Repair of court put at $2.5m

The report says the historic complex could have been strengthened and back in business by the end of 2012. Photo: ODT
The report says the historic complex could have been strengthened and back in business by the end of 2012. Photo: ODT

A leaked report on Dunedin's historic courthouse shows the Ministry of Justice was advised in 2012 the entire complex could be made safe for $2.5 million, within a 40-week period, and without emptying the building of its court services.

in a nutshell
in a nutshell

The ministry this week dismissed the report as obsolete, claiming several subsequent reports showed the need for more extensive, and expensive, work.

The report, written by Opus Architecture for the ministry and obtained by the Otagp Daily Times, was one the ministry had previously denied the ODT access to, claiming commercial sensitivity.

It dealt only with the strengthening of the tower and exterior ornamentation on the historic site.

It said the historic complex could have been strengthened and back in business by the end of 2012.

But in more than three years since that report, the ministry had spent $6.8 million on fitting out its High St temporary courthouse, was developing a business plan calling for more than $10 million in strengthening work at the historic courthouse, and was still unable to say when any decisions on the complex's future would be made.

The city's rent-a-court facilities were costing nearly $600,000 a year, while rates still being paid on the now mothballed Stuart St site were about $80,000 a year.

The ministry's commercial and property general manager Fraser Gibbs said the 2012 report had been superseded by further investigations at the Stuart St site.

Those investigations included further engineering studies and a 2014 geotechnical study.

They had identified problems including the building's ''irregular geometry'', ''different roof forms'', and the possibility of liquefaction underneath the site.

They also found the complex's unsafe tower could not be treated in isolation from the rest of the building.

Mr Gibbs said the ministry's understanding of seismic strengthening requirements had also moved on since the 2011 Christchurch earthquake.

The result was a building needing a full suite of seismic strengthening options, Mr Gibbs said, work that would be far more expensive than the 2012 report suggested, and that would require the emptying of the Stuart St site.

The ODT requested the release of the subsequent reports Mr Gibbs was referring to, but were told they were commercially sensitive.

Change needed - Labour 

Labour justice spokeswoman Jacinda Ardern said that approach had to change.

''For the ministry to claim that a report like this could have been so wrong, and justify the [$6.8 millon temporary High St court fit-out] they've spent as a result, seems hard to fathom.''

The ministry was trying to ''justify everything'' by holding information back from the public, but with such large sums of public money being spent that was no longer good enough, she said.

''The [Justice] Minister [Amy Adams] needs to prove once and for all that a huge amount of taxpayer money hasn't been wasted, by releasing every single report that has been carried out since this one.''

No-one would expect commercially sensitive information to be included but the technical findings were vital for public understanding, Ms Ardern said.

''That's the only way they're going to to dispel this kind of speculation.''

The ministry's explanations that best practice seismic strengthening had moved on since 2012 were not good enough, she said.

''They will keep batting back by saying it's all about the safety. Well, prove it.

''Of course you want to see reasonable expenses. You don't want to see anyone put in danger. But you can't just waste money.''

Minister of Courts and Justice, Amy Adams, was asked to respond to Ms Ardern's request that all engineering reports be released, and her conclusion that the ministry had been reckless in ignoring the 2012 report.

She was also asked whether she could commit to returning court services to the Stuart St site, and if not, why not.

The minister responded by saying only that it was her ''intention and expectation that we see the historic Dunedin courthouse building strengthened and returned to, but we need to see the business case first''.

Mr Gibbs said that business case would be delivered to the minister by the end of August.

It would then go before cabinet, where a decision would be made on whether to spend the money on strengthening the historic courthouse, or not.

At no point in that process would the business case be made public.

craig.borley@odt.co.nz

Add a Comment

 

Advertisement