Ice rink costs in­ex­cus­able

Kapi-Mana News - - OPINION -

I have never con­trib­uted to KapiMana News be­fore, but ‘‘Ice rink makes $100,000 loss’’ (Novem­ber 19) ran­kled me and I be­lieve some­thing needs to be said.

I am ap­palled by the barefaced ar­ro­gance of the mayor and Porirua City Coun­cil that they know­ingly ran an event that would in­cur a sig­nif­i­cant loss and then tried to jus­tify it with a lame com­ment like ‘‘our kids de­serve a chance to go ice skat­ing’’.

Al­most with what ap­pears to be an af­ter­thought, they say they wanted to ‘‘show what is here as well’’. It de­fies be­lief. The coun­cil has a re­spon­si­bil­ity to all ratepay­ers to use our con­tri­bu­tions for run­ning the city wisely. It’s called fis­cal re­spon­si­bil­ity. To run an event like this and then have the gall to say they are con­sid­er­ing do­ing it again is an abuse of their po­si­tion. Is it any won­der our rates are so high!

We all ac­cept there must be some ‘‘pub­lic good’’ spend­ing that fails to re­cover costs.

We have the pool, Arena, skate parks, hol­i­day pro­grammes, [Fes­ti­val of the] El­e­ments etc for that.

Those places and events ben­e­fit ev­ery­one, pro­vid­ing a pos­i­tive fo­cal point for the wider com­mu­nity.

The ice rink just doesn’t de­liver on that front and should be aban­doned to the ‘‘been there, done that’’ bas­ket.

Porirua is di­verse and the coun­cil need to ac­cept it can’t be ev­ery­thing to every­body and should con­cen­trate on value-for­money ac­tiv­i­ties.

To say ‘‘our kids de­serve it’’ is a very weak ar­gu­ment and one Mr Leggett should be em­bar­rassed to see in print.

Our kids de­serve food on the ta­ble, an ed­u­ca­tion, a com­puter in ev­ery home, play­grounds, and healthy wa­ter­ways where they can fish and swim.

Just think how that ex­tra $100,000 could have im­proved or ad­vanced some of those ar­eas.

Ev­ery school hol­i­days the kids grav­i­tate to the shops to hang out with friends, go to the movies, the skate park, pool etc.

Holly Thomp­son (Cham­ber of Com­merce) should look out the win­dow next school hol­i­days. The buzz will be there and it won’t be be­cause of an ice skat­ing rink.

The coun­cil needs to stop hiding be­hind ‘‘the kids’’ to jus­tify its bad fi­nan­cial de­ci­sions and start act­ing like a busi­ness, not a wel­fare scheme.

At­tract more busi­ness and the com­mu­nity/so­cial ben­e­fits will fol­low. in­stance. How­ever, insurance com­pa­nies are un­likely to pay up if the fence was rot­ten, and there is usu­ally an ex­cess to pay. Alan Knowl­s­ley replies:

If ei­ther or both own­ers are in­sured for dam­age to their prop­er­ties, an insurance claim can be made by each owner for their share of the re­pairs.

It is still nec­es­sary to sort out those costs with the neigh­bour so the in­sur­ers can con­sider what the re­pair costs are for each owner and pay any amount ow­ing un­der their pol­icy.

They will also take into ac­count the state of the fence be­fore the storm.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.