Dunedin City Council chief executive Jim Harland says it is
"entirely appropriate" the council will appoint a director to
a new-look Highlanders rugby board.
The Highlanders will receive financial underwriting for two
years and its board will be overhauled under the terms of a
bail-out deal with the New Zealand Rugby Union revealed
yesterday.
While the financial assistance is a boon for a franchise that
has not turned a profit since 2006, the changes to the board
are perhaps the most obvious sign of a rescue package.
The DCC, which has bought Carisbrook and is part-funding a
new stadium, will get to appoint a director and the NZRU will
retain its three independent directors.
Four provincial union directors will drop to three.
Previously, Otago appointed two board members, Southland one
and North Otago one, and the new board will have to decide,
with the unions, whose place will be sacrificed.
Significantly, the NZRU will also have the right to appoint a
Highlanders chairman at any time, for any reason.
The changes have been made to attempt to prop up a franchise
that has quickly become the runt of the New Zealand rugby
litter, failing both on the field and in the accounts, and
NZRU chief executive Steve Tew is pleased the DCC has
indicated its desire to help.
"I think the commitment to the stadium is an important step
forward for the city, so it's appropriate to have the DCC
involved," he said from Tokyo yesterday.
Mr Harland said the DCC had an "active interest" in having a
successful rugby franchise in the South.
"The majority of revenue in the new stadium will come from
professional rugby, and the Highlanders are the vehicle for
that," he said.
"Having an influence at director level will assist the
council to ensure its tenant is as successful as it can be."
The council had not yet begun the process of appointing its
Highlanders director but he could not rule out the
possibility of a councillor getting the role.
The Otago Daily Times understands the Highlanders made
six-figure losses in each of the last two seasons.
"There's no secret the Highlanders have needed some financial
assistance over the last couple of years," Mr Tew said.
"We don't have any magic answers. We've made a firm
commitment but it won't be forever."
Asked if that meant the NZRU would consider shifting the
Highlanders franchise, Tew replied: "That's not on the cards
at the moment. We can't guarantee there'll be a franchise
anywhere forever . . . But we've made it clear we want the
Highlanders to be there."
Sacrifices to rugby
How far are we, I wonder, from the time that the DCC will adopt Otago Rugby as a 'core' council activity, and promote loss-making matches with city ratepayers providing the finance to underwrite the inevitable losses? Fantastic, you say. Impossible? We're already something like halfway there.
Another reason to love rugby
Of course it's appropriate for the DCC to be represented on the Highlanders rugby board. The DCC's support (read: Dunedin ratepayers' hard-earned cash) is the sole reason they are 'solvent'. What could be more appropriate? Oh - that's right. Letting them sink-or-swim on their own merits would be more sensible, especially since that is what ratepayers would choose - if they were ever given a choice. We are smothered with claims of 'consultation' and 'transparency' - but it's all one-way. Public opinion is just an inconvenience - until local elections.
Which councillor...?
Best-case scenario: Chris Staynes. Worst-case scenario: Bill Acklin
Core business?
Since when was 'owning' a rugby team part of a city council's core business? Rodney Hide where are you? This council has shown itself to be truly incapable of making decisions in the best interests of the ratepayers of Dunedin. I call for their resignation forthwith. Furthermore, how dare Steve Tew put his two cents worth in. Does he not realise how deep the resentment is among ratepayers at the councils actions? NZ and Otago rugby must be laughing all the way to the bank over Dunedin's stupidity.
cut the cord
They're a business, not a core council function - if they are not economically viable they should be left to die. Why are the rate payers propping them up when the problem is that their own supporters obviously don't think they're worth spending money on? This is just another excuse to funnel a few more millions from our pockets along with the sweetheart deal for Carisbrook. If they really want to survive on their own they'd break their Sky contract and play games during the day when people want to go to them - the problem of course is that the NZRFU gets the bulk of that money and won't let them. Obviously the council is worried they are going to build a stadium that no one, not even rugby, will use - it's not like they weren't warned up front that the ORFU was in a bad way. When we find out how much this costs we'll add it to the total that the stadium is going to cost.