This newsitem has 5 comments.

• ‘In general terms I agree with the direction that the TBMP is going but I am opposed to the speed with which it is trying to do it. Where is the informed debate in the public arena? How many people have had time to read what has been presented let alone discuss a possible submission? For 17 years the WCC has chosen not to revise the present TBMP. Now it makes this huge step in breathtaking speed and includes the sensible idea of new legislation to replace the Trust Deed that has served for 170 years. “The Devil is in the Detail”. I am deeply distrustful of undue speed. David Lee’s critique is well argued and plausible. The WCC proposals should be left “on the table” and used to generate sensible discussion – after Christmas, not before. As a public consultation process on a very important subject, the timescale cannot deliver a good result. ’
• ‘The unintended effects of well intentioned law changes have been all too apparent recently. Yes the Council is faced with increasing pressure to utilise Town Belt land for an ever widening variety of uses. Whilst the existing arrangements are undoubtedly inconvenient for the Council, the answer is not to provide itself with greater flexibility to do whatever it deems appropriate. To do so denies the vast majority of Wellingtonians (the Town Belt’s beneficial owners) the right to have a say. That is not only a tragedy for the citizens of Wellington but in the long run the City Council as well. ’
• ‘The comments expressed by David Lee are very clear and full of wisdom. Loosely defined terms and legislation are the perfect avenue for wrong interpretations. Business entities, under the guise of concerned Wellingtonians, will define it to suit their plans and programs for their own gain. Wellingtonians, let us support this advocacy that David Lee and others like him are pursuing. It is a worthwhile cause that will benefit not only this generation but the future generations as well. ’

You can view the remaining comments and submit your own here.

This newsitem has 10 comments.

• ‘George, that’s something that another of our readers has raised – in the next post: http://eyeofthefish.org/caketin-glassy-or-spikey/ It looks like it is not to be retained, but this is all early days yet. ’
• ‘Will the magnificent Māori design features above the entrance to the stadium now be retained? For me they are truly wonderful and it would be a real shame if they were lost. ’
• ‘Callum, that’s perfect. Yes – that is the more interesting render that Stuff had up briefly on the first day, and then must have been asked to take down by the people at the Stadium. Time for it to be reposted I say ! Extra pictures now included above… Meanwhile, from that same report, here is what the Stadium Trust say about the issue of the Roof: “The particular challenges are: • The Stadium is built of light weight concrete and cannot support any additional structures, therefore either additional foundation work would have to be done, or a separate structure built to support a roof • There is a height restriction in the Thorndon area. The Stadium has a resource consent that permits us to build to only 26 metres. There would be many resource consent issues and potential problems with the neighbours in building a structure covering the Stadium • The existing light towers need to be at the current height mainly due to cricket requirements • Any roof would need to be above the light towers • Any roof construction needs to provide airflow within the Stadium so grass can grow • It is likely that there would be serious wind loadings on a roof that would create major additional costs to resolve Some high level estimates for costs, from our consultants, have varied between $60 and $80 million for construction of the roof. This is beyond the financial resources of the Wellington Regional Stadium Trust and the local councils would need to assist in the funding of such a project. Nothing in the Master Plan prevents the addition of a roof at some time in the future. It is the opinion of the Trust that at a cost of $60 –$80 million there would need to be a debate on whether that money would be better spent on funding a purpose built indoor arena. A covered Stadium would not attract the smaller 10,000 –12,000 seated concerts, which are the majority of concerts that are currently touring and bypassing Wellington.” ’

You can view the remaining comments and submit your own here.

This newsitem has 5 comments.

