Bill Dalton

Last night I had the pleasure of attending the “Sponsors Night” for the Hawke’s Bay A & P Mercedes Wine Awards.

It was a great night – the wines were magnificent, the venue at Elephant Hill Winery was world class – it made me feel very privileged to live in this part of the world. I must say though that the last round of reds was probably unnecessary.

This afternoon the Napier City and Hastings District Councils are having a combined meeting followed by a dinner – at Councillors own expense, I hasten to add. I have to say I am really looking forward to a frank and open discussion about the future of our region and in particular a review of the collaborative projects that are already under way and an investigation of where other efficiencies can be found.

Clearly there is a completely different view of what constitutes a prudent financial structure, between Napier and Hastings Councils.

Napier, which in recent years has benefitted from strong and conservative financial management, prides itself on having just $12 million of external debt. Lawrence Yule is quoted in this morning’s Dominion as saying Hastings debt is likely to rise to $101 million over the next few years but that doesn’t matter because Hastings has got plenty of assets.

Debt is not serviced by assets and ratepayers don’t pay their rates with assets.

Debt is serviced with cash and cash comes from the ratepayers. So, great dollops of debt incurred by a Council will have a direct affect on ratepayers.

But the Councils need to talk more and today is a good start. I want to know why, at a time when amalgamation is a possibility, Hastings is blazing on incurring large amounts of debt to build new reception centres and sports parks in the middle of nowhere.

It seems to me that if Lawrence and his team are serious about amalgamation, they would be aware that debt levels are going to be a major issue.

But I’m going in with an open mind and to listen to the views of the Hastings councillors. And just to prove I am open to good argument, I watched Q & A on Sunday and found myself in full agreement with Richard Prebble.

Who would have thought?

You are probably sick of the amalgamation debate already but sorry, local body amalgamation is going to be the hot topic of conversation up to the 2010 elections and probably beyond.

My great hope is that we can have this debate on an informed and intelligent level, rather than the emotional clap-trap we are currently having.

Regional Councillor Neil Kirton claims amalgamation will save ratepayers 5 to 10 million dollars (now there’s a range). When asked to back that figure up with detail there was a deafening silence. Why? Because he guessed – he made it up – he plucked the figures from the same air that pigs fly around in.

Mayor Yule says there will be savings in the short term but long term savings are unlikely.

Mayor Arnott says there will be no short term savings but long term we might see benefits.

You see – no one knows. No work has been done. No one has done a cost benefit analysis. How can we possibly discuss such a large issue without the appropriate background work being done.

Now we’ve got Murray Douglas, the head of the Chamber of Commerce and a five minute resident of Hawke’s Bay, not only telling us what should be done but when we should do it. The mind boggles at the arrogance of this fellow.

This debate is one we need to have but it needs to be conducted on an informed basis.

And it’s not all about money. If it was I would be very much in the anti team because there is no evidence internationally that such amalgamations save ratepayers a penny.

The debate should centre on whether a regional focus would be better for the future of Hawke’s Bay rather than the current fragmented focus.

And we also need to look at those things that we are currently doing on a regional basis and ask what more we could be doing right now.

So, lets get on and debate the real issues backed by facts and knowledge and we will get an appropriate outcome for Hawke’s Bay.

Much is being made of the fact that we are coming out of recession and frankly the outlook is better. But we need to consider what “coming out of recession” means.

It means we are no longer going backwards – the economy is no longer in reverse gear. But that doesn’t mean we have found first gear. Simply not going backwards is not good enough. We need to find the right gear to move forward.

Recession is an important part of the economic cycle. Companies are forced to get leaner, meaner and more efficient and therefore well positioned to participate in the worldwide recovery. But there are still some areas that really concern me. Internationally there is still an enormous amount of greed obvious at the top level in companies. The recession does not seem to have had any effect on the huge remuneration packages being demanded and paid to senior management.

In the USA the problem remains. Here in Australasia it has got worse. The head of Telstra earning $16m – the head of the CBA bank getting $11m. Think about that. Ralph Norris, who is a very good Manager admittedly, goes to work each week where he is directed by a board of directors, supported by experts in every field, and runs the bank. For that he is paid $220,000 per week. That’s right, $220,000 per week.

