Water

Where would we be without it.

Thank goodness the election is over but the headlines continue and a local MP smiles and waves for the camera saying ' a dam for Hawkes Bay is a priority'.

It is an issue that has been around for years and the big move to build a dam in Central Hawkes Bay met all sorts of problems , political and non political.

It was unfortunate the Council was central to the funding. Or should I say the ratepayers funding what could have been  an ongoing draw on already over tapped residents.

The dam issue has been resurrected following the rout of experienced council staff  and a round of elections changing the political makeup so much that any flow on of knowledge and experience hit the post and deflected to a new age of generation something that  missed history and want to reinvent the wheel.

The facts are the incredible system we have in Hawkes Bay has been around for a while and in our lifetimes has not changed a lot although the 1931 earthquake did make some changes that can however be factored in .

Water (Falls from the sky I think) in Hawkes Bay is a fascinating story and our region is so lucky we have a  major aquifer system that underpins our economy that revolves around land based activity.

Ratepayers have spent large sums of  money investigating, studying, reporting,  on our water availability  that reflects its importance in the bigger picture of life in Hawkes Bay.

Our cities and growers and industry have tapped in to a great reservoir since the 1930's and utilised a pristine necessity to great effect.

Many do not know that we actually have three reservoirs under the Heretaunga Plains and although test deep wells to 300 metres have provided valuable information the shallower aquifers around 50 metres are where most wells have tapped in to extract what is gold to many.

When one considers the size of the plains aquifers and understands that they are are deep , over a vast area and the water is continually being recharged mainly from the Ngaruroro river , then we really have a massively important asset.

It is arguable wether a dam is necessary in Hawkes Bay although farmland in the upper reaches of the Ngaruroro catchment could benefit from a dam as they precede the recharge area and can be water short in dry years. The trouble is who pays?

The emphasis on reducing water use for producers on the plains could be misplaced and should  be redirected to massive amounts extracted by  the two main cities and how much is  wasted because it just comes out of the tap.    

         

$50 Million Down the Plughole

Call it what you like. The pub test, commonsense, local knowledge, logical thinking. The more people in the local community that I talk to the more I get the same answer.

The kneejerk reaction to the flood has seen the boffins spend $50 million on works that are not going to solve any problems.

Locals don't count. Local knowledge doesn't make any difference even when there are 80 year olds that have witnessed all sorts of weather events and stored away in their memories  the impacts, the results and the historical reactions that add to an accumulated store of valuable information that at times like this can be utilised to help make decisions. To help understand. To help the community better prepare for any future events.

A close by neighbour called in during the week and let rip at the destruction occurring along the banks of our local stream.

Trees that have been established for years are being felled and chipped .Yes chipped. What a waste.

They should not be felled at all. What about the environmental impact . Surprising there was no report that stopped the destruction of habitat.

All part of the plan to build a stopbank that will do nothing. A stopbank that is being built to make it look as though something is being achieved. A stopbank project that is costing $50 million .

The community was decimated following Gabrielle and gathered itself together with grit and grind from helping each other and help from an army of volunteers.

Those who were bought out probably gained fom the deal while the remainder have carried on .Watching with disgust now as money goes down the plughole on a poorly thought out response.

It has been heartening that the response from everyone I have talked to has been the same. No need.

The answer lies in other areas which I will divulge in time . 

 

 

   

 The  House That Moved

Amazing what they can do to move a house these days. 

Trucks that can perform amazing tasks to straddle and dodge obstacles on the way to a new outlook.

So the house that was moved from danger  (too late really) was sitting on the truck one day and in the middle of the night I heard the quiet but fast move down the road with flashing lights and pilot vehicles and attendants paving the way for a safe trip.

The property that the house was moved from was deemed necessary to acquire for future flood control.

It's like a kneejerk reaction. Something has to be seen to be done or otherwise there will be another catastrophe .

The stream next to the property has been quietly flowing for years and years .There was a stopbank present along the adjoining stretch but the stream was spring fed.

The spring was miles away and the resulting flow meandered through many properties before reaching a junction with the main river system where it discharged near a double channel that took overflow from the main river.

I had seen this stream at times of very high rainfall and runoff pushed it up a little but it was hard to notice.

I had observed the level well up the stopbank in one rain event but it never looked like breaching.

The only reason it breached during Gabrielle was because the main river had multiple breaches up steam and that combined with what was more like a dam burst in another valley to deliver us a double whammy.

The solution was to attend to upstream issues first.

Disrupting peoples lives and spending ratepayers and taxpayers money on quick fix solutions was a poor decision.

The other issue is reoccurrence.

 I guess modelling suggests we will see the same scenario repeated in the future.

I would speculate that we will not.

The exact same scenario will not be repeated and there other areas that I can see that are much more vulnerable  and still exposed to future events.

Two areas in particular are open to huge destruction and possible loss of life.

Strange that the reaction is to penalise those who have already been penalised. 

        

 Another House Gone

One of the more silly ideas born out of modelling and expert opinion has seen a block of land purchased off owners that lived happily on their life sentence block for years . Parties ,family , sheep, upgrades, fruit, cropping . All those wonderful aspects of life that we live for and enjoy until something comes along and kicks you in the guts.

Well Gabrielle did that but they buried sheep ,lost sheep , lost a  restored Holden , lost household goods but survived to tell the tale.

That was until the powers that be turned up and said we want to but your property and if you don't agree we will take it.

Its a marvellous piece of legislation the Public Works Act.

Sometimes it may be warranted but with this move it was debatable.

Locals who have been resident for years could see the stupidity.  It is so silly that locals may understand the area when the experts have all the knowledge and qualifications to clobber the people with facts and figures.

To hell with commonsense understanding and years of observation.

The modelling shows this block that has a stopbank on one boundary and a curve that invited the power of water to press against during the flood , thus creating a hole, a breach, a weak spot now must be changed to accommodate the next flood.

Not only that but well established trees that had held the edge of the banks together with a tangle of roots holding hands such that they never fell over in the heat of the moment , well they must go.

Modelling says so.

Realign. Reshape. redesign because the money is there and it will all work better next time.

Such folly.

I think the analysis by the locals that witnessed what happened , quietly whispered between friends , was that there was no need for this action.

The fault lay upstream. The fault was part of a much larger problem that is not being addressed .

So this lovely house that stood up to the forces of nature was lifted on to the back of a truck the other day and sat in the paddock awaiting it's escape to some other paddock or hill top.

It will not feature on moving houses .It is just another house lost  to our community because of bad decisions .

The dozers are lined up ready to reshape the future.    

     

  

Lessons Learnt

It was good to hear a radio interview with a representative of a volunteer group that was involved in the many and varied tasks of helping those affected by Gabrielle.

The old Civil Defence setup ,though well meaning , failed miserably following the flood and hopefully is now a better group after a look in the mirror and an embarrassing  exposure in the aftermath.

They have their place.

What was comforting was the lessons learned by those involved in helping the many in  a host of situations and the way they have convened and chewed and created an effective approach for future events.

The many communities affected locally did react immediately and come together and pull resources and equipment to help their fellow members at such a difficult time.

Locals understand the geography ,  they understand the land . the waterways, the problems and from experience know what to do.

People pool resources very quickly and recognise the expertise that many can contribute.

Talk of hubs that can be set up is a good move and some better organisation and planning put in place now will be invaluable for any future challenges.

I had a few concerns about terminology but at this stage that can be overridden as it would be if there is a serious event.

Future events may well hit different parts of our region so so planning for any events based on a repeat of the last flood may well be slightly misguided .Hopefully resources can be shifted quickly and effectively.

Exceedingly good that local knowledge has been recognised and councils through Civil Defence can stay on their side of the fence  along with any other Government bodies .

Better to respect the locals and not dictate.

    

      

Politicians

I know.

