries are publicly-owned and publicly-funded facilities designed to be used by any members of the general public who elect to do so.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. itstricky (1,880 comments) says:

    Walking tracks and libraries are publicly-owned and publicly-funded facilities designed to be used by any members of the general public who elect to do so.

    And, to some degree, churches and marae are also open to the public. And contribute to the well being of all citizens (eg. Tourism, community gathering points, community spirit)

    Whatever the case this post is a bit of a pick n chose quote one. I believe, having read the whole thing, that your man JT was actually complaining about the already proposed expenditure on specific Maori projects versus what actually is happening, not individual projects like marae.

    Vote: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5 You need to be logged in to vote
  20. prosper (172 comments) says:

    With the advent of Kindles etc the future of libraries must be limited. Why are we building them. At this point in time the Auckland ratepayers cannot afford walking tracks, libraries, maraes, churches or other nice to haves. The council needs to focus on sewage, roads, land for housing, rubbish collection and other basics. If you need a walking track use voluntary Labour and build one. Some of these board walks are hideously expensive and cater to a few pensioners.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  21. Surely Knott (12 comments) says:

    Churches, or church owned businesses like sanitarium, don’t have to pay taxes or rates. So perhaps that needs to be looked at first. Are we collecting all the rates owing to us. And Lopdell is also largely funded by Pokies trusts. The council has privatised these activities so they are in charitable trusts specifically so they can seek the communities pokies funds.. But ironically the pokies are not going to be in the bottom of the Lopdell HOuse precinct are they, no. They are in Glen Eden, Next to WINZ and the TAB and the licensing trusts. The communities that are disadvantaged by these activities but the money that is collected from the pokies is not going back into that community to improve that area . They are going into council businesses that council privatised so they could collect pokies money. Essentially an extra tax. The wealthy communities are getting wealthy on the backs of the poor.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2 You need to be logged in to vote
  22. artemisia (254 comments) says:

    Any business case which does not have a ‘do nothing’ option should be sent right back for amendment.

    Vote: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  23. Surely Knott (12 comments) says:

    http://thestandard.org.nz/pokies-and-corruption/ This is what Martin Legge has to say on the setup with Lopdell and the Pokies and the council. And yes Tamihere and Presland are on the licensing trusts that distribute the pokies money to the Trusts. Presland is also Trustee at Lopdell.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  24. Viking2 (11,555 comments) says:

    Private property so fund it themselves. Either that or pay for reno’s to all our property.

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote