Mayor, CEO defend new borrowing of $178m

Definitely not so, as one example the saving of the Taieri gorge railway line - saved for the cost of half a million dollars by ratepayers, and another half million by an appeal. Now the main visitor attraction of Dunedin, that brings a swathe of cruise ships that come into Dunedin and spend the money into the economy directly. If not for the railway, we'd see scant all of them. Aside this, there's plenty others that come here for this purpose. Indeed, I met a young Japanese guy yesterday who came solely to ride the train up the gorge, and next day did the Seasider trip to Palmerston. The railway encompasses heritage, scenery and wildlife, none of which a rugby (and speculated other tiny uses) stadium, used a few hours a year at hundreds of times the cost will ever lay claim to. Yes, heritage scenry and wildlife are Dunedin’s attraction, and there's plenty of scope in doing far more in this field for relatively low cost, but instead, we are building another stadium and class cubes, yuppie apartments and yet more vapid, overpriced cafes at Dunedin’s waterfront.

There are good investments and bad ones - for example investing in the stadium is a lot like me taking out a loan so I can have a really big party - I might have a good time but eventually I'll have to pay for it with interest.

On the other hand the city's investment in Waipori paid off and continues to keep on giving, much like borrowing to build my own windmill might.

The city should be making investments in the future but they should be ones that pay off for the ratepayers, not just give some of them a good time.

Investing is what you do when you spend money on something that will return what you spent plus more - more than the rate of inflation. Sensible spending is when you spend money on things you need for your wellbeing. This applies whether it is an individual, a household or a city. Shopaholics are spenders who throw money around on things they do not need and cannot afford, things that will not return a profit in money or wellbeing. Shopaholics who shop on credit are on an accelerating ride into insolvency. Dunedin's borrowing makes perfect sense, mikenette? Only if one has taken up residence with Alice "Through the Looking Glass"!

Jim Harland's cavalier attitude to passing massive debt on to the next generations is all too prevalent in the "Greedy generation" running Dunedin City and in the National-Act government. It is the same attitude as the refusal to develop sensible and sustainable strategies to reduce the effects of climate change in the century ahead, to conserve resources and energy, to protect and extend natural areas. It is all about short term gratification and limiting long term options. It's disgusting, arrogant and selfish. . It certainly is time for a change - we have a duty to elect responsible and sensible people onto the DCC and ORC in October to mitigate the damage to whatever extent is still possible.

At least things get done and makes perfect sense. Investing for the future, something Dunedin didn't do well through the 60's - early 90's.

fI can recall even a recent ODT Editorial slamming the Annual Plan submission process.

Interesting of course that Mayor Chin suggests that he and his council listen to submitters, but there is no suggestion from him that they act on what the people have been saying to them. The council will make the final decision - no problem in that as long as the council have been making decisions based upon the premise that the council will be acting in the best interests of the majority. And one thing that Mayor Chin cannot do is to point to any research or measurement that would indicate that he and his council have been acting in accordance with the wishes of the majority.

Indeed, such research or measurement shows the opposite. We know that placing the City into this announced debt level - while conveniently ignoring the level of debt that the wholly owned DCHL has been forced to engage in, and of course the $40m debt that the Otago Regional council have also decided upon for the main user of cash, is irresponsible in the least. But it shouldn't come as a surprise - this is the sort of attitude that we have all come to expect from this particular council.

I'm glad that the mayor has finally realised that the city needs to make wise decisions about where the ratepayer's money is spent - he's right of course but he's also far too late since he's already spent it. Very much a case of shutting the barn door afterwards, it must be elecion year.,

Borrowing $178m long term, 20-30 years, incurs an interest bill at a simple estimate of the same magnitude as the principle. So the ratepayers will end up paying $358m or so from this past year's folly. The best thing the new council we elect in 6 months can do is to pay down this debt early. By avoiding compounding interest every dollar pay off now saves us two in the future.

Let's start by selling off Carisbrook and getting our $7m back - that will be worth $14m. We can also raise ticket prices at the stadium, hit Sky up for space for their cameras, charge a lot more for beer, power for those box seats etc etc. If it's going to be the success the mayor and Mr Davies say it will then we can pay off its capital debt early and save that interest too.

Mr Harland's delightful phrase 'intergenerational debt' really means borrow, borrow, borrow and let other's worry about the consequences. In my opinion this is irresponsible and profligate behaviour.