Crying tears of bronze,
With Anzac Day looming, the future of the Citizens’ War Memorial remains bleak. Dominic Harris examines the political inertia that has left the memorial behind closed doors.
In a corner of Cathedral Square sits the figure of a woman on a cold, stone block, her legs crossed and head bowed. Symbolising the mothers of the Empire grieving for their sons, she strikes a forlorn pose at the foot of the Citizens’ War Memorial, Christchurch’s monument to those lost serving their country.
Like those around her – St George the protector to her left, Youth to the right, Peace and Justice at her shoulders and an angel brandishing a sword above them – she looks tired.
Her bronze is corroded, her robes leaching green into the dirty white Portland stone around her, and she overlooks a forest of weeds and shoulder-high grass.
But perhaps her arms are most telling. Outstretched, they represent an air of both resignation and sacrifice.
The imagery was a deliberate construct of sculptor William Trethewey, whose spectacular monument was unveiled in 1937, and its symbolism echoes down the ages.
But today, more than 80 years on, that resignation is mirrored by a simmering frustration verging on anger for the modern guardians of remembrance.
For seven long years the cenotaph, a category-one heritagelisted landmark regarded as New Zealand’s finest public monument, has been off-limits. Though largely undamaged by the February 2011 earthquake, it is hidden behind a fence to keep the public safely away from the shattered cathedral nearby.
And for nearly as long the city’s Returned and Services Association (RSA) has pushed for a new home for it so people can properly pay their respects.
But their proposal to move it to Cranmer Square is mired in bureaucracy, a victim of political hand-wringing.
Action promised months ago by the city council has produced little beyond an assessment report, leaving Wednesday’s Anzac Day service to once again be held in front of a makeshift plywood memorial.
It appears no decisions will be made until another working group is set up, this one a joint venture between the Christ Church Cathedral Reinstatement Trust, which oversees the cathedral’s rebuild, and the Church Property Trustees (CPT), owners of the land the memorial sits on.
For Pete Dawson, the RSA’s president, the situation is beyond unacceptable.
‘‘Currently we have a monument that was built to commemorate the sacrifice of 4398 Canterbury men and women who gave their lives for our freedom throughout World War I that has been left in a derelict state in what looks to be a bomb site with absolute disrespect. We find this despicable.’’
The RSA first mooted the idea of a permanent move to Cranmer Square in 2012 after learning the council-owned memorial was on land needed for a then-proposed contemporary cathedral.
Its location in Cathedral Square was problematic even before the earthquake, Dawson said, the site unable to accommodate the thousands attending services and becoming dangerous for the increasingly frail veterans.
The Anzac Day dawn service of 2011 was held in Hagley Park. While grateful to the council’s for ensure it happened following the tragedy weeks earlier, Dawson felt the hugeness of the site ‘‘dwarfed’’ the occasion, and each Anzac Day service since has been at Cranmer Square.
The little park is arguably the ideal spot for the memorial. Just a stone’s throw from the RSA’s Armagh St headquarters, it was a transit camp during both world wars, a rallying point for the Canterbury Mounted Rifles and the Canterbury Regiment before they went to Lyttelton to ship out.
Little happened after the RSA first proposed the move and the RSA started campaigning again in March last year, keen for the council to see it as a flagship project to mark this year’s centenary of the end of hostilities on Armistice Day, November 11.
A working group – comprising the council, the CPT, Heritage New Zealand, Land Information NZ and the RSA – was set up, meeting at regular intervals.
But after months of little progress RSA leaders asked to address councillors directly.
At a council meeting on September 28 they said Cranmer Square offered a more fitting location for ‘‘quiet and sombre reflection’’ and that they were worried the memorial could be offlimits for another decade while the cathedral is rebuilt.
In a motion approved mayor Lianne Dalziel, the council asked staff to ‘‘urgently explore temporary and permanent options’’ for relocation, ordering them to report back by the end of November.
But Dawson claims little, if anything, has happened since.
Speaking to The Press last week he said: ‘‘To our knowledge that report has never seen the light of day. We don’t even know if it’s been written.
‘‘Every time we meet with council management we are told there have been delays.
‘‘We have now got to the stage where we believe there is a view within council that they do not wish to follow through.’’
Meetings since October have dried up, with just two or three since the promise of the report, Dawson said.
