Tātaki Auckland Unlimited director of economic development Pam Ford. Photo / Supplied
Tātaki Auckland Unlimited director of economic development Pam Ford. Photo / Supplied
Analysis by Kate MacNamara
Kate MacNamara is a South Island-based journalist with a focus on policy, public spending and investigations. She spent a decade at the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation before moving to NZ. She joined the Herald in 2020.
Auckland Council’s Tātaki Auckland Unlimited launched the Te Puna Creative Innovation Quarter in Henderson.
Up to $1.8 million from the Māori Outcomes Fund and nearly $3m for land have been allocated.
Mayor Wayne Brown criticises the CCO model for lacking democratic accountability in the project’s funding decisions.
In November last year, Auckland Council’s economic development agency, Tātaki Auckland Unlimited, launched a “creative quarter” in the city’s western suburb, Henderson.
The project, now called the Te Puna Creative Innovation Quarter, encompasses big ideas for grouping so-called creative sector industries – screen production, videogaming, creative technology, music, and the arts – within a small and walkable precinct. In Tātaki’s own words, the project will be: “a circuit of creative industries linking Henderson village, Corban Estate Arts Centre and Auckland Film Studios in Henderson Valley. Radiating out like ripples will be integrated services and education providers, to create pathways and opportunities for talent and ideas.”
But it’s been difficult to connect the project’s vague and aspirational marketing-speak – “place-based economic master-planning for job creation outcomes in the Henderson Creative Quarter” – with concrete elements of a plan. And it’s even more difficult to understand how much public money will be sunk into it.
Te Puna was conceived in or around 2023, it entails working with West Auckland-based iwi Te Kawerau ā Maki, and Tātaki board minutes suggest up to $1.8 million of Te Puna spending over roughly the next three years will come from Auckland Council’s Māori Outcomes Fund.
But a considerably larger sum of public money appears to be at play, including the nearly $3m cost of land to date, and there is also an aim, perhaps as yet indeterminate, to channel into Te Puna, funds generated by film production in Auckland (including from the planned sale of council-owned Auckland Film Studios).
What benefit might flow from this is unclear. The project has a business case and an “economic rationale for the market intervention” both of which the Herald has requested under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act (LGOIMA). The request is still under consideration.
The agency’s director of economic development, Pam Ford, has also been secretive about elements of the plan; in particular, she neither disclosed the land transaction nor included the cost in her response to a LGOIMA request in Octoberfor “total spending to date” on the Te Puna project (including under its predecessor name Henderson Creative Quarter).
Only after the Herald received confirmation from Te Puna’s establishment group co-chairwoman, Penny Hulse, that 18 Henderson Valley Rd is clearly part of the project, did Ford provide any information about the deal – land records show the parcel of raw land was bought for $2,755,000 by Auckland Council from David Alan Sutherland in December last year.
Ford recently told the Herald thatTātaki Auckland Unlimited (TAU) became aware that 18 Henderson Valley Rd was for sale in November last year: “TAU made a bid on the property and completed the purchase in early 2024. This was a strategic decision to ensure that if the creative innovation quarter was developed beyond the initial phase of Te Puna Creative Hub, the adjacent land would be available for development – and to support its alignment and vision ... if, in future, the decision is made not to expand the Te Puna Creative Innovation Quarter further, then the land could be sold at market value.”
Ford said TAU responded to the Herald’s LGOIMA “in good faith” and she refuted the characterisation that she’d been secretive. She said at the time of purchase, the transaction was explicitly noted and approved as a stand-alone, “to provide optionality without predetermining plans for a wider precinct. Thus, this purchase is not part of the currently approved scope of the Te Puna Creative Innovation Quarter”.
In contrast, Hulse told the Herald: “Te Puna is a loose definition and that’s a strategic piece of land to hold … but look, of course it’s part of it. Have you seen the Te Puna map on Tātaki’s website? That land is right in the middle of it, between Whoa! Studios and the Auckland Film Studio.”
Whoa! Studios includes a movie-making studio and theatre for live performances, restaurant, urban playground and, of course, gift shop.
Te Puna Creative Hub and a 5-year lease
Earlier this year, Tātaki signed and commenced a five-year lease on the Whoa! Studios site at 8-14 Henderson Valley Rd; it now calls the facility the Te Puna Creative Hub. And Tātaki is more than halfway through a remodelling and “fit-out” of the building – the recently purchased raw land is directly adjacent, and Whoa Studios is also owned by David Alan Sutherland.
Ford said the property includes “spaces that can be used for performance, rehearsals, presentations, small studio production, technical equipment and facilities that can be repurposed”. The agency is now seeking tenants.
Board minutes suggest the project has also secured some $1.8m (over three years) from Auckland Council’s Māori Outcomes Fund, and this will fund an associated Māori creative skills academy and business growth programme.
The cost so far
Ford told the Herald that to September 25, total spending on the Te Puna project was $250,000. As noted, the figure does not include land purchase; also, the cost of the Whoa! Studios lease and its fit-out are largely subsequent costs. The Herald has requested further cost detail, including the lease cost, which Tātaki is still considering under LGOIMA.
The agency spent $64,000 in fiscal 2022-23, and a further $185,287 in the three months of fiscal 2023-24 that were covered.
Hulse, the former mayor of Waitākere Council, said she was very supportive of the project, which constituted a long-overdue interest in and focus on Henderson, something that has been lacking since the 2010 creation of the supercity, an amalgamation of Auckland’s councils including Waitākere.