In New Zealand we pay the head of Telecom in excess of $7m per year. In a country that sends its front line police offers in to face armed offenders and expects those officers to be happy to earn 55 to 70 thousand dollars a year, we pay the head of Telecom $140,000 per week.

Some of you, by now will be starting to think I have been converted to socialism but that is far from the truth. I just believe there needs to be some fairness in the remuneration levels different members of society receive.

We expect our Doctors and Nurses to work their butts off – and they do – in under-funded and under-resourced institutions like the HB Hospital. The Doctors work incredible hours for a pittance considering the years of training they have done and nurses earn less per month that the head of Telecom does before smoko on a Monday.

I don’t know about you – but I think somehow, these excesses need to be addressed, if the economy is going to move forward.

Listening to Martin Sneddon this morning, talking about the Rugby World Cup in 2011 reminded me of the lady, just a week or so ago, who was raving on to me about Rugby and particularly the Rugby World Cup.

This vitriolic spinster seemed to think Rugby was the root cause of all New Zealand’s ills and she stated she was sick and tired of hearing about the World Cup and the enormous cost that New Zealand was going to incur to host it.

Let me put this poor demented soul right.

The Rugby World Cup, to be held in New Zealand in 2011, is the biggest promotional opportunity that this country has ever had. It will put New Zealand on the world stage in a way no other event has ever done. The tens of millions of dollars that the government is putting in to this project is not an expense, it is an investment. It is an investment in our future and the wellbeing of generations to come.

Here in New Zealand we look around at our magnificent scenery and say of course we are a tourist destination, just look at what we have got to offer. But the fact remains that there is a very large number of people in the world who have no idea that we exist. Even in reasonably affluent countries – the United States is a good example – where interestingly Rugby is one of the fastest growing sports – in many parts of the States they have no idea where New Zealand is. Most have heard of it but many think it is part of England or by South Africa or somewhere near Australia.

The Rugby World Cup is a fantastic opportunity for New Zealand to raise its profile in the world.

And don’t forget the benefits all the domestic activity around the Cup brings to your community. At a time of high unemployment, the building of new stands, replacing lighting, upgrading of the infrastructure needed for such an enormous event, all provide much needed jobs for Kiwis.

This Rugby World Cup will benefit New Zealand in direct relation to the effort each and every one of us puts into supporting it. So lets get behind those who are working so hard to bring this event to New Zealand – it is very much in the interests of all of us to do so.

Last night I had the pleasure of being part of a panel, discussing the local body structure of Hawke’s Bay, the proposed local body structure of Hawke’s Bay and other issues that are contentious here in the Bay.

The function was hosted by Auckland University and the questioners were 100 odd young geography students. And boy – they didn’t take any prisoners. With the honesty of youth they certainly didn’t spare the panellists.

As part of one answer I explained that whilst I am relaxed about Hastings building a sports park and that, of course it will add to the region’s sporting facility stock, it could not reasonably be called “The Regional Sports Park” because there was not a regional consultation process undertaken before the project was begun.

My argument remains that if the region was to build another sporting facility, and the region was going to be asked to assist with funding, then the region should have been consulted as to the siting of the park, the scope of the park and what sports should be included. For instance, Napier might have argued that a competition swimming facility was a greater need for the region that a Velodrome – who knows?

Hastings District Councillor Mick Lester took me to task. He explained at length that the Hastings District Council undertook extensive consultation with sporting codes across the Bay before deciding on the make-up of the Park.

Of course you did Mick. You dangled the promise of world class facilities in front of these sporting codes and naturally they were enthusiastic. I wonder if they would have been as enthusiastic if they had been informed of the cost of moving to and maintaining their presence in such a facility.

And what about Rugby League? They haven’t got a home at all. Could it have been an idea to do something for that sport?

As we move towards a more regional approach to decision making, we need to look to those examples of regional co-operation that are working. And one is the Omarunui Landfill committee. Run out of Hastings, chaired by a Napier City Councillor – a committee that is not interested in proving points – a committee that simply works for the region.