The mere mention of the word causes faces to contort.

What now?

The National team ,  that thought they understood Local Government , demanded that Councils look at options for amalgamation as that was going to solve all the rates rises. You know. Bigger is better. Savings from economies of scale. Less CEO's (that were once Town Clerks).  Less staff. Blah, blah, blah.

Councils throughout the country threw themselves in to  consultant led conniptions, staff led saving our arse excercises and councillor led what's in it for me mindsets.

Forget about millions spent previously on amalgamation questions and the glaring example of what not to do provided by the monster Auckland Council that breeds staff  and reports like Central Otago rabbits .No it's only ratepayer money that is being spent err, being thrown down the braided rivers of various catchments in to a sea of  crabs that grab it with their little nippers before the next notes appear.

May be that's what an economy is about . Just throw the money around and hope everyone snares enough to get a feed with.

So all this money was spent and then at the last minute the Government said they will put these ideas on hold .

What happened?

Did the Government get a message that local government is not that easy to change and there were problems in trying to force change on extremely diverse arrangements that fit in to our long ,complicated , geographically changing regions .

It's hard to fathom but going by the vacuous  utterances exuding from the Local Government Minister one does not have a lot of hope that the decision was amde for wise reasons.

Wise is something missing in the beehive.

Ho hum.

Ratepayers have been skinned again. Fleeced of money that will never be explained in the lengthening list of explanations on a rates bill.

Their should be a line for confetti. 

 

     

 Rates Bill

Not hard to get upset about a rates bill these days.

As I tentatively opened the colourful envelope ( I knew it wasn't a love letter)  I had a thousand thoughts running through my mind.

Would the new valuations mean a drop in rates?  Has the Council made some cuts to expenditure and reduced the reach in to ratepayers pockets?  (haha) Has the Council  reduced the number of lines explaining every added excuse for a little more rates?

No way.

It was the same old spread. 

It was as though nothing had happened .

After paying rates for forty years it continues.

There is a line or two that says HPFPS .

Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme.

What happened .We had a flood. Were we protected .No. 

The Heretaunga Plains Flood Control Scheme failed. It was/is  a very good scheme and was designed to protect us from flooding with stopbanks built for a 1 in 100 year event.

So for years and years ratepayers have paid to build and maintain this scheme. It failed.

Why did it fail.

A host of reasons exacerbated by a major rain event .Many of the reasons however were because the Council failed to carry out maintenance , failed to hold up their end of the bargain that the ratepayers coughed up for.

Why did we pay rates for decades for protection and still get flooded ? 

So here we are again paying the rates for protection that is now questionable.

$50 million currently being spent on stopbanks in our area is a waste of money. The rivers that are filled up with tree growth and silt have not been touched.

If I refuse to pay my rates the state wins.

I'm back to accountability and why are we ineffective in attempts to correct this mess. 

    

 

Accountability

Word of the week.

Accountability. It's been popping up in conversation around many issues and Government and Local Government are being exposed  for the lack of accountability that occurs after major events or decisions that affect thousands of New Zealanders.

It is not a new problem but may be issues like the Mount and alleged lies by public servants have brought the problem to prominence in the media and a bit of sunlight has exposed how bad things are.

Historically accountability of civil servants has been a 'too hard' to deal with issue .We can't sue and the public service carries on as though nothing has happened.

Following Gabrielle fingers were pointed , behind the scenes shifts occurred , jobs reallocated , lots of muttering and excuses but no accountability. Nothing. Nada.

It was hard to get a hold on who was in charge and who made decisions. No one wanted to front up and if you asked questions there was silence.

Last week I happened to be having a wide ranging conversation with a local friend and the comment was made, "he made the decision "

I was stunned .Whaaat ? I asked. Yes he made the decision.

So from a random conversation and by sheer coincidence I found out who made the decision to draw a line through our community causing angst and pain, pitching local against local during a time of extreme fear and upheaval.