She said she couldn’t speak about particular budget matters, but she noted that the broader Te Puna vision is predicated on using funds collected from the film sector and proceeds from Auckland Council-owned Auckland Film Studios, currently for sale: “Whether it’s sold or not, it’s booming and that building was originally bought with shedloads of West Auckland money. There’s money coming in from film permits in Henderson, from the film industry in Henderson, and this project is saying, yup, let’s find a way for Henderson to clip the ticket.”
Hulse also disclosed she was paid $5460 (plus GST) for the establishment group co-chairing work that spanned four months earlier in the year. She said the payment covered meeting facilitation, preparation and liaison with group members. Since then, she has been volunteering her time to work on the project.
David Sutherland, owner of Whoa! Studios in Henderson, Auckland. Photo / Michael Craig
Amorphous ideas
Alice Shearman, executive director of the NZ Writers Guild, which represents screenwriters, was also a member of the Te Puna establishment group.
Shearman said the group’s work centred on about half a dozen “workshopping sessions” (which Tātaki called “sprints”) convened to consider broad ideas floated by Jasmine Millet, Tātaki’s head of creative industries. These included investment infrastructure, education, international connection and industry development.
“They were big ideas, I would say there was a lot of desire and passion, but we never saw the concrete elements. I’ve never seen a design process like it, it was unique … we were an establishment group, but that might not have been the right name. We didn’t establish much,” Shearman said.
Shearman also noted the first solidifying element of the project is unlikely to appeal to the screen sector. She described the Whoa! Studios conversion as a kind of co-working space unlikely to attract those working in film or TV: “That space is small, an old bunker, and it’s got a pitched roof, which won’t work for lighting, the walls are too low, it’s not designed as studio space, that’s a screen perspective. It could work well for other creative industries like performing arts or photography, though.”
She also confirmed Screen Auckland, the regional film office for Auckland and a division of Tātaki, was not involved in the Te Puna work and did not take part in the group’s workshops. The omission is odd because the agency sits within Tātaki and its remit is to attract film production and to facilitate filming in Auckland.
Cancelled investment summit
Tātaki planned and advertised a November investment summit to promote investment opportunities in four parts of the city – the downtown, Drury, northwest Auckland and the Te Puna Creative Innovation Quarter.
The agency’s promotional material gave this plump for the quarter: “Work is well under way to establish Te Puna Creative Innovation Quarter, a thriving hub for creative and creative tech businesses and talent in the heart of Te Kōpua Henderson, a suburb 13km west of Auckland’s city centre. Investing in Te Puna Creative Innovation Quarter offers investors a unique opportunity to make a meaningful impact while inviting financial returns.”
Tātaki hasn’t made clear what role investors will play in the Te Puna plan, but the summit was cancelled abruptly just weeks before it was to take place.
Ford said the event was postponed because of “other events and projects emerging, reduced resource and capacity, and potential Council Controlled Organisation (COO) reform.” No new date has been given.
A $26k round-the-world trip
In May last year, Jasmine Millet took a $26,000 round-the-world trip with a joint purpose, according to Pam Ford in response to earlier Herald LGOIMA questions.
Millet flew to Singapore, France and the United States – the air travel cost $9053 – and undertook “screen reconnecting work”, largely in France at the Cannes Film Market.
Ford said this was the main purpose of the trip and the full cost of the airfare was attributed to it. Additional expenses, such as meals and accommodation, for this screen-industry-focused reconnection, totalled $12,805.
A second purpose of the trip was related to Te Puna: to research creative precincts in the UK, Singapore and the US. The associated expense – including return rail fare from France to the UK and accommodation in Paris, Manchester, London and New York – was $4427.
Ford said the business value of Millet’s work at Cannes included “re-engaging and promoting Auckland as a film destination with the international film industry at the premiere market”.
She said it was important to signal that Auckland was “open for business” following the Covid pandemic.
Ford also provided 10 “outcomes” for Millet’s work at Cannes including: “learnings into screen industry sustainability and climate change adaptation/mitigation”; “connected emerging expat New Zealand filmmaker (based in Australia and planning to return to New Zealand) with Pan Asian-Screen Collective NZ”; “strengthening connections and developing new connections with peer film commissions as part of Association of Film Commissioners International”; and, “gained market insights to French media and screen industry, and scoped opportunities to co-produce and collaborate in future years”.
Several screen sector sources with whom the Herald shared the response said the Cannes trip and “reconnecting work” appeared to be a thin excuse for Millet to undertake the travel.
“I can’t see any of the supposed activities either being ‘time-critical’ or unable to be fulfilled by email and Zoom … [and] I can’t see how a single one of them has increased any screen activity in Auckland, nor will they contribute anything in the next three years,” one said.
“We’d expect project-specific meetings about bringing specific international productions to Auckland,” another said.
Millet was previously manager of Screen Auckland, but moved out of the role and was replaced in mid-2022.
It’s also notable that Millet’s reconnecting work overlapped significantly with that of the NZ Film Commission, also publicly funded, which sent four staff to connect with the global industry at the Cannes Film Market last year -- their cost, including a stop in London and hosting expenses, was $143,000.
Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown: "The Te Puna Creative Quarter is a good example of where the CCO model does not allow for the appropriate level of democratic accountability."
The mayor’s view
Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown has a draft plan to return considerable swaths of public work from Auckland’s council-controlled organisations to the council proper. This includes Tātaki’s economic development work.
Brown told the Herald: “The Te Puna Creative Quarter is a good example of where the CCO model does not allow for the appropriate level of democratic accountability. This was a decision made by Tātaki at arm’s length from the council. Any decision that involves millions of dollars in ratepayer money going to the private sector should be carefully scrutinised by councillors so Aucklanders can have confidence we are doing the right thing by them."
