Now we are to see transformational outcomes for Gisborne and the Coast. There are now to be new opportunities and a new structure.
Is this a concession that the regional wellbeing approach has not fulfilled expectations? Or a realisation that regional wellbeing is not synonymous with one of the trust’s stated purposes, to “encourage or sustain economic growth within the district”?
So it is all rather sad to see the trust making a grant of $100,000 to Gisborne District Council for community events and initiatives commemorating the one-year anniversary of Cyclone Gabrielle.
There is no quibble about the February 2023 tragedy being remembered, but it is inappropriate to align the anniversary with one of the trust’s stated purposes of encouraging economic growth.
Grants for revitalisation of native taonga, school vans and a toilet block for a sporting club may well be for public benefit, but do they fit the economic growth stipulation?
The point is that simply to provide for beneficiaries as the trustees might decide is not in itself a purpose.
Ultimately it is the trustees who exercise the discretion whether to make a grant that is in accordance with the trust’s purposes. In many instances, it will be how far can the rubber band be stretched to fit the proposal in with an economic growth criteria.
The examples I have given and the murmurs of discontent around the district of the extent of grants suggest the trustees could well be pushing the limits.
Let us see what these transactional changes bring, but with total recognition that it must be against a background of compliance with the strict terms of the Deed of Trust.
Gordon Webb
Environmental law undermined
Of course, their insurance companies will pay the fines of forestry companies successfully prosecuted by the Gisborne District Council for discharging contaminants and unlawful earthworks.
This is why the ban on insurance was put into the Natural and Built Environment Act 2023. Companies and individuals could insure for legal representation and remediation but not for penalties.
Another casualty of reckless repeal under the current Government is the loss of this incentive for companies to protect rather than pollute the environment.
Allowing entities to insure against penalties radically undermines the deterrent effect of environmental law.
Manu Caddie
Unintended consequences
The Government’s intention to “green-card” beneficiary spending will likely mean that there will be little or no rights for affected beneficiaries to indulge in any “comfort spending”, to support their vices such as drinking, smoking or vaping.
The “traffic light” system of controlling beneficiaries will likely cause nothing more than imposing a further state of hopelessness into the minds of beneficiaries, and thus markedly increase crime and social chaos.
It is likely that with such a requirement for subservient spending being imposed on beneficiaries, those who were previously compliant will be likely to rebel, either individually or en masse.
Dennis Pennefather
Always Pākehā venues
Re: Odd venue to decide Māori wards support, August 13 letter.
Hi Roger,
Join we Māori, mate. We ALWAYS have to meet in Pākehā venues. You have got it!
Joe Naden
Still a ‘Pakehā' building?
Replying to Joe Naden: Hmmm. I believe the council chambers’ “look” and design were done in consultation with our local iwi... and paid for by ALL ratepayers.
Despite this, do you still consider it a “Pākehā” building?
The Māori flag has flown outside and the building contains Māori symbology inside and out, from the waka over the entrance to the tukutuku pattern of the window shades, to the artwork which graces the interior.
I am sorry if this appears to be “token” and the building remains “Pākehā” despite efforts to make it inclusive.
Roger Handford
