Brian Rudman: Tent obscures important issues

It's time our politicians got their priorities right. On Wednesday afternoon, councillors representing the region's seven councils voted by a majority to slice $500,000 from the $11.6 million regional levy proposed to support 10 key social and cultural amenities for the coming year.

Their basic argument was that ratepayers are suffering, therefore so should WaterSafe NZ, Auckland Theatre Company, Auckland Regional Rescue Helicopter, Auckland Philharmonia Orchestra and the other six organisations that help make Auckland a city worth living in.

While this was going on, another row was breaking out over how many millions of dollars of public funds were going to be "invested" in a temporary "party central" structure on Queens Wharf for Rugby World Cup 2011.

And what got all the attention? Yep, the ephemeral World Cup tent, or shed, or pavilion.

As the "party central" debate flares up once more, a breath of sanity came from, of all places, Campbell Live on TV3. Up popped former Wallaby Peter Fitzsimons to say he didn't think there was a need for "confined spaces" by Auckland harbour.

"You just need to have a rolling carnival in the streets which is what World Cup at its best is like."

He thinks "party central" already exists. "Auckland is a rugby town and there's a rugby carnival atmosphere" at test match time. "I love the life on the streets and in the boulevards, in the bars, people carrying on, singing, cheering, that's the wonderful thing."

It's the same message Auckland City Mayor John Banks delivered in late February when, as spokesman for the region's mayors - but not regional council chairman Mike Lee - he rejected the Government's plan for a joint $97 million "party central" cum cruise ship terminal on the wharf.

"The sooner we move away from this as the place of 'party central' in the middle of winter next year, in howling northeasterlies on the end of Queens Wharf, we will be better off."

He said places such as a new $29.6 million marine events centre, the $90 million upgrade of Aotea Centre, the Viaduct Harbour, Ponsonby Rd and Parnell Rd would all be "party central" for the cup.

Bowed but undeterred, Rugby World Cup Minister Murray McCully continues to beaver away at the concept, backed by the ARC chairman.

Mr Lee sees it as a way of getting government funds for a new cruise ship terminal and in a feisty statement this week declared that despite "the Mayor's fuddy-duddy, stick-in-the-mud attitude" to the party central idea, "I for one will be going down to Queens Wharf during the Rugby World Cup and intend to party like it's 1999".

My question is the same as John Banks' and Peter Fitzsimons': why build something new when there are already 101 downtown hostelries and precincts like Viaduct Harbour and Aotea Centre?

To me, temporary and public money don't have a good ring. Mr Lee is being coy about the cost and shape of the latest proposal. In late February, Mr McCully revealed four alternatives ranging from $23.9 million up to $100 million. Even if the latest incarnation is only $10 million, that's still a publicly funded structure that, after a few weeks of use, will end up in the rubbish tip.

In the meantime, the battle for the funding of the 10 regional amenities goes on. At the end of last month, the outer councils ganged together to oppose the proposed $11.6 million regional levy, which was backed only by Auckland City, Waitakere City and Rodney Deputy Mayor John Kirikiri (who defied his council's instructions to vote against it).

This week, another vote was taken, but this time Waitakere City's two representatives, Vanessa Neeson and Peter Chan, changed sides. The majority went for a compromise of $11.1 million. The regional amenities funding board, appointed by the committee that has rejected its recommendation, opposes the proposed cut. Both sides will now fight it out before an arbitrator, retired High Court judge Peter Salmon, QC.

The councillors have hired Matthew Casey, QC, to lead their battle against their own funding board - and the 10 amenities. The judge has until April 26 to deliver his verdict.