The RSA met another interested party, the publiclyfunded planning agency Regenerate Christchurch, before Christmas but again have heard nothing since.
The CPT, at least, has been vocal about its support for the RSA’s proposal, and Heritage New Zealand also backs a move from Cathedral Square.
In desperation, the RSA and CPT on April 10 requested another meeting with council management. RSA leaders have also met with Greater Christchurch Regeneration Minister Megan Woods, as well as representatives of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC), which is helping set up the trust managing the cathedral rebuild.
On Tuesday a meeting took place – and a report presented to the RSA and the working group.
It is understood the document, reportedly seven pages long and written in February, assesses the effects on the heritage values of any relocation of the memorial, analysing options of keeping it in Cathedral Square or moves to Cranmer or Latimer squares.
Details are scant – the council refused to release it, saying it will be an add-on to a report for council to discuss on an unknown date before it can be made public.
It is also not clear if the report is the one that should have been submitted in November.
But it is thought the council has a recommended location – Latimer Square, a kilometre from the RSA office on the other side of the city centre.
Dawson said he found the report ‘‘biased and unbalanced’’.
‘‘I just believe that it’s predetermined for Latimer Square,’’ he said. ‘‘It talks about tangible and intangible impacts – I asked what are the intangible impacts and no one could explain it. If they’re not explained they shouldn’t be in a report.’’
What is clear is that authorities involved in decision-making have a new umbrella organisation they can cede responsibility to and hide behind – one that, seven years after the memorial was first hidden away, is yet to be fully set up.
Key members of the working group are reluctant to give views on the memorial’s future.
The Press asked the council a series of questions, including why the report ordered in September was delayed, whether it was ever written, who leads the working group, why communication with the RSA apparently dried up and why discussions have dragged on so long.
Each it flatly refused to answer, a council spokeswoman saying they would have to be addressed under the Official Information Act.
Requests to speak with the mayor and the council officer leading its management of the memorial also received no reply.
The spokeswoman said Dalziel has spoken with Dawson and ‘‘they both agree that Anzac Day is for the commemoration of what happened 100 years ago’’.
In a written statement Brent Smith, the council’s head of parks, said the council ‘‘cares about and acknowledges’’ the significance of the memorial but was ‘‘waiting for the Christ Church Cathedral Reinstatement Trust/Church Property Trustees joint venture to be established’’.
‘‘The joint venture will be responsible for delivering the project, which will include managing the site itself. Work on establishing the joint venture is progressing.’’
Responses from others offer little more than platitudes.
Regenerate Christchurch chief executive Ivan Iafeta said the organisation would like ‘‘an outcome that’s satisfactory for all parties’’.
Megan Woods was unavailable to speak with The Press but in a written response said she has met RSA representatives once and has spoken briefly with them by phone, and has ‘‘commissioned advice from the DPMC’’ over her powers.
She said: ‘‘My focus is on ensuring that the reinstatement project on the cathedral progresses and that the citizens’ war memorial is protected from any site construction.
‘‘This is a temporary measure for the life of the project, but will not be able to be confirmed and verified until the proposed joint venture is in place.’’
Woods said ‘‘it will be the council, the RSA and the people of Christchurch who will ultimately decide where it should go – both temporarily and permanently’’.
For now, the RSA and the veterans who meet up in its bar for a pint and to share old stories are in the dark about how they can pay their respects to their forebears in the future.
While the working group gets ready to conjure up more reports and hold endless committee meetings, there is one thing all parties do agree on – that Anzac Day itself will be for remembrance.
Like last year, the CPT will open the gates to allow RSA members to lay wreaths at the memorial for the fallen. The RSA says it will not let politics overshadow the day, but afterwards will petition the public for support.
Dawson accepts the memorial problem could be regarded as a minor issue while roads and houses need fixing, and is keenly aware many in Christchurch are still suffering.
‘‘But we live today as we do because of the sacrifice of those people we are trying to commemorate,’’ he said.
‘‘On Anzac Day there will be 4397 white crosses and one Star Of David laid out in Cranmer Square.
‘‘We wonder what the ghosts of our soldiers that those crosses represent are thinking, that another year has gone by where we are forced to remember them at a temporary plywood cenotaph.
‘‘We have to wonder how much longer their memory will be disrespected and forgotten until someone takes the initiative to put this right.’’