The Star asked readers for their opinions on Mauger’s plan to push for asset sales. City councillors meet to discuss the issue before Christmas.
The emails came in thick and fast and the vast majority say ‘no’.
It is a U-turn from Mauger who said while campaigning to become mayor last year he wouldn’t sell assets. That has not been lost on readers.
Mauger now says he believes the city council will have to sell off some of its assets to off-set rates increases in the future.
The city council owns 100 per cent of the port company, City Care, fibre broadband provider Enable and Eco-Central, 75 per cent of the airport, and 89 per cent of Orion through its company Christchurch City Holdings Ltd.
Christchurch’s rates rose 6.4 per cent this year, up from the 4 per cent Mauger promised he would deliver if elected mayor.
Here are readers' responses to Mauger’s plan to push for ratepayer-owned assets to be sold, or partly sold, off to private interests:
I am very strongly opposed to selling assets in order to reduce rates. The funds realised would give a temporary breather in rates increases but it would mean reduced income in the future so rates would then need to be increased more. Selling even a proportion of the assets would weaken council control through the democratic process. With the looming threats posed by climate change the council will need all the resources at its disposal to enable it to pay the costs inevitably involved.
– Norman Wilkins
Selling council assets that have been built up over many years is a matter that deserves the scrutiny of all ratepayers. I think a referendum would be the best way to ensure the issues are fully examined and the ratepayers properly informed. We need information on whether these assets are making good returns on the capital invested either now or in the future. Once they’re sold the council has lost the ability to influence vital activities that affect everyone.
This is not a debate about ‘right’ or ‘left’ politics. It’s about prudent financial management both now and in the future. Long-term, their value may far exceed our expectations.
– Ormond Wilson
It’s bad enough the city council has handed over a huge number of revenue-gathering car parks to Wilson. As ratepayers, we can’t afford for any more assets to be sold off. We definitely need to manage and maintain assets such as the Lyttleton Port, and the airport. They belong to Christchurch city and ratepayers. Why would the city council be considering selling off our airport on one hand, and pouring money into Tarras airport on the other? It beggars belief.
– Margaret Ingram
I came to New Zealand after 18 years in China. China achieved the biggest jump in living standards in history, largely due to letting selfish motivation run free. It’s currently experiencing a significant downturn because of curves on that selfishness. Nothing in my experience which is in public ownership ever runs efficiently. I totally support the sale of Lyttelton port and all other major council assets.
– Michael Pendleton
Absolute no to asset sales, short term gain based on short term political cycles. Financial challenges have to be managed in ways that retain our control over environmental issues and infrastructures.
– Felicite Jardine
Under no circumstances should we sell the silverware. We need to decide what to do that is within our budget. We have to pull back on some things that are nice to have. We are lucky to have an airport and wharf. It is easy to say ‘to keep or sell?’ We need to think about our children’s futures. Didn’t we have a mayor who promises lots of things? He needs to be strong and keep his promises. Do not sell the silverware.
– Peter Fitzgerald
The port of Lyttelton is another drain on the council’s resources and should be sold to private interests. It is all very well to say that this and other council ‘assets’ have paid dividends of around $2 billion over 30 years, but that averages out at around $66 million a year, whereas in 2022 the council’s total revenue was quoted as $938 million, so to keep these enterprises on the books will make little differences to what ratepayers have to fork out each year.
– Terry McLaughlin
In my option now is not the time to think about selling off assets. If they bring in $2 billion and possibly more, surely the best thing to do is to try and maximise the profit from the assets and increase the amount. Once you have sold the family silver it can never be replaced, and the assets owned by the ratepayer not the council will continue to provide well into the future for the city.
– Chris Irons
Irrespective of political views, I do not support the council selling all or part of its assets. First review inefficiencies, outputs and reasons for excess expenditure. Selling assets is only a short term fix and even then disputable.
– Philip Robinson
Thank you for providing somewhere for ratepayers to have a say on the sales of our assets. This is short term thinking. I am strongly opposed to any, or part sales of the port company or the airport. I am also strongly opposed to the proposed airport at Tarras.
– Jen Cotter
I am strongly opposed to the council selling any of the city’s assets.