• ‘Hi there Friederike, Thanks for your feedback – every day we welcome visitors from around the corner and around the world, and we are proud to share experiences with every one! Enjoy the rest of your time in NZ and thanks for supporting Te Papa and our Wellington Tourist Attractions! ’
• ‘For me as a foreign visitor, Te Papa was the best museum I visited, ever. I spent hours browsing your impessive exhibitions. People in Wellington can be very proud of Te Papa and the way it teaches foreigners about New Zealand arts and culture. ’
• ‘Hi there Steven B – thanks for that, wow interesting – our team will link up in the morning! And Hi peteremcc – totally get where you’re coming from, we especially don’t want to be an undue burden on anyone (our visitors or our funders) which is why we do everything we can to support our local and international visitors with great educational experiences and support our local business communities by sharing in the marketing of Wellington to the World and its visitors when they are here. ’

You can view the remaining comments and submit your own here.

This newsitem has 6 comments.

• ‘Yes but … Te Papa does need more funding. But it’s not the city council’s responsibility. As for having a national gallery of art – the new Auckland Art Gallery has taken over that responsibility, with an impressively curated collection of New Zealand art which leaves Te Papa for dead. ’
• ‘What Te Papa needs is MORE funding, not less. The internal planning of Te Papa is a mess. It really needs ripping out and starting again. Do you know that the sculpture garden on the roof deck has been discontinued? Did anyone notice? Does anyone care? Te Papa used to be our national gallery of art – now we don’t even have a faint attempt at a gallery on which to display sculpture – it is a national shame. ’
• ‘The truth is, if Te Papa funding reduces, then it stands to reason that Te Papa’s ability to provide certain services will reduce. I have read all of the comments above, and the only one that may have some legs is the one about about consultancy fees. All I can say about social media activities is, Te Papa has always said it is a forum for our nation, and a place for all to stand. Discrimination doesn’t factor, so anyone making comment about anything using online forums is the norm. I can also completely understand why Te Papa has paid guides. I have worked with volunteers, and while volunteers make fantastic contributions, they can also be a difficult workforce to rely on day in and out. A paid workforce can be held to performance standards, that ensure a level of service, that clearly has been missing in the above person’s experiences at other museums and galleries. Te Papa has changed the face of Wellington in the past decade. We have become the arts capital. Reduced capability will impact on weekend excursions by New Zealanders if they can’t provide what they have in the past … Monet and so on. Will this also impact on Te Papa’s ability to market internationally? What impact would that have on visitation to Wellington?? I have lived in Wellington for 40 years, and visited Te Papa more times than I can remember with my family since it opened. I have seen the difference it has made to the Wellington landscape…Cruise Ships, Tour Buses and the growth of the arts scene in Wellington. While I conceed that we will still get visitors, because Te Papa is here, I also know that the things that Te Papa has provided in the past to bring visitors to Wellington, may well disappear. What they are, we will only see, if the funding is cut. ’

You can view the remaining comments and submit your own here.

This newsitem has 1 comment.

• ‘The Council is being small minded and Scrooge like in its thinking. Perhaps we need to reconsider the value of Te Papa? (a) What change in revenue [if any ] would occur if an entry charge was made? (b) what decline [if any] in visitor numbers to Wellington may occur if a charge is applied? (c) What income does the Wellington City Council get directly and indirectly from Te Papa visitors? (d) Let us assume that the Council withdraws 1.25 million. Perhaps a method needs to be devised where the Council is levied a fee by Te papa as recompense for the revenues the Council gets as a consequence of Te Papa’s operation? Would this levy be as great as the reduction of financial support or greater? ’

You can add own comments here.

This newsitem has 4 comments.

• ‘In 2009 both WCC and Capital Coast District Health Board committed funding to a permanent wet house for chronic alcoholics who were homeless………….. http://www.capitaltimes.co.nz/article/2616/Notinmybackyard.html ’
• ‘What concerns me about Blanket Man’s death is the apparent effects forced medication by psychiatric services had on his health. I believe he was injected with anti-psychotics on the day he died; I noticed since his release from his forced stay in Ward 27 he was laying around more, something I never saw before. i believe giving anti-psychotic medication to drug and alcohol users is dangerous but the medical model carries on regardless . . . ’
• ‘Aye, and where were you during all this, Pat? Good view from that high horse? ’

You can view the remaining comments and submit your own here.