DU­PLI­CA­TION?

Rotorua Review - - YOUR LOCAL NEWS -

The ar­ti­cle your pa­per ran on Septem­ber 13 on page 3, ‘New $30m Spa prom­ises lo­cal jobs and money.’

Whilst it is very en­cour­ag­ing to see the con­fi­dence in Ro­torua’s growth and econ­omy I won­der if in the case of the above, this is du­pli­ca­tion of what QE Health is presently do­ing. As one who has noth­ing but the high­est praise for QE and its unique point of dif­fer­ence in how it pro­vides its ser­vices, I won­der if the trust would not be bet­ter ad­vised to join hands with QE rather than po­ten­tially com­pete against them?

Surely if this was to hap­pen this would be a win-win for all con­cerned, Ro­torua in­cluded.

In my view it would be a great shame to see the his­toric past of QE and its place in our holis­tic his­tory dis­ad­van­taged.

I think there would be more to be gained for not only Ro­torua but users of such a fa­cil­ity if both en­ti­ties were to merge their re­spec­tive strengths and abil­i­ties.

Kevin Jor­dan

The de­ba­cle that is the Hemo round­about sculp­ture, lies squarely on the fail­ure of coun­cil and project man­age­ment to ac­tu­ally ‘man­age’ the project.

A fig­ure of $570,000 has been bandied about but coun­cil is still ‘‘con­sid­er­ing all op­tions’’.

How can a project be ac­cu­rately costed when the con­trac­tor has not been con­firmed, though we do know that the work will need to be sub­con­tracted out to a Cana­dian firm be­cause the ‘‘spe­cial­ist en­gi­neer­ing and con­struc­tion meth­ods re­quired aren’t avail­able in New Zealand’’.

That won’t be cheap. One also has to won­der why wood carv­ing ex­perts were as­signed to de­sign a steel sculp­ture in the first place.

Also, how can the project have been ap­proved when the fi­nal cost is yet to be de­ter­mined and to­tal fund­ing yet to be as­sured, ex­cept of course, if coun­cil al­ways in­tended to ‘un­der­write’ the lot, ie ratepay­ers to cover all but the $200,000 from NZTA.?

Based on past ex­pe­ri­ence, ratepay­ers can safely as­sume the fin­ished item will cost much more than the bud­geted $570,000 es­pe­cially given the out­sourc­ing of its con­struc­tion.

In­stead of what will un­doubt­edly be a very ex­pen­sive block­age of ‘sight lines’ at the round­about, can I sug­gest that we have a mud pie as the cen­tre piece, af­ter all it would have much more sig­nif­i­cance for Ro­torua than an Olympic Flame look-alike and would def­i­nitely come in un­der bud­get which would be a first for coun­cil.

Paddi Hodgkiss

pro­vid­ing emer­gency hous­ing there are pos­i­tive and prac­ti­cal so­lu­tions avail­able. Start by open­ing the wait­ing list to quan­tify real need, re­search­ing low-cost op­tions and re­vis­ing the hous­ing by­laws.

One so­lu­tion be­ing de­vel­oped in Hong Kong is to ne­go­ti­ate with de­vel­op­ers and lease suit­able land on a tem­po­rary ba­sis at to­ken rates. The Coun­cil of So­cial Ser­vice wants to build con­tainer homes with NGO part­ners and of­fer af­ford­able ac­com­mo­da­tion to 2-5 peo­ple per unit on the tem­po­rary hous­ing list.

When we built Abu Dhabi Uni­ver­sity we housed hun­dreds of work­ers in con­tainer homes. There are other pre­fab­ri­cated and multi-story homes cus­tom­ized by cli­mate be­ing used in Hol­land and Bri­tain to tem­po­rar­ily house fam­i­lies.

So, in­stead of hound­ing the vic­tims of home­less­ness with tres­pass no­tices, can we please rekin­dle our Kiwi hu­man­i­tar­i­an­ism and of­fer our fel­low cit­i­zens a ba­sic right; af­ford­able shel­ter.

Reynold Macpher­son

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from New Zealand

© PressReader. All rights reserved.