The Category 3 ID was a line drawn in haste . It was totally unnecessary and was one of those hasty decisions that was made by the hidden shiny arse brigade in Wellington with help from information supplied by local public servants.

I had tried to find out who made the decision and now I know.

It confirms in my mind that the process that evolved all to quickly following the flood was ill conceived and though well intentioned had such a drastic affect on our community (and others) that it should never be followed again.

The disconnect between the people and the bureaucrats has never been greater and accountability will never occur with the current setup.

I will not divulge the name of the decision maker because he is but one in a chain of command that is possibly implicated in many Government decisions that have had major impacts on communities.

Suffice to say it helps put the picture together for later reference.  

   

 

   

 

Urban Rural Divide

For years it has been purported that there has been an urban rural divide.

New Zealand used to have a population where nearly everyone had a contact or family that had a rural connection. It was common to have holidays on a farm or to go and stay with relatives and enjoy a break from city life.

Kiwis understood what went on in the country and there was a common sense of purpose .

Over the last few years with a surge in population the division is more apparent and the latest round of Government dictates has emphasised how far things have moved .How the gap has widened and how out of touch some urbanites are with the rural sector.

Some of the suggestions coming out of suburbia to solve Local Government problems are frankly scary and underline how far down the track we are to ignoring the importance of the rural sector and its key role in leading export returns for New Zealand.

The South Island is surging ahead with a shift in population discovering once quiet , comfortable and beautiful surroundings that are now being settled with carefully coloured and positioned houses that overlook lakes and valleys and vineyards that will soon be spoilt in the rush.

It's bloody cold in the winter but that's good for skiing and closed roads and panel beaters .

The urban excitement taking place is going to play out in more control of rural problems, as the Government shifts democratic decision making  from land owners to wannabe landowners and environmental zealots  that think they understand nature. 

One suggested solution to changing local government has a business model with experts around a table making decisions (because business people know best) .They will have representatives of all interested parties of course but once set up it will be an arrogant takeover of ratepayers money in to yet another trough for mates and matesses.

We are in for a major shift to urban control of rural areas and farmers, growers and related people of the land are in for a very difficult time.    

   

Unfathomable

Over the last week their have been many media stories about the forced local government  agenda and it is truly alarming the extent and speed by which things are rolling out.

As well, it is alarming that the variations being proposed are creating an absolute mish mash of options that are going to have ratepayers crying in their home havens while trying to decipher what is happening to their councils that have become agents of theft and chambers of non representation.

One council came out and said there is no way they are going to play the game and another had options that read like the  confusion of a kindergarten playground . Clearly no clear organisation and a poor attempt at appeasing a bullying government .

New proposed councils that have urban Mayors leading regions is going to lead to mayhem among rural ratepayers and before long calls to reinstate what we had established. 

A Minister came out and said he had been told to go harder and faster. By whom? 

That has to be a big porkie and if true, could only come from those who have an agenda that believes in the tooth fairy that tells them the rates will come down if they do as they are told.

It is a pity the Minister was not questioned by the compliant media person although he was part of the crowd who have been convinced bigger is better and rates will be reduced. 

Another horror story came from another minister who , while puffed up like a pious pigeon , said that if councils don't do as they are told the invisible bureaucrats in Wellington will make the decision for them' This is wrong on so many fronts and yet there is little resistance.     

It is a totally undemocratic and affront to ratepayers to think that  the shiny arse brigade residing in Wellington have any idea of the complicated makeup of regional New Zealand and how local government operates.

Imposing  the urban approach to many rural areas throughout the country is going to challenge long time established norms and pitch rural against urban like never before.

All ratepayers want rates to come down but this is not the way to do it.       

 

 Forcing Ratepayers

I'm surprised there has not been more pushback from ratepayers over a Government threatening to force councils to amalgamate in some form or face the wrath of a Minister who is driven by some ideological dream that has convinced him that bigger is better and Central government knows better than the people on the ground.

