Auckland Now: Top 5 locations for a national sports stadium in central Auckland

“Mayoral Candidate Mark Thomas said the most sensible thing when you’ve got an existing asset is to say, OK, really is there any way we could make this work?

“And we haven’t done that.”

Auckland has a lot of top transport and housing/infrastructure projects currently not funded. Phil Goff’s plan to move the port and build a new stadium continues his unfunded make-it-up-as-you-go approach.

Read about our different approaches here.

Share this post!
    Moving stadium

    2 comments on “Auckland Now: Top 5 locations for a national sports stadium in central Auckland

    1. andre says:

      Thanks Wayne. I agree that rates is a pretty hopeless and unfair way to fund a city. Local Government NZ did a bit of work on a replacement system last year:, but this Government and indeed previous ones haven’t been keen to give local government more and/or a different ability to charge for our services. I’m happy to continue this discussion, but we need to make our current rates policy fairer (which I will do with my plans to increase the UAGC a touch and boost the low income rebate uptake), and reduce council waste. If we do a better job of spending within the constraints we have, that may make a future government more interested in giving us more flexibility.

    2. Wayne Andrewartha says:

      Hi Mark,
      Some of your ideas sound good. It is about time we dumped the current garbage mayor and have someone useful elected instead. I would like to make a suggestion re your policies. Rates are a major issue with ratepayers. It is the main impact the Auckland Council have on most people living in Auckland. This affects them far more than any good projects you manage to complete. I wonder whether you and your team would consider a different rating system. Mostly based on the capital value of a house is unfair. I believe it should be user pays. If a house owner had a house worth $6 million, and a house owner had a house worth 600,000, why should the more expensive property incur 10 times the rates. It is completely unjust. Especially when the more expensive house owner wouldn’t use 10 times your services. I have that opinion even though I don’t own a very expensive house. There must be a better way to levy the ratepayers. In some instances, your rates are forcing house owners on fixed incomes to leave their cherished but expensive properties because of the rates. That is morally wrong, no matter what the official policy is. I realize as an accountant that the council need income to maintain a city the size of Auckland. I don’t suggest you accept a lower income to do the job you are elected for – just review the basis on which rates are calculated. Thank you. Good luck with your campaign Cheers Wayne Andrewartha ACA