23 December 2004

Ashburton District Council is proposing a liquor ban for the central business district of Ashburton to address problems with drinking, damage and disorder in this area.  Consultation on the proposed liquor ban will take place until the 25 February 2005 and the public is encouraged to make a submission on this. 

A public meeting has also been scheduled for Monday 14 February at 7.30pm in the Council Chambers at 5 Baring Sqaure West, Ashburton to discuss the proposed ban.

The Council has previously received complaints from the community about vandalism, damage to property, littering and disorder associated with drinking in public places in Ashburton.  As a result of these complaints a Council Working Group was set up to look into these problems and assess whether a liquor ban would help resolve this.  As part of this assessment the Council also looked at whether other actions, apart from the introduction of a liquor ban, could address these problems. 

The working group considered that the introduction of a liquor ban in central Ashburton would be an effective way of addressing problems associated with vandalism and disorder, but also recommended that the Council consider taking other action such as increased enforcement and publicity of problems, increased video surveillance of problem areas and discussions with other agencies involved in community safety issues.  The Council will consult on whether the community supports such actions as part of the 2005 Annual Plan process.

The Council is proposing that the liquor ban be introduced from 9pm to 7am, 7 days a week in the area bounded by Park Street, Cass Street, Kermode Street and Wills Streets.  Under the liquor ban, people would not be allowed to consume alcohol or carry unopened containers of alcohol in public places inside the ban area.  People who are transporting unopened alcohol within the area would not be affected by the ban.   The liquor ban would not apply in privately owned areas or in areas where there is a liquor license, such as an outdoor area associated with a cafe. 

If the liquor ban were to be introduced, the Police would be responsible for enforcing the liquor ban in Ashburton.  Under the Local Government Act 2002, the Police are required to warn people and give them an opportunity to remove their alcohol or leave the area prior to taking enforcement action.  People convicted of breaching the bylaw could face fines of up to $20,0000.

The Council will be consulting on the draft bylaw until the 25^th of February 2005.  Because consultation has started over the Christmas period, the Council will undertake public consultation for longer than the one month period required by law, so that the community has enough time to comment on this.  The Council will also be sending information and submission forms to community groups who have an interest in the bylaw and inviting them to make a submission.  The Council is keen to hear from the public about what they think of the proposed bylaw.

Submissions on the proposed liquor ban must be received by 5pm on Friday the 25^th February 2005.  Further information on the liquor ban, including maps of the areas where the ban would apply and submission forms, can be found on the Council’s website www.ashburtondc.govt.nz or at the Council office and Ashburton Public library.  For further information on the proposed liquor ban, please contact Allanah Jarman on 03 308 5139 or email allanahj@adc.govt.nz. 

 1 November 2003

INTERNATIONAL VOLUNTEERS DAY  5 DECEMBER 2003

Thank you Volunteers  ¾  our community does appreciate this wealth of giving. 

Can you imagine what life would be like if suddenly our army of volunteers were no longer available.  It is a special quality ingrained in the make up of the majority of our people to consider others rather than just oneself ¾ indeed it is a vital ingredient for the advancement and survival of mankind.  The United Nations has designated this Friday 5 December as an opportunity to acknowledge the contribution that volunteers make to their communities and society.

This theme recognises the wide and varied contribution that volunteers make to New Zealand’s society, and how important they are to the functioning of many of the services that we can so easily take for granted.

A recent Statistics New Zealand time use study showed that 247 million hours were spent volunteering in organisations in New Zealand.  At $10 an hour this is $2.47 billion per annum.  I suggest that this figure is not the true value, volunteering is much more widespread than this and therefore hugely more significant than even these statistics demonstrate. 

Please think carefully about volunteers in your area and also what you can do to support volunteering.

Thank you and congratulations to our volunteers.

MURRAY ANDERSON

Mayor

 21 October 2003

BROADBAND INTERNET NETWORK

The introduction of the Broadband Internet Network into the Canterbury Region is very good news says Mayor Murray Anderson.

The Mayor’s Forum, for a considerable time, has promoted the urgency for this service.  The Broadband Taskforce, which has members throughout Canterbury representing Councils, businesses, schools, and farmers was formed to provide input into the Government’s Broadband rollout, Project PROBE was very well led by Paddy Clifford, CEO of Hurunui District Council.

