Complaints - Please scroll to the bottom of the page
« Zoom Zone v. Swimming Pool (& others) (2) | Main | Supreme Court Leaky Building Decision »

New Chum

Oh boy – what a doozie!

Anyone prepared to stand up against the prevailing, and emotionally charged view of those who claim to  have trekked over the hill to see the “finest little beach in the world”, could run the risk of being chased off the Peninsula. 

The campaign seems to run the gamut of the political spectrum, with Catherine D. and the Greens securing the headlines, as usual, and Sandra G. running the sidelines me-tooing, as usual.

There is another view, but I will just whisper it - it is based on property rights, which I thought the Nats. were wont to protect. 

And just where do the protagonists imagine the Government is going to suddenly come up with the zillions that will be required by the proposed Trust to buy off John Darby. They must be joking, or otherwise deluding themselves. Have they not heard about the economic woes being faced by this Government, and Bill English’s determination to hold the line against all comers. And that is before they have even calculated the final cost of the mine, and the earthquake, and added it to the already declared $15.6b. deficit.

I would lay a pound to a packet of peanuts on Cabinet at best offering the same deal as offered on the leaky buildings – TCDC 25% and Government 25%. Thames rate-payers should be just ecstatic about that prospect!

Darby will be rubbing his hands with glee if he scrapes out of this one – surely the hordes of nay-sayers must realise that his investment has taken a hiding. Just which rich-lister will risk building a chopper / holiday pad in that charged environment? So what is the value of “the considerable gift” that Darby is allegedly putting into this deal? You won’t find any reference to that in the cosy little story in the HH.

I guess if it satisfies everyone to be able to jump on to this bandwagon over the holidays, it will have served its purpose. But EDS Chair Gary Taylor is no fool, and he must realise that they are up against it persuading the nabobs in Wellington of the merits of creating this little precedent. Can’t you just see all the other great little pieces of coastal property being lined up for similar treatment all around the country?

My view is that they should be endeavouring to negotiate the best possible deal they can with Darby, and leave him to stew in the juice of what is now a grossly over-valued development prospect.

Poor Phillippa B. – she tried her best to put a back-door deal together, but it just did not add up, and it is probably one of the main reasons she lost out so badly. Trouble is, beneath all the bluster, we don’t really know where Glenn L. stands on the matter, but he certainly seems very close to the developer community.


PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (6)

Actually Bil, It's Glenn....

December 21, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJMA

Thank you wee jamie for your courteous correction.

December 21, 2010 | Registered CommenterBill Barclay

One all!

December 22, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterJMA

Maybe the Mayor wants to establish a camper van park site for freedom campers, sans toilets; just plant some more trees.
I mean, how ridiculas is all this?

December 23, 2010 | Unregistered CommenterRussell

"New Chums" not New Chum, there were lots of them and the beach was named for them. Ref Listener for correct spel.

January 14, 2011 | Unregistered Commenterj isdale

If any public activity such as a protest is scheduled for a Friday dont look for the Mayor.....its happy hour at 4.30pm in the Mayors Office and all are invited.

January 17, 2011 | Unregistered CommenterPeter Frean

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>