Letters to the Editor
There is a significant problem with the structure of local government when it comes to Hamilton city.
Hamilton ratepayers pay for the financing and operating expenses of what should be considered as regional assets - the likes of FMG Stadium, Seddon Park cricket ground, Claudelands Events Centre, Hamilton Gardens and now the new Regional Theatre.
All of these substantial capital investments and consequential indebtedness (loans) as well as the operating losses are funded by Hamilton City Council.
Every ticket or entry to these wonderful assets is subsidised by Hamilton ratepayers.
Those who live outside of the city boundary don't bear any of the losses incurred or are responsible for any of the indebtedness.
Surely regional assets should be funded and paid for by the Waikato Regional Council so that the costs can be shared equitably by everyone who lives in the region and not just by the citizens who live in Hamilton city.
There are so many ratepayers who live in the city whose sole income is either: the pension; a benefit; or who are paid the minimum wage who just cannot comprehend a rate increase above 10% or fathom out how the HCC has gone so wrong so quickly.
In the HCC 10-year financial plan for 2021 to 2031 the rate increases year on year were around 7% year on year.
What has happened? Surely this is a matter that deserves greater scrutiny. No one can say that “we now have three waters” because HCC has always had three waters.
Ian Bridge, Hamilton (abridged) Editor’s note:
The Waikato Regional Theatre won’t be fully paid for or owned by Hamilton City Council. The council contributed $25m towards the capital cost and the rest was secured by Momentum Waikato, a project history states. The theatre will be owned by the Waikato Regional Property Trust and run by an operating company. The council has committed to an annual $1.1m maintenance budget for 20 years.
As a past resident of Hamilton I enjoy reading the Waikato Times when we are visiting the city.
I read the report on page three of the edition of March 6 about the council debate regarding roading upgrades.
At the end you listed those councillors who voted in favour of a resolution and those who voted against it.
All except one had nothing added to the names but you saw fit to state the representation of the Māori councillor.
Why was he singled out for special treatment? I thought that all councillors and for that matter all citizens are equal. Am I mistaken?
Allan Gough, Geraldine Editor’s note:
Maangai Maaori are not councillors, they are appointees on council committees to give the “voice of Māori”, according to Hamilton City Council. Hence the label was added to differentiate from elected councillors.
It seems ironic Mayor Paula Southgate is calling for an urgent water rethink (Waikato Times, March 2, 2024) when we had a fine workable model in the last government’s Three Waters Reforms.
She states that this “entity model for Three Waters Reform was unpalatable, with the removal of all assets from council”.
Mayor Southgate knows Labour’s Three Waters Reform was not an “asset grab”, as labelled by the disinformation campaigns of the National Party and others.
Councils retained shares and the ability to elect boards of governance.
And because the reform programme attempted to honour Te Tiriti commitments it became subject to the most vile, racist attacks.
What is unpalatable about a reform designed to save ratepayers from the massive rates hikes otherwise needed by councils to fix urgent and hugely expensive water infrastructure?
So, now we are faced with those huge hikes, along with all the other cost increases announced by this new Government elected to fix the cost of living crisis.
And Mayor Southgate explains in a letter (Waikato Times, March 7, 2024) everything she has agreed to cut, including community grants and cat de-sexing programmes (which won’t help our native birds).
So all of it is sacrificed to meet ballooning costs because councils have to find the money to fix urgent water infrastructure.
It is time Mayor Southgate, along with all the other mayors and councillors across the country, apologised for standing so adamantly against the Three Waters reforms.
If our community and business leaders had had the strength to support this programme against the naysayers, the racists and the conspiracy theorists, it would have set an example and we may not have lost this opportunity for a visionary and cost-effective reform.
Privatisation will be the next agenda for water.
Watch this space.
Paul Judge, Hamilton (abridged)
Ever since David Seymour stated his callous intention of cutting school lunches to needy school children, it seemed to me he was the very caricature of a modern day character from Dickens.
I thought of mean-spirited Scrooge.
But perhaps better is Mr Bumble the Beadle. I wonder how many readers will know this character?
Mr Bumble took great pleasure in denying food to Oliver Twist. Just look at the smirk on Seymour's face as he announced his lunch cutting policy.
Where is his and this Government's shame for the actions they continue to take that hurt the most vulnerable in our society the most?
They are not bumbling though - they know what they are doing.
Russell Armitage, Hamilton
Want to share your thoughts?