CONTROVERSIAL PROJECT: Work got under way on the new wastewater treatment plant in early November, despite the concerns of some councillors.PHOTO/FILE
Sucker punches
Mayor McDouall has come out swinging against councillors who wanted to call a special meeting about the sewerage scheme because, as they had not yet been sworn in, no one had lawful power to act. He then pointed out that, in the meantime, he had arranged a workshop. So, what lawful power did he have to do that?
But let's put the legal niceties aside for the real point that I want to make.
Affco and Tasman Tanning don't want to pay a major share of the sewerage treatment plant costs. So, being astute businesspeople, the Talley family, Affco's owners, have threatened to build their own plant.
That plant would create effluent that would have to be disposed of somehow. It is extremely unlikely that they would be allowed to discharge it into the Whanganui River. They could, perhaps, discharge to sea and that would entail an enormously expensive resource consent application with uncertain results and then equally prohibitive construction and operating costs.
Their suggested alternative is to discharge their "pure" effluent into the council sewer, where it would be mixed with human sewerage and require treatment as such. That would be back to square one, except that Talleys would now have to pay council trade waste fees as well as the running costs of their own plant. Smart thinking indeed!
The fact is that they have suckered the council and its officials and consultants into kowtowing to them.
So let's think about suckering:
I was absolutely staggered to read in the mayor's statement that the contract with Hawkins includes a "break fee" of $9000 a day! I can't find any provision for such a payment in NZ Standard 3910: Conditions of Contract for Building and Civil Engineering Construction, so presumably this is a special condition that has been written into this particular contract. I guess that this sucker punch was slipped into the contract in the rush to get it signed up before the election.
Who is going to be held accountable for that blunder?
STEPHEN PALMER
Whanganui
WWTP message
Mayor Hamish McDouall's Christmas message made one point quite clearly in the midst of his public admonition of some of our elected representatives on the District Council.
The Christmas message gives the appearance that his statements about revisiting the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP) after the election and due to the clearly expressed will of the voters, were simply political posturing. In fact, he appears to say that the new council had no choice or chance with the WWTP because the previous council had already done the deal just before the election, a time when they should not have been committing the city to any such controversial contract.
Of course, mayor McDouall was not the mayor of that previous council, only the deputy mayor.
So merry Christmas to all, and a happy debt-laden New Year.
K A BENFELL
Gonville
Not moving on
Mayor Hamish McDouall has said quite often, "We must put the past behind us and move on as a unified council" or words to that effect.
He doesn't seem to heed his own mantra in his Christmas message when he accuses many of his own councillors of disseminating misinformation in relation to the wastewater plant.
He should remember the majority of ratepayers voted in the Beyond 2030 team because they were dissatisfied with the way the council was committing the city to something perceived as unaffordable, hadn't properly investigated the possibility of restoring the old plant and hadn't properly investigated cheaper alternatives.
To sign off on a new $41 million contract only a few weeks before the new council took office was bad governance and unfortunate, and -- whether by good luck or design -- effectively prevented the 2030 team doing what it had been mandated to do: effect change and reduce costs.
Severance costs would have just been too great.
To describe the comments of a "junior Government official" on the wastewater issue as trivial and of no importance is utter nonsense and insulting. The person involved is an experienced engineer employed by the Department of Health and widely versed in many other councils' sewerage schemes. He should have been listened to, but minds were closed.
An agreement over charges with wet industries the Talley Group and Tasman Tanning has still not been reached. Some previous council negotiators were just not welcome at meetings, such was the impasse. This has changed, though, as some members of the 2030 group became involved in the talks.
If the wet industries are mainly out, as seems likely, the city has a plant more expensive and larger than necessary. Sludge will not be produced in great volume and the need for a dryer is questionable.
Many other questions remain unanswered.
My earnest hope is that the new plant is a success, works properly and comes in on budget with running costs as estimated. If not, the egg will not be on the 2030 team's faces but on the previous council. (Abridged)
RAY HUTCHISON
St John's Hill
Who's to blame?
I am surprised by G R Scown's response to my letter (December 9) in the December 22 Chronicle.
He suggests I lay the blame with the greenies regarding the Pike River mining disaster.
I will repeat, in part, for your benefit, Mr Scown, what I wrote: "The Pike River mining disaster would have to be the most disgusting demonstration of lack of any care or responsibility by any government, government department or corporate this country has witnessed".
I lay the blame at the feet of everybody involved, greenies included. And as the greenies got their way, it just goes to show the rest of the Wellington Wombles are a waste of time. We had a cash-strapped Aussie company running a mine, taking short cuts, and operating with dodgy gear.
So after the disaster we had everybody heading for cover, greenies included, with minimum consequences all round.
For the full story, google "Pike River Mine disaster".
I am not a greenie, nor do I support their party or policies, but I do support common sense, fair play, and justice for the victims and their families. It is now admitted by this government that they, at least, could have done more and will do so in the future. Let's hope.
A BARRON
Whanganui
Stand on land
New Zealand's UN delegation has taken a stand against the expansion of Israel's settlements and the displacement of the Palestinian occupants.
I must ask whether this stand will be taken on behalf of the Taranaki tribes who were robbed of 20 million acres and are all still displaced and unable to return to their homelands.
Sure, we have some Treaty settlements, just enough to seduce a younger generation into signing up, but nowhere near a fair and just compensation -- and bugger-all in the way of that most valuable of all assets, the land, te ukaipo, te turangawaewae, te papakainga. The very foundation of our Maori culture.
All of which raises the issue of the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People. We can hardly practise and uphold our culture if we can't go home. By this I mean go back and live there and gain sustenance, both physical and spiritual, from our turangawaewae. Yes, we all have shares in some incorporation and get a few dollars now and then. And we do have organisations with charitable status which try to maintain the culture. But it's all a far cry from the wealth and freedom our ancestors had in early 1840.
The colonials deemed the Maori culture to be "beastly communism" and vowed to destroy it. Modern government still holds on to this concept.
And it is now being driven by those who negotiated and signed those so-called settlements.
POTONGA NEILSON
Castlecliff
He lost an arm and a leg in a crash that killed three friends.