The Government’s broad band project PROBE was initiated to focus on internet services to schools.  However, the project was extended through lobbying to include wider community access and benefits.

The Mayor’s Forum was updated on the tendering and contract process recently and is very happy that Woosh Wireless has been selected as the preferred supplier.  Woosh Wireless has also won Auckland and Southland Region’s contracts.

Cities and major urban areas are generally well served by Internet providers, but vast areas of Canterbury have poor or no effective Internet service.

Business and communities all over rural Canterbury are constrained by the lack of fast internet access and this will have a positive impact on the Canterbury economy.

Our schools, business and communities need this essential infrastructure in place to ensure opportunities can be taken in continuing strong economic growth and provide an essential tool for our education, health services and general community wellbeing.  Like roads and electricity networks have allowed our rural communities in the past, broad band will do this for our future.

21 October 2003

PRIVY COUNCIL

Parliament’s decision on 14 October to abolish New Zealand ties with the Privy Council from 1 July next year is certainly a historic one says Mayor Murray Anderson.  This important piece of constitutional law change was carried by a narrow margin in Parliament and I sincerely hope for the right reasons.

Attorney-General Margaret Wilson expressed her elation following the passing of the Bill.  Stating New Zealand justice system had finally broken its link with its colonial past.  “We must throw off, once and for all, the fetters of our colonial past.  The development of New Zealand law has been stifled.  It is time New Zealand grew up.”

If this is what it is about then it is for the wrong reasons.  Our New Zealand government writes its own legislation.  The judiciary interpret and apply it.  Any discussion and decisions should revolve around having the best independent service of our law through all sectors of our legal system that New Zealanders have the opportunity to access quality service through the courts to the very highest level if necessary, judged by the best legal minds.

If the Privy Council has served its time in the view of Parliament then all alternatives should have been considered in a more meaningful manner.  In my view an Australasian Supreme Court should have been given serious consideration if we are to have the necessary financial efficiencies along with a quality independent final appellant court.

The quality of the members of the Privy Council is well known.  The United Kingdom source members from other Commonwealth countries to ensure they have the best available people to serve the Privy Council. 

Local Government is disappointed that the decision has been made in this manner.  New Zealand has had access to a top quality legal system at a very economical price and one that can clearly demonstrate transparencies in its separation from party politics.  This is a major constitutional change for our country that has been pushed through by a minority government.

Local Government’s recent experience was in taking a case to the Privy Council last year - “Local Government verses New Zealand Government”.  A long ongoing difference with the Government which endorsed the Valuer-General’s interpretation of the Rating legislation that councils were interpreting it incorrectly on rating multiple housing units separately on a single title.  Councils were asked to repay the rates to individuals dating back 5 years. 

Local Government’s advice was that it was rating correctly within the legislation.  Local Government was forced to challenge the decision or else pay up.  The figure was approximately $40 million and the largest beneficiary was the State-Owned Enterprise Housing New Zealand – money which would have had to come from our ratepayers. 
The High Court upheld Local Government’s position.  The Government appealed this decision to the Court of Appeal who changed the decision in favour of the Government.

Local Government was confident its position was correct so rather than pay, it took its case to the Privy Council.  Before the Privy Council finally ruled on the case, our legal advisers and CEO of Local Government New Zealand reported to us their confidence in the quality, knowledge and expertise of the members serving and whatever the outcome they were satisfied of receiving a very fair hearing.

The outcome was of course great news for Local Government - our case was supported in total.  The foreshore and seabed issue appears to be another case of the Court of Appeal getting it wrong.  This time, the Government is not appealing the decision despite advice from the Crown Law office that it should do so.  It would be politically very difficult for the Government to take the Crown Law advice and appeal that decision to the Privy Council, whom they have just abolished all rights to appeal to.  Who will pay the price in the future?

29 September 2003

METHVEN RODEO

The Methven Rodeo is one of the major events held on an annual basis in our district says Mayor Murray Anderson.  It is an event that has enjoyed strong support for many many years by the participants and is popular with the crowd.

Organisers have worked hard over the years to ensure the ongoing success of this event.  However, excess alcohol consumption at the event and especially at the after match function in Methven by a section of the crowd could threaten the future of this event in its current format.