It was telling this last week when a former  National Minister,  now Councillor , admitted that after supporting the Auckland Super Council he now sees it as a failure.

The touted savings never eventuated and in fact have increased by 25% and staff numbers keep growing.

This is what will happen around the country if the dictates of the current minister occur.  

Local Government is just that , local. That's the way it should stay . The bigger is better argument does not apply in this situation because of the roles of councils and the variation of situations throughout New Zealand.

The worst part of the equation is the elimination of Regional Councils.

The role of Regional Councils is critical in maintaining an infrastructure around catchments that has been only too critical in recent times. 

If they are absorbed in to unitary authorities the importance of regional issues such as pests, catchments ,water , air , TB, transport and others will be diminished by the urban clamour for dollars for never ending desires of never been in business busybodies who expand their expenditure like a ratepayer bungy .

There will also be small councils that are fiscally responsible and have little or no debt that will get swallowed up in the quest for council perfection.

That's without getting in to the ownership of assets like ports that were deliberately given to regional councils in the 1998 restructuring. 

That's another big argument.   

 An End to 2C

Those in category 2c following Gabrielle have had a long wait to finally see the tag removed.

It was like a mark on your life as though you had done something wrong. Now the work that is being done or will be done to theoretically make us safer has proven enough to authorities to shift us all back to the land of normal.

No one out there in wider society will have any idea about the effectiveness or not of a reaction that has cost millions in questionable expenditure.

It is amazing what can be done with modelling but all the modelling in the world will not replace accumulated  experience and logic of learned engineers and long term residents that  could have been instrumental in injecting solutions for the people that did not cost a fortune and maintained our  long term prospects.

It has been sad to see a community go from an area where it was sought after, a prime location, thriving,  productive and busy to a shadow of itself and now being eyed up by some who have no respect for the potential that still exists in the surrounding land.           

 Amalgamation Mess

The more examples of proposed  amalgamation plans that are gaining media attention , the more it explains the folly of the move to force local government to travel down a path no one really wants.

It is highly likely the wrong people are in charge of coming up with these plans in the first place and the politics behind the scenes must be extraordinary.

It really is a mess.

To solve a problem first one must understand what one is trying to solve. Local Government is a strange beast as there are so many variables in the best country in the world and trying to fit all these variables in to the same box is a task fraught with difficulty .

Aside from the complexity is the raft of legislation that dictates the course of local government .So many dictates that guide the people through their complicated lives.

Options appearing include total amalgamations, part amalgamations , unitary authorities, halving authorities and some saying no to any change.

I think this reflects the stupidity of government trying to force ratepayers into a corner. 

The problem with local government was never properly identified thus the dire situation we are in ow and it will get worse if there is follow through.

There was at least one Mayor or former Mayor who identified what were the problems and how to approach them.

Hooray.

We are going to end up with a terrible model of local government and at a time when water is being corporatised along with other major legislative changes the future is looking extremely challenging.       

 Reforms Agenda

What is the agenda of those pushing the RMA reforms?

The agenda is supposedly aimed at making Local Government more efficient , less costly to ratepayers and to have less regulation to allow more development.

During the week it was apparent again from the proponents  that they were working in this void where they were oblivious to historical events and as well they were deaf to any advice from experienced operators who understand the past performance of legislation and reasons why there were reactions and actions played out in case law and  events that had a shaped a path to deal with managing resources.

Young Ministers sit in the house and spout as though nothing significant  has happened historically in the area of responsibility.  

It is hard to comprehend.

Simon Upton had made some sensible comments in response to what is happening and the response from the Minister of unnecessary reforms was scathing in his put down of  a once respected Minister.

Around the country we have reports coming out with similar themes. Oh there will be savings by reducing the number of administrative staff . Millions and millions but surprise surprise the council activities will still be required and in no time a new setup will expand and we will be back to square one.

What will happen to democracy? 

New large authorities will be more distant from the ratepayers and there will be no more 'local' in local democracy.   

We are in for a rough ride in the next few years.

