The situation is just the same in the commercial or corporate world, though the amount of time and money involved is on a much larger scale.
The ballooning costs of the refurbishment of the Dunedin City Council’s Civic Centre, and the lack of information about the upgrading of the Municipal Chambers next door, have sparked concerns about the council’s commitment to communicating with ratepayers on its key projects.
Beyond that, there is also a level of disquiet about how effectively council staff are keeping elected councillors in the loop on these multimillion-dollar schemes.
The issue isn’t whether the work should or should not be carried out. Clearly there are compelling reasons for it to take place.
Seismic strengthening is crucial to protect life, even in a part of the country which has not experienced a major, damaging earthquake in recent history. Despite the government wanting to exempt buildings in Dunedin and coastal Otago from earthquake strengthening, there are plenty of nearby faultlines which could potentially generate deadly shaking.
The likely bill for the 45-year-old Civic Centre’s work has kept rising, sometimes steadily and other times alarmingly. From an original budget of $3 million, the expected price-tag is now $23m.
Councillors have felt blindsided by aspects of this work and the lack of detail shared with them, especially around a revamp of the second floor, where senior staff and the mayor’s office are currently located. However, council staff say councillors have been kept informed through workshops and reports.
Crs Andrew Whiley and Sophie Barker both expressed concern at whether all of the expense in the Civic Centre is justified. Cr Lee Vandervis said the same of the $14m Municipal Chambers’ restoration and had no recollection of the figure and the work details being discussed by the council.
It’s not just the councillors who feel they are stumbling about in the dark. Initially, council staff refused to tell this newspaper more about progress on the chambers’ upgrade when specifics were sought.
City ratepayers are ultimately footing the bill. They, and their representatives, deserve to be kept informed — every step of the way.
Alcohol’s uncomfortable truth
It has been known for many years that alcohol is not just an intoxicant and depressant, and something which can do great family and societal harm, but something which causes cancer.
Alcohol is not just any old carcinogen, like those which are classified as possibly or probably carcinogenic, such as acrylamide, glyphosates, lead compounds, night-shift work, red meat and very hot drinks.
Instead, it is right up there, and has been classified as a Group 1 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer — along with asbestos, plutonium, tobacco and X-rays — as definitely cancer-causing.
This is the inconvenient and uncomfortable truth which many thousands of drinkers don’t know about, or don’t want to know about, and the alcohol industry doesn’t go out of its way to tell people about.
Good news then that winemaker Villa Maria has acted responsibly and put health-warning labels on bottles being exported to Ireland, ahead of a law to make that compulsory from May 2026. However, pressure from the Irish alcohol industry is already making it likely that will be deferred by several years.
The New Zealand Alcohol Beverages Council unsurprisingly is not a supporter of the labels. It says the industry believes the amount of health risk is more complex than can be put on a sticker and does not take into account "responsible" versus "hazardous" drinking.
Alternatively, it wants policies to target the minority of hazardous drinkers and not the majority who drink at "moderate levels", which the council says has claimed benefits in terms of lower risk of heart attacks, diabetes and strokes.
The alcohol lobby in New Zealand exerts a great deal of influence, too much some would say.
Health-warning messages on liquor would seem to be a no-brainer.