Road safety problems, individual health risks and social disorder due to excess alcohol are not acceptable in our community.

I do not want to see more rules imposed or the need for greater police numbers, but unless we can demonstrate some responsibility this is what will happen.  More regulation is a further cost on our ratepayers and may threaten the viability of this and other events in our district.  This would be very disappointing and a backward step.  I want to see people enjoying themselves and not have their enjoyment threatened because of a small group of irresponsible people.  I look forward to an improvement this year especially at the evening activities in Methven, and encourage a local community to participate.

With the co-operation of all parties involved, community support and responsibility, these events will continue for all to enjoy.

The Chairman of the Methven Community Board Philip Wareing echoed Mr Anderson’s comments and added that it would be a sad day for Methven if successful events like the Big Air and the Rodeo were placed in jeopardy because of the actions and behaviour of a few idiots.

He agreed that a regime of strict controls would put a damper on an occasion and was not desirable.

“We have a wonderful facility in our town centre and I want to see people make the most of it” he said.  “It would be a shame if a few out of towners spoilt it for everyone.”

19 September 2003

FORESHORE AND SEABED PROPOSALS

The Ashburton District Council is pleased to have been able to facilitate a public meeting to discuss Central Government’s proposed solution to the seabed and foreshore issues.

The Council has fielded a number of calls from members of the public wanting to know about the Government’s proposal, and where they can go to hear about the issues.

“No public meetings were planned for the district and the Council has been pleased to arrange for Tim Barnett, Government Member for Christchurch Central and Chairperson of the Justice and Electoral Select Committee, to come to the district to discuss the proposal” said Mayor Murray Anderson.  “There appears to be need for our community to be better informed, and I encourage people to attend the meeting.”

The meeting will be held at the Hotel Ashburton at 7 pm on Sunday 28 September.  Submissions on the discussion document close on Friday 3 October.

8 August 2003

ECAN’S DECISION ON RANGITATA CONSERVATION ORDER APPEAL

Ecan Councillors, at a special meeting on Wednesday, again changed direction on how they will submit evidence to the Environment Court on their appeal to the Rangitata Conservation Order, says Mayor Murray Anderson. The political manoeuvring and patch protection by Ecan councillors was again demonstrated as their politics, along with some subjective scientific evidence, continue to play Russian Roulette with people’s future.  Their apparent disregard for the social economic wellbeing of our community is intolerable.

The RDR, which draws water from the Rangitata River, was built 60 years ago and has been one of the great success stories in the development of New Zealand.  The viability of this asset is increasingly being put at risk.  We would not be continuing this debacle if Ecan had faced up to its responsibilities of the Rangitata River management in the first place but their course of action continues to cost our community an incredible amount of money and anxiety. A wealth of evidence was presented to a Special Tribunal 21 months ago which had the responsibility for making a decision and their recommendations are contained in the Draft Order.

More recently, Commissioners appointed by Ecan to hear the RDR application to renew their water consents from the Rangitata River also came to the same conclusion, that the present minimum flow regimes and allocation that had been in existence for all these years was okay and the continuation and was approved.  The findings of the Special Tribunal and the findings of the Commissioners who heard the RDR application to renew their water consents were both well received by all sectors of our community.  It was recognised as a transparent accountable process and one that had a common sense win win outcome.

But no, Ecan knows better and on 15 April the Council voted on their case for higher minimum flows to be presented to the Environment Court.  Last week they rescinded that motion and this week voted on new flow regimes recommended by the new CEO, Dr Brian Jenkins, who has been there for two weeks.

An impassioned speech by the proposer Cr Alec Neill stated to his council “we must support this recommendation as it is important to demonstrate confidence in our new CEO for the credibility of this council”. Chairman Richard Johnson said “the proposal would provide a more sustainable outcome than the present situation.”  This is not correct.

The report indicates an improvement in environmental values and also a substantial increase in economic value in the region through an increase in irrigation area. Chairman Johnson went on to say “it will retain equity for existing users, with potential water for other users.”  This is incorrect.  If this is as good as he states then why would you wish to phase it in over a 10 year period?  The truth is that the proposal will reduce reliability to the existing users, it will be a major cost on our community and to a scheme which already is one of the most efficient in New Zealand. Councillor Angus McKay again tried hard to convince his council not to go down this new direction, narrowly losing 8-6.  This was extremely disappointing as I was so optimistic about their fresh approach.

