Today’s Wairarapa
Times-Age confirms that the people of Masterton will pay twice for an
airport that no airline wants to use.
As taxpayers, they will pick up a share of the $10
million government tab for the Hood Aerodrome upgrading announced amid much
fanfare last week by Finance Minister Grant Robertson.
But they’ll be hit as ratepayers too, because the Times-Age reveals that the other $7
million for the project will come from Masterton District Council. The source
of this additional funding was mysteriously unidentified in last week’s
announcement but has now been confirmed by MDC chief executive Kath Ross.
According to Ross, the project will “transform Hood
from a community airfield, supporting recreational pilots and a select group of
commercial operators, to a centre for cutting-edge commercial activity,
manufacturing and training, alongside existing and new tourism attractions and
businesses.
“This work will open the door to some exciting
opportunities for future business development.”
This is a statement heavy on pie-in-the-sky wishful thinking and empty
PR clichés (“cutting-edge”, “exciting opportunities”). Not one of the
cheerleaders for the project – Ross, Robertson, Masterton mayor Lyn Patterson
and local MPs Ron Mark and Kieran McAnulty – has identified a single new user
of the upgraded aerodrome.
On the contrary, the one regional airline named as
being potentially “interested” in flying out of Hood has cast fresh doubt on
the viability of the plan. The Times-Age
reports that Doug Emeny, general manager of Air Chathams, said the airline had
to be persuaded to submit a business case to the council last year.
“You know it’s getting hard when they come to you
and say, ‘Can you please put an application in?’
“We thought about it and decided ‘Yes, we will’. But
in all honesty, we limped into it. We weren’t overly impressed with the
research that had gone on into what service there would be.”
It’s hard to imagine more damning words from the man
running an airline identified as a key prospective user. In fact I'd suggest that on the basis of what we know so far, the project looks a complete dog.
Masterton District Council’s media statement on the
Hood upgrade reinforces the impression that the government and the council are
taking a massive punt. There’s more hollow PR blah-blah from both Patterson (“The funding for Hood Aerodrome will
enable us to transform this treasured asset into a modern, functional airport
with increased capacity over the longer-term”) and Ross (“We have a dedicated
team that have worked hard over a significant period to fine-tune the future
focus for Hood Aerodrome”), but not a single hard fact – and no mention anywhere
of a business case to support spending $17 million at a time of enormous
pressure on government and council finances.
Astonishingly, the council’s media statement last
week avoided any mention of the millions that Masterton ratepayers will
contribute to this potential white elephant. So much for transparency.
When the Hood announcement came out of the blue, I
wondered whether I had missed something. I couldn’t believe the government and council
could so airily commit $17 million to a project with no assured benefits other than the creation of 53 short-term construction jobs. In
the absence of any compelling case for the upgrade, we’re left with no other
conclusion than that it’s a brazen vote-buying exercise.
1 comment:
Another example of our money being thrown around. One thing I would note is the ever so common claim that some new project or other is going to create X amount of (new or temporary) jobs in the construction industry, is just not true.
Construction companies work from job to job, tendering to get work and generally carry a full time work force who move from one job to the next as they come up. 53 new jobs wont be created, this is just some reserve bank calculation. You can guarantee that whoever wins the job wont be saying "great lets employ 53 new workers to build an airfield".
If a company doesn't get enough work they go broke and their workers get picked up by other construction companies who did get the job.
Post a Comment