I refer to article of November 1, entitled "Boatyard gets nod to use reserve".
The local media has become habituated to personalising what is an issue of national significance by referring to the subject boatyard rights as having been granted the owner that to the boatyard. The owner has played
to this by using the phrase "my opponents" in reference to people who are not his opponents at all, but merely remain opposed to the expansion of an obtrusive industrial private business operation onto public reserve.
The Northern Advocate article faithfully followed the example set by the owner in using the phrase "his opponents".
The comments attributed to FNDC councillor Willow-Jean Prime are disappointing in reflecting the same confusion by referring to "strong personalities" ... "making it difficult to consider the facts". The essential facts were summarised on to one page and sent to all councillors prior to their vote, October 30, but they clearly did not consider them. This underscores exactly why the boatyard use-rights in question are required by the Reserves Act to be the subject of application, public notification and due process involving public submissions.
If councillors wanted to know the facts that was the best way to bring them to light, as is also mandatory in law. They failed in their duty to themselves and to their ratepayers.