The instream interests, the out-of-stream interests, and the Ashburton District Council have worked alongside each other to ensure the path we tread is a sensible one.  This is the community working together.  Ecan must realise it lives in the real world where communities have been built by hard work, common sense planning and taking initiatives to succeed. In 1876, after a short history, the Government abolished provincial government in New Zealand. The two reasons for this were:

1. Provincial government was becoming too powerful.
2. It was considered that local decision making was the best democratic method of developing our communities.

Should history repeat itself?

Murray Anderson
Mayor

10 July 2003

MAYOR SUPPORTS OPPOSITION TO NEW TAXES

The country expects leadership from its Government, leadership based on a robust and structured framework of policies that will increase our quality of life and standard of living, says Mayor Murray Anderson. 

Our Government has talked about growing our economy based on knowledge and science, however recent policy announcements are simply based on emotion and ideology, rather than rational and objective analysis.

In recent times we have had the concept of the “fat tax” floated.  We all know that many things eaten  in excess can be bad for one’s health.  Increasing taxes won’t change this, it will only make more of our community reliant on the Government for handouts.  Education, particularly of our children, is the only way to break such habits.

We now have the “flatulent” tax, the proposal to tax methane belched by our cattle, cows, and sheep, to meet our Kyoto responsibilities.  The target is a 5% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions from our 1990 levels.  From our Government’s own figures, we as a total country are in a position of having net carbon credits, and this position is improving.
With respect to our livestock, census figures show that grazing land has reduced by 1.5 million hectares from 1994 to 2002, with 400,000 hectares converted to forestry, and 200,000 hectares regenerating to native bush.  While dairy numbers have increased by 1.3 million cattle over this period, sheep numbers have reduced by 10 million, and beef cattle by 500,000.   The net effect of all this would clearly indicate a reduction in net methane emission.

We have an increased area of wetlands being protected and regenerated.  Wetlands are a high source of natural methane.  While it is important to preserve natural areas, the drainage of farmland over the last century for crops and livestock may to have reduced the net methane gas production rather than add to it.  Where does this feature in the equation.

Such a narrow focus of methane and carbon dioxide production by the Government advisers is seriously misguided and cannot be allowed to take a tighter grasp of our community and continue the relative decline in our standards of living and lessening economic independence.  Central Government policies need to reduce our dependence on welfare rather than increase this through higher taxation, higher cost of living  and increased income redistribution.

The issue is not about wealthy farmers not wanting to pay more.  I agree that science and research needs funding - the Government has the carbon credits to sell - it is about informed communities, and decision making on facts not coloured by political ideology.

Murray Anderson
Mayor

26 June 2003

DECRIMINALISATION OF PROSTITUTION

The new law passed making soliciting for sex and brothel-keeping legal is extremely disappointing to me, and another example of leadership accepting that New Zealand continues to lower its social and moral standards, says Mayor Murray Anderson.

It is extremely important for the wellbeing of a healthy society to lead and to set the example in social and moral standards.  Indeed if democracy is to survive in a healthy state we must have strong leadership in our homes, in our communities, and in Parliament.

There will certainly be some difficulties in administering the new law and if people think that this will fix the broader issues of the street and back-room activities they are dreaming. This will be another option and will not discourage a growth in degrading activities in this business.  It is accepting that this is a commodity to trade in our community.

Local authorities will have responsibilities within the new law and bylaws may be necessary to manage the local situation.  It is generally accepted by the supporters and objectors of the Bill in Parliament that some changes in the Bill will be necessary.

I am not pretending that there are any simple answers or that the present situation is working well, however, we must meet the challenges and lead by example for the benefit of society.

There are certainly some strange characters in Parliament and personal emotions should not blur decisions.  For example Ms Georgina Beyer stated that if this legislation was in place 20 years ago she would not have been a prostitute for 5 years.  That is absolute rubbish.o
Tim Barnett stated that this will remove “the last significant vestige of Victorian moral law from New Zealand’s Statute book”.

We know that this was not a conscience vote in its true sense.  That is the reality of politics.

Murray Anderson
Mayor