– Brian Smith
I disagree entirely with elected people changing their pre-electon promises once elected. City council assets are owned by all ratepayers and should be retained by all ratepayers. If they want to sell them it should be a referendum, allowing every ratepayer to voice their opinion. Returns from these assets benefit all ratepayers in terms of rates rebates and any other services that add vibrancy to our community. The only benefits to selling are a one-off sugar hit for council. It will not give ratepayers long term benefits. The only other beneficiaries with long term gain are those individuals/companies/internationals who stand to benefit from returns on their investment. Those investors (often international corporates, e.g. superannuation funds) do not care for our community, our ratepayers, our city. The mayor and his right wing councillors have no mandate to sell off the city’s silverware.
– Chris McGill
I agree with the Maritime Union in not selling the port company.
– Jeremy Light
We should not even consider selling our silverware. Our councillors were elected to run our city, not to sell it off to the highest bidder. Without our port and airport, what prices would we, not only Christchurch but all Canterbury and South Island, have to bear?
– Daphne Crampton
I think the first asset to be sold is the land the city council have shares in for the proposed Tarras airport. This airport plan is ecologically unsound, disruptive to a beautiful part of Central Otago and is going to end up costing us the ratepayers a huge amount of money to get it off the ground. There is already a perfectly good airport in Invercargill that could be developed further to suit the extra business that has been proposed for the Tarras airport. The other assets are already creating an income, and this should remain.
– Vivien Jones
If these assets are sold off, there will be no rates reduction and if there is it will be temporary. Once these assets are sold there will be no dividend returns, which will lead to even higher rates. This mayor got in on broken promises, so why would we trust him now. While the council may see this as a short term fix, you can be assured that if these assets are sold it will be a long term pain for ratepayers, long after this current mayor and the council are gone.
– C.I Macdonald
Don’t sell the assets. Why would the decent people of Christchurch be selfish and choose a short-term infusion of cash from these valuable working assets when returns from them over time will continue to benefit future residents? Why would the far-sighted council, on our behalf, choose to relinquish control of these key infrastructure companies and jeopardise the city’s ability to shape our destiny – especially given the impacts of climate change and sea level rise? Why would our straightforward ‘what you see is what you get’ Mayor Phil Mauger renege on his promise not to sell assets, thereby damaging his reputation? I thank those councillors who have stood firm against pressures to sell the silverware.
– Belinda Meares
It didn’t take long, but some of us knew this was coming, these ideologues inflicting despair and destruction upon civil society. Politicians who treat everything with contempt including themselves. These barbarians are not at the gate anymore but have overrun the city. They have come like days of old to pillage the wealth of the population and make slaves of those who remain. Who will defend the people, what sort of society will our grandchildren inherit? Maybe this is some form of divine justice handed out to a lazy, decadent, indifferent and self indulgent population who would rather build a $680 million stadium and drive around in utes all day than pay their debts. They say there is nothing new under the sun and that history tells us civilizations rise and fall over a long period of time; could it be that we have been living in a time of enlightenment for too long now and it is time for a new ‘Dark Age’ to descend? I hope Christchurch citizens will wake up, stand up and run these bandits out of town.
– Neville Palenski
I don’t believe it is a good idea to sell off all or part of our assets including the airport, Lyttelton port, etc.
– Regan Courtney
I would sell a percentage of the council owned assets, but keep a majority. But I would also look at why these companies have such a poor return.
– Peter Bartley
Definitely not, soon there will be nothing left. They could of saved money by not spending billions of dollars on the cathedral. Would of been cheaper to rebuild something that goes with the new Christchurch. If I new he would consider selling off I’d never have voted for him. I honestly thought he’d be a good mayor but he’s turning out like most other politicians and council people. Disappointing.
– Elizabeth Crowe
I am very opposed to this idea. Who would purchase these assets? Are we going to allow our essential ports to go into the hands of another country? We, as ratepayers, have paid for these ports over our lifetimes and they essentially belong to us. I am very wary of our mayor changing his mind about selling assets. Can we trust his judgement anymore? This should be taken to a referendum. The city council is playing down the income of the ports, but we all know the last few years have been hard for business. Using the threat of rising rates scares many ratepayers understandably, but a plea is to look ahead to the consequences of these sales. We know our rates will rise anyway.
– Gillian Porter
We’re absolutely against selling any of our city council assets. It makes no sense to sell companies that are providing good returns, whose number one priority is serving the people of Canterbury.
– Graeme Boddy and Linda Morris
I am strongly opposed to selling off assets. There is a lot of money received annually with possibly more available and what happens once they are sold. It is also what the mayor said he wouldn’t do when canvassing just last year.
Maybe a survey should be done on just how many people are actually using cycleways and cease this expensive exercise. Would the right wing councillors sell off their business assets? Highly unlikely.
– Doreen Collins
