Labour wants taxpayers to pay more for Christchurch

July 11th, 2014 at 11:00 am by David Farrar

The Herald reports:

has raised the possibility of the taxpayer shouldering an even greater proportion of rebuild costs, saying it would sit down with Council to review the existing cost sharing agreement if it won the election.

I guess $10 billion or $20 billion or whatever the figure is isn’t enough. Labour wants to bail out the high spending Mayor. If the Council saved  $100 million on not restoring the Town Hall that would be better than sending the bill to taxpayers.

Tags: ,

19 Responses to “Labour wants taxpayers to pay more for Christchurch”

  1. Other_Andy (2,623 comments) says:

    The Christchurch mayor wouldn’t be a n ex Labour MP now, would it?

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  2. simpleton1 (195 comments) says:

    New town hall, here we come, ;-)
    Have we enough builders, workers, construction companies, etc., involved in Christchurch, yet ?
    then build even more accommodation etc.

    Do not get me wrong, I do want Chch to recover as soon as possible, but not on a wish list and no expense spared

    Vote: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  3. s.russell (1,621 comments) says:

    Labour suffers from irremediable fiscal incontinence.

    Vote: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  4. Rich Prick (1,682 comments) says:

    I think we (and the insurance industry) have paid enough. I think this is designed to get us warmed up for Labour’s earthquake levy on our rates. Instead, all Labour has to do is declare a Christchurch re-build crisis and it will resolve itself.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  5. burt (8,239 comments) says:

    Given anywhere in NZ could be “the next Christchurch” at any time – I’m glad that nobody needs to worry about insurance from now on and that the government will tax everybody as much as it takes to be popular at election time.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  6. dime (9,869 comments) says:

    The Greens will demand a “High Earners Levy”. Starting about 50k id say.

    3% for 10 years should do it.. then they can just roll that 3% into some climate fund.

    Assholes.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  7. Nukuleka (309 comments) says:

    As a Chch resident who is impressed by all the work that is going into the CBD rebuild, and the repairs to the infrastructure and homes I am tired of Labour using the city as a political football. As an eastern suburbs resident nor do I see people living in tents or under bridges as the media would have us believe. Things are well on the move in Christchurch, and it should be over to the City Council to get on with their job and start making sound fiscal decisions about we can and what we cannot afford. We have decided that we cannot afford a flash sports stadium and now we must decide that we cannot afford to repair the Town Hall. Cut our coat according to our cloth and stop the whingeing!

    Vote: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  8. Hugh Pavletich (192 comments) says:

    The reason for such heavy Central Government involvement in Christchurch, is because the Christchurch City Council was severely dysfunctional at the time of the first earthquake events September 4 2010.

    Are we hearing constant whining from the smaller and disciplined adjoining Local Government Units of Waimakariri and Selwyn ? That’s where much of the new development has been happening.

    Indeed … due to poor quality governance and planning, these events will likely cost in excess of $40 billion, when they should have been about $15 billion … as I explained at Interest Co NZ with “Christchurch earthquakes: Council stalled recovery” …

    http://www.interest.co.nz/opinion/53947/opinion-hugh-pavletich-accuses-christchurch-city-council-blindness-blunders-and-chain-

    The problems and solutions have been widely discussed … “Christchurch: The way forward” …

    http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1206/S00251/christchurch-the-way-forward.htm

    Throwing more long-suffering taxpayer money at the Christchurch City Council makes as much sense as throwing booze to alcoholics.

    Vote: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  9. thor42 (971 comments) says:

    … and no doubt we will be required to bail out *Auckland* as well (when that goes belly-up).

    Punish the thrifty to reward the extravagant (Auckland, not Christchurch)
    . Gee…… thanks, Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  10. OneTrack (3,024 comments) says:

    Promising to spend other peoples money to buy votes – it must be Labour.

    Vote: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  11. duggledog (1,528 comments) says:

    Labour means one thing and one thing only: higher taxes (if that’s possible) with at least 50% of the money collected being wasted on ever more bureaucracy and non productive areas. Businesses go offshore, ever decreasing circles.

    And that’s without even counting the Greens’ madness. If they get into power; well I’m not going to worry about it. I’ll wait till the dust settles and buy up some cheap property and cane it in the next cycle.

    Won’t happen though. National will take this election by a landslide I reckon, and most likely win in 2017 albeit with compromises.

    Vote: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  12. Hugh Pavletich (192 comments) says:

    CCC debt three times NZ average | Stuff.co.nz

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/news/10142192/CCC-debt-three-times-NZ-average

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  13. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    So while Parker was Mayor we didn’t see complaints about the CCC spending from this blog, but now the Mayor has changed it’s suddenly the ‘high spending Mayor’.

    Vote: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 9 You need to be logged in to vote
  14. Hugh Pavletich (192 comments) says:

    MikeG … That comment is unfair. Many of us worked hard to clean out the Parker / Marryatt regime. Read “Christxchurch: The way forward”.

    New Mayor Lianne Dalziel and her team (9 of 13 replaced) have moved at a glacial pace since the election October last year.

    They know what needs to be done.

    Vote: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  15. MikeG (425 comments) says:

    Hugh – I wasn’t referring to you, but rather the author of this blog.

    I’m not from Christchurch, but from various media reports part of the glacial pace appears to be the difficulty of getting the Minister of Chch to move.

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3 You need to be logged in to vote
  16. Rowan (2,116 comments) says:

    Every single proposed policy from either Labour or the greens is another reason not to vote for them, is Labour seriously trying to win votes with this?

    Vote: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0 You need to be logged in to vote
  17. GPT1 (2,118 comments) says:

    Didn’t government say they would contribute (pay for?) to a performing arts precinct including, in effect, a new Town Hall? But the last council decided they knew better…

    Vote: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  18. Steve (North Shore) (4,547 comments) says:

    Christchurch has now become ‘welfare dependent’ They will keep demanding just like any other bludger

    Vote: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1 You need to be logged in to vote
  19. Nukuleka (309 comments) says:

    Those involved in planning the rebuild of such facilities as the Music Centre of Christchurch report that when they were dealing with the CCC it was a case of frustration and red tape- ‘glacial pace’. Now that they are dealing with the government things are MOVING!! Lianne and the CCC are dysfunctional and can’t wait for Labour to form the government so that they can get their hands on tons more lovely lolly from the taxpayer.

    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.