Submission on 10-year-plan for Christchurch

The MANA Movement is strongly opposed to the council’s proposals to sell the city’s assets to meet a projected budget shortfall in the draft 10 year plan. This is one of the most serious issues raised in the draft plan and is the focus of our submission.

The proposal is anti-democratic

Despite the city seeking consultation on the 10 year plan which includes radical plans to privatise the city’s assets to meet a projected budget shortfall there has been no direct council contact with household or citizens to inform them of this these proposals or seek their informed feedback. There has been nothing sent direct to households to explain the situation and engage them in a genuine public consultation. Instead it seems the council wants to keep city residents uninformed and disengaged from the process.

We propose the council take a step back and engage Christchurch citizens directly in these critical decisions.

The proposal is economically dumb

New Zealanders have had plenty of experience with privatisation and part-privatisations and these have been marvellous for the super wealthy but disastrous for people and families on low and middle incomes.

Asset-stripping the council will deprive the city of income from these assets to help offset future rate increases. It will also mean these key strategic assets will not be able to be developed in a way which supports the development of Christchurch as moulded by its citizens. It will progressively shift the city from a people’s city to a corporate city.

The proposal will grow inequality

If Christchurch City Council is to sell assets or part-privatise the city’s assets then the impact will be the same as with the policies introduced by Labour Finance Minister Roger Douglas from 1984. Those neo-liberal policies led to the enrichment of a tiny few while hundreds of thousands of New Zealanders were pushed into poverty. The disastrous legacy of those policies is with us today with a quarter of New Zealand children growing up in poverty.

Selling the city’s assets will increase inequality in Christchurch. That will be welcomed by many of the wealthy but will be a heavier burden for families already struggling.

The proposal is unacceptable

There are positive alternatives to selling assets to meet projected budget shortfalls. It’s clear the arrangements made with the government for the rebuilding of capital projects will have to be negotiated. The government says it doesn’t want to renegotiate this arrangement but is always prepared to renegotiate agreements it has with big private corporates such as the owners of the owners of the Bluff Aluminium smelter on the price it pays for electricity.

Our mayor needs to take up the fight on behalf of the people of Christchurch.

Our mayor and councillors are there to represent the people of Christchurch – not the interests of the National government and its wealthy backers.

MANA wishes to be heard in person to back up this submission with an oral submission.

We look forward to hearing from you.

ENDS

© Scoop Media