The Wash: Cannan ignites fireworks

Well, as polls go that was pretty much a nobrainer. If and when John Key's Government decides to ban the private sales of fireworks, it seems likely a majority of the public will not mind at all. 

But (and yes, there's always a but), while that was the overwhelming result from yesterday's Wash readers' poll, dominated by a huge amount of feedback from the ODT Facebook page as well, there is an important rider to this view.

It seems a good many of those who favour a ban on private sales emphasised they also want or expect the compromise of an organised, official, public fireworks display on Guy Fawkes night, such as those run by some other councils around the country.

Which immediately raises the question: who would be responsible for organising - and paying - for such a display in Dunedin?

Possible answer: the city council; yes, the same debt-laden DCC which comes under fire regularly for many of its spending decisions using ‘‘our'' money.

Can anyone else see another outbreak of ratepayer outrage on the horizon?

The DCC does, of course, fund at least two public fireworks displays annually: the New Year's Eve celebrations in the Octagon and the Chinese New Year events a few weeks later. So one could argue, quite reasonably, that two is plenty already.

However, I have, belatedly, sent some related questions to Mayor Dave Cull to get some idea of how he feels about the issue and we'll publish those thoughts when they arrive.

But, if the DCC does not want to get involved in Guy Fawkes displays, that leaves the way open for companies, schools or maybe service clubs to get involved - perhaps.

In the meantime, here's an edited summary of the feedback from readers who responded to yesterday's poll.

I need to point out the Facebook page was by far the main contributor. When I closed off the count around 4.55pm, there had been 104 clearcut votes cast (one or two were not definitive). Of these, 83 readers (or 79.8%) voted (A) to ban public sales. There were 14 votes for (C) no change to the law and seven who favoured (B) to restrict sales by age and numbers per customer.

Í Selected comments from each ‘‘camp'' on Facebook included:

Ashley Thomson: ‘‘ Unfortunately A is the solution in my eyes. There's is too much risk putting fire crackers in the public's hands. Stupidity does not have an age. I've seen people be dangerous with them at 18 and 10 years later they're just as bad. Too many people and worst of all animals, become targets of these idiots and psychos and it has gone on for too long. I'd hate to say goodbye to sparklers, but even they're used for dangerous purposes. Public displays are the way to go, and plenty of them.''

Case Hoatten: ‘‘I say B. I went in and brought my fireworks yesterday. I'm only 21 but one of the security guys who was over watching them said to me the whole time they've been on sale I was the only one who brought a safety tray to let them off on. Not everyone is stupid with fireworks.''

Lisa Yonker: ‘‘C - this is ludicrous. Ruin everyone's fun instead of policing the few idiots. Let's ban everything else we can think of at the same time.''
Í And, from some Wash readers who emailed or rang in their thoughts:

Brian Ralph: ‘‘Put me down as ban all except public displays. I moved from Australia in January 2010 and generally believe everything in New Zealand is far better than Australia. However, I was horrified to find NZ still has a fireworks night with shop sales, even if only for four days. ‘‘At some stage private sales were banned in Australia and many schools make money from a community event. Family First is a ridiculous organisation but I think it would be preferable for families to go to a well-organised safe fireworks display in their local school grounds (or similar) rather than risk fire, injuries and harm to pets at home.''

Geoffrey: ‘‘Definitely vote A. In fact, I would have preferred to vote D: ban all fireworks totally, then ratepayers would not have to foot the bill for DCC town hall wallahs being profligate with our money for unnecessary displays. Bring back Benson Pope is all I can say.''

Shelley Davies: ‘‘Agree with you about fireworks and would go with the first option A. Nice work on the keys story today - there are decent people out there. Really enjoy your column. Keep it coming.''

‘‘Old Lady'': ‘‘A total ban on fireworks sales and organised public displays. The public don't need fireworks. The money should be spent on kids' lunches for schools. With animals, you dread it . . . you are on edge every night. I'm sick of it.''

Sue, of St Kilda: ‘‘I agree with the ban. I went shopping this morning and there were fireworks going off, with little children around. It's continuous, not just on Guy Fawkes but right through the year. Why not a display at the beach? They used to have them at Outram Glen.''

My thanks to everyone to who responded, especially the enthusiastic Facebook folk, who seem to love nothing more than a good poll to get fired up about!