Brian Rudman: Mayor's hero liked to poll ratepayers before borrowing

If Mayor Dick Hubbard employed a public relations consultant to pen yesterday's epistle to Aucklanders, I hope he insisted on a money-back guarantee. Because somehow I don't think the imperious opening about wanting "to give you a clear signal of where we are heading" struck quite the conciliatory tone needed to calm the restless masses.

Especially when he then went all paternal, lecturing that "no one like rates increases ... but without a brave decision on rates right now, we quite simply won't have the resources we need to create the city you want".

Talk about grabbing an ear and thrusting a spoonful of cod-liver oil down our throats with the order, "Swallow hard, it's good for you".

In demanding we dig deeper to complete "the cathedral" that is Auckland, Mr Hubbard wrote admiringly of "a brave mayor by the name Gunson" who in 1921, amidst "poverty and hardship ... had the foresight to build the Auckland War Memorial Museum".

It was a tale, he said, "of strong leadership, vision and preparedness to dig a little deeper to leave the right legacy for future generations. That is what we are asking for now."

I confess to knowing little about James Gunson, but a little digging reveals that Mayor Gunson's ratepaying rabble turned out to be as big a bunch of ingrates as we are, 80 years on.

Flicking through yellowing clippings, the first mention I find is how he was tossed out in 1925 after a decade in power by ratepayers who rejected his vision of a great civic centre.

"He bore a great deal of blame," says the report, "having irritated many citizens by his actions of clearing the site before they had a chance to vote upon it."

Historian Graham Bush, in his invaluable city council history, Decently and in Order, observed wryly that the civic centre "mania" was "a rich illustration of how not to go about foisting on the citizenry something they have not been educated to want ... "

Sir James, as he later became, obviously dominated Auckland local politics between 1910 and 1925, chairing the chamber of commerce, the harbour board and various other organisations. With a dictatorial bent, he organised the strike-breakers during the 1913 waterfront strike.

As Mr Hubbard points out, Sir James masterminded the campaign for a war memorial museum in the Domain. He also organised the creation of the zoo and presided over much in the way of public works and the amalgamation of several surrounding districts into the expanding city council. The arguments for and against, and the rows over costs, could have been written yesterday.

What Mr Hubbard failed to note was that the creation of the museum, and Sir James' other "think big" projects don't appear to have been financed by squeezing ratepayers through the old mangle.

They were financed, at least in part, by generous donations from local businesses and members of the public, or by specially struck loans, voted on beforehand by the ratepayers.

Take the £200,000 museum. Just £10,000 came from the city council, along with the site. In its opening day coverage, the Herald of November 29, 1929, recorded that the rest came from "free-will offerings and that no adventitious aids, such as bazaars or art unions had been employed". Nearly half came from public donations, along with £50,000 from the Auckland Savings Bank and £37,500 from the Government.

The ratepayers were spared from extravagant rate increases when it came to Sir James' other projects too. Dr Bush notes how in December 1924 "the ratepayers were cajoled into endorsing a loan for £710,000 to carry out what was modestly described as 'by far the most important and ambitious scheme in the history of the city'." This involved widening Quay St and concreting several city streets, all "without any undue charge on the ratepayers".

Two years previously, Mr Hubbard's mayoral exemplar had decided a zoo at Western Springs would be a great idea so, once again, he had a ratepayers poll to seek approval for a £10,000 loan. He got it.

Mr Hubbard's advertisement ended with the statement that it had been "funded privately". Now there's an old idea for finishing the Eden Park Cathedral that Sir James would have backed. After a poll of ratepayers of course.