What I Give As a Geographer to Be On That working group looking at the future of the port

I have been watching the Port of Auckland wharf extension debate closely to the point of having to correct those who are being tardy with the actual facts (yes you Councillor Chris Darby as a main instigator).

After yesterday’s stunt out on the Harbour and Queen’s Wharf I am starting to notice a slow but evermore rising resentment against the opposition. I have noticed Councillor Cameron Brewer going from pro extensions to opposition but Brewer is an opportunist and the debate at Council can not be revisited by the Auckland Development Committee for another six months.

I have been trawling through the news feeds and the social media feeds to see how the reaction on the Port extension is holding up. While there is opposition there is a larger chunk who on economic and employment grounds are not as phased. That said the consenting process is dodgy but that stems from the Auckland Regional Council rules set in 1999. That issue will be plugged next year once the Unitary Plan goes operative and the new tighter rules on port reclamation are in force (see: EVIDENCE TO UNITARY PLAN PANEL MEDIATION FOR PORT OF AUCKLAND).

The coverage on Radio New Zealand this morning in regards to the Port situation is left wanting badly. Here is their report and links to both interviews:

Auckland mayor absent from wharf protest ( 3 min 36 sec )

About 800 people turned out yesterday calling for the extension of Auckland’s Bledisloe Wharf by about 100 metres to be stopped.

Ports of Auckland wanted work on the extension to begin in April.

Listen to Len Brown on Morning Report ( 3 min 36 sec )

That was despite a promise by Mr Brown in 2013 for a study on the expansions social, economic, and environmental affects before that happens.

But today he said the council was already looking at tightening rules so people get a say in any future consents for the port – and he was also starting a working group.

“That will work over the next 12 months to review the port its costs and its benefits both economic, social and environmental.

“This is a stage two report that I made a commitment to, and we’re moving forward on and we will involved a number of those key voices who were present at the protest yesterday.”

He said it was critical to find a balance between the port’s economic importance and what people wanted the harbour to be.

Phil Goff’s reply can be heard here: http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/20171949

………

Source: http://www.radionz.co.nz/news/regional/269333/group-to-consider-akl-port-options-brown

Reaction to both interviews was negative towards both the interviewer and Phil Goff. My own reaction was:

Interview miles off course on reclamation. As we know and some are omitting the consents are for wharf extensions at 93m and 98m respectively. There is no reclamation consent granted currently.

All reclamation post 2016 is dealt with by the Unitary Plan especially Rule 10 on the Port Precinct which is pretty hard to pass before a consent was granted.

So crap interview with the Mayor there

Phil Goff is actually wrong on using the majority of Aucklanders against wharf extensions. The actual protest is from the Isthmus and North Shore having a whinge. Yes white people having a whinge as that is all I saw on the media and social media photo and TV shots last night.

South and West Auckland plus the industrial chiefs of the South who rely on the port have not been canvassed for their opinions at all. And looking at comments on the news websites South and West Auckland were NOT amused and yesterday’s stunt at all on the grounds of

1) Employment and economics
2) The amount of water front there and we can all share.

So isthmus pre 2010 politics at its worst

……………..

Sean Plunket from Radio Live who I would not normally agree with I thought was bang on the money around the Port issue. Especially in his suspicion on the leaders pushing the debate which are my suspicions as well. You can hear Plunket give his thoughts here:  http://www.radiolive.co.nz/SEAN-PLUNKET-Genuine-people-power-or-prominent-people-power/tabid/506/articleID/77313/Default.aspx

Now this Working Group to be set up by the Mayor into the future of the Port is a good start. What I would give as a qualified Geographer to be on that Working Group to thrash out the future of the Port and all practicable alternatives post Unitary Plan.

But we will have to wait 12 months to see what this group comes up with. Maybe then things can settle down a bit as the future direction of the port can be based on what comes out of that working group study.