Mothers weep in tragic court case
A converted Aucklander and a former Wellingtonian offer polarising views on living in the capital, following reports many skilled workers don’t want to move here. Damian George reports.
The ‘‘coolest little capital’’, or a money-draining big city with crumbling infrastructure? Wellingtonians have not been short of an opinion on the subject, following a report quoting private sector representatives saying they were having major trouble attracting skilled workers to the city.
The reality is probably somewhere in the middle, but debate on social media since the report was publicised in a Stuff article a week ago has drawn out some polarising views.
The report detailed gripes over expensive housing, perceptions of significant infrastructure problems, and stalled projects such as the drawn-out Let’s Get Wellington Moving transport programme.
With the economic impact of the coronavirus pandemic also taking hold, industry leaders called on the council to help retain and attract skilled workers and jobs, and promote the city in a positive light.
The findings certainly resonated with returning Kiwi Gemma Freeman, 37, whose family chose Christchurch over Wellington when relocating from Portland, in the United States, because of Covid-19.
Freeman and husband Rollo Wenlock, 40, lived in Wellington for 18 years before moving to Portland with their two children in 2018, to help Wenlock set up an office for his video software startup Wipster.
The biggest factor in their decision to overlook Wellington on their return to New Zealand, Freeman said, was the cost and quality of housing.
‘‘It was so expensive and, in our minds, so unappealing,’’ she said.
‘‘Even though we both like Wellington, the houses cost so much money, and they are not that big, not well insulated, and you often have to park on the street.’’
The couple sold their Kilbirnie house while in Portland and later bought a house in Huntsbury, Christchurch. The four-bedroom house cost $735,000, with a comparable house in Wellington in similar proximity to the central city costing over $1 million, Freeman said.
Wellington’s weather and Wenlock’s family connections in Christchurch also played a part in the decision, ‘‘but the single biggest thing was the quality of housing’’.
Freeman is a freelance copywriter and can work remotely, while Wenlock will probably travel to Wellington once a fortnight to work at Wipster’s other office.
But another start-up founder, 27-year-old Mike Lovegrove, who moved to Wellington from Auckland, said he ‘‘struggled to relate’’ to the report’s findings.
Lovegrove started JRNY, a company that helps people choose insurance policies, in Auckland in 2016, but moved to Wellington the following year.
Earlier this year, he closed his Auckland office and moved the company to Wellington fulltime.
Lovegrove said he moved to Wellington for the networking opportunities he felt Auckland lacked.
‘‘I just got the impression that in Auckland, the attitude was, ‘You’re doing something, good luck’, whereas in Wellington it was, ‘You’re doing something, how can we help?’
‘‘People are very receptive to helping people achieve their goals and not expecting anything in return. It was quite quick to get established here.’’
Creative HQ, WellingtonNZ, and various investors had been initially helpful, he said.
Asked about professionals in their late 20s to early 40s reportedly not wanting to move to Wellington, Lovegrove said that was surprising.
‘‘I just struggle to relate to that. Wellington is ranked one of the world’s most liveable cities.
‘‘It’s a cool city, it’s the capital, there are lots of cool cafes. I think Wellington has a lot going for it.’’
Lovegrove never considered things like infrastructure and delayed projects when choosing Wellington, and said public transport was better than in Auckland.
He lives in Island Bay, about a 20-minute bus ride from his central city office. However, the renter,who is looking to buy, said housing was now more expensive in Wellington than it was in Auckland. ‘‘The much-talked-about light rail, that’s long overdue. You look at cities like Amsterdam, Melbourne, Copenhagen – everything flows.’’ ‘‘Free public transport. When we had that [during the coronavirus lockdown], that was really good. Things flowed a lot easier and smoother.’’ ‘‘Better transport from the eastern suburbs. Spending half an hour in peak traffic is not that fun.’’ ‘‘Housing supply. When I came here [from England] two years ago, I found it very difficult to find houses in the first place, because so many people were looking in the same bracket.’’ ‘‘Probably better public transport. I like the idea of the train [light rail] to the airport.’’ ‘‘Widely available public housing through the city council – think about all of the people looking for affordable housing.’’
In a small courtroom in Palmerston North, two mothers wept.
One cried as she stood, telling the court about the everlasting pain she feels after the life of her best friend – her toddler son – was stolen by a teenager dangerously driving a motorcycle.
The other sat, crying into tissues as she waited to learn what would happen to her son – the motorcycle rider. The rider, 18, appeared in the Youth Court yesterday to learn what punishment he would get, having earlier admitted dangerous driving causing injury and death.
Judge Lance Rowe gave Stuff permission to report from the hearing, but Youth Court suppression orders prohibit the publication of the names of the toddler and the motorcycle rider, amid other identifying details.
The offences took place at 6.50pm on September 27 on the walking and cycling path between Palmerston North and Longburn. A family was out for a bicycle ride to celebrate the end of the school term and impending daylight saving. The father had the toddler on a seat on his bicycle, with the mother and other children on their own bikes.
The rider was also on the pathway, on a motocross bike. The bike was unregistered and had no light, and the rider had no motorcycle licence. He came across the family while going between 50kmh and 62kmh, avoiding the mother at the front but hitting the father.
The toddler was thrown from his seat and the father was dragged by the motocross bike. The father suffered broken bones in his face, wrist and leg, while the toddler’s injuries – facial fractures, cuts and severe brain damage – were so bad there was no chance of survival.
The toddler died in his mother’s arms, his father holding his hand, at 1.30am the day after the crash.
Reading her victim impact statement, the toddler’s mother said the crash was a ‘‘stupid and avoidable’’ act that created every mother’s worst nightmare. She had since lived with anger, denial and unbearable pain caused by heartache since the crash. Her son was the sweetest boy, always happy and a joy to raise. ‘‘I was his best friend and he was mine.’’
He had only spent one night away from his mother since he was born, but was now gone forever. Her son’s heart was still beating as he lay on the pathway after the crash, making her think he would survive.
It was not fair her husband was hurt and her child killed, yet the rider was fine, she said.
The rider’s youth advocate, Peter Brosnahan, spoke to the victims’ family directly, saying the rider felt anguish and grief for the tragedy he caused. The rider had shown good and bad judgment that day. He refused an offer of a beer after work from his boss because he wanted to be clear-headed for riding his motorcycle. But riding in dim light without a light on a walkway was not wise.
The judge said the rider had never been in trouble with police and had no alcohol or drug problems.
The offences were marked on the rider’s record and he was disqualified from driving for a year. He was also ordered to do 100 hours of community work, be under Oranga Tamariki supervision until he turns 19 and to pay $8800 reparation.