Authorities

They came and wrecked our houses

ripping them apart

tearing out the organs 

the kitchen , showers and bath.

Nothing stood in the way

It was a target

holding tight held no sway.

They could rip it from the hinges, rip it from the floor,

prise it from its brackets

going door to door.

It didn't take long

for the ghosts , unseen , to leave a shell.

An  unwelcome response, at a time of living hell.

Reinventing the Wheel

The ongoing discussions around a politicians dream are costing thousands of dollars and hours of time going around and around issues that have been before us not too long ago and bypassing solutions that astute observers are already aware of.

I have mentioned catchments previously and over the last week have listened to discussions by people that have finally discovered these things called catchments and that they are real and you can't divvy them up in some great deranged attempt at cutting costs foist upon us from bureaucrats and politicians that live in an alternative universe.

Catchments are the crutch of the issue and one of the main reasons that regional councils were formed.

To listen to a new raft of  parties trying to reinvent what we already have is frustrating and disappointing.

This is coming about because of the loss of institutional knowledge. Local government (and other bodies) have gone through a period where the experienced engineers, on the ground operators and a raft of  knowledge carrying staff were quietly moved on to retirement and other areas of endeavour.

The impact on this has been drastically underestimated as the new crew of know it alls have been left floundering and bereft of ideas when it comes to dealing with problems.

It was obvious following Gabrielle but three years down the track it is apparent that the whole country is suffering from knowledge neglect.

So we have commentators and even politicians discovering things like riparian planting and wilding pines as though they have just appeared out of the woodwork.

  Listening to a new crop of MP's in the house is concerning as many are young and have not had the benefit of working with experienced MP's and it shows in answers at question time. It's pretty sad.

I am hoping that there will be some changes after the election that will see wiser heads prevail but given some of the players involved  I am losing hope.

Ratepayers will be losers next year. 

    

Catchments Key

Perusing more reports from various regions  tackling the forced reforms I note a common theme that is not a surprise.

Historically New Zealand has always had a body responsible for catchments .It's not half obvious why given the last few years and the challenges thrown at the country by natural forces.

It is critical that NZ understands how important catchments are in the development of our regions as they have a major impact on water and it's path to the sea. Catchments  have been understood for many years but lately have not had the understanding of politicians or the community as they have become lost in the political desire to build flash facilities instead of  infrastructure that protects and provides.

The new crop of politicians are like Johnny come latelys with their approach to dealing with headaches such as why Local Government has become top heavy and dictatorial .

They need to look in the mirror and ask who created the problem.

Shucks I find myself agreeing with the latest from the NZ Initiative who have correctly identified the crux of the Local Government largesse.

A senior fellow with the NZI has said the current problem with local government is not too many councils but that too much power has been taken away from local communities and moved to central government .He says council staff have too much power and councillors are effectively rubber stamping decisions made by staff.

I have been saying for some time that central government is responsible for the increasing workload of councils and issues such as the climate scam have a band of merry advocates all around the country trying to change the temperature. The only temperature change is occurring to ratepayers that are paying for a dream.

Jones and Watts and Bishop have wrongly identified the reason why rates are forever rising and the rude attack on local government misses the target completely.

The worst part of the bullying is the forced removal of regional councillors. Regional councils are critical in regional responsibilities such as the control of rivers and water. Water allocation needs to be with a body separated from main users of the resource , urban populations.

It is a classic poacher game keeper situation but it is misunderstood by most ratepayers.

Proposals emerging to address the bullying see catchments split down the middle, boundaries being played with and representation  resets that will cause major problems in the future.

Hawkes Bay rural sector should be shaking in their gumboots if a Mayor of an urban area is in control of regional rural issues.

Leave the dam situation as it is and stop causing so much angst and cost to ratepayers.

      

 More Money

Talk about money.

Headline today in the ODT says that analysis estimated to cost $60,000 is expected to bring focus to talks about reshaping Local Government on Otago.

Repeat this around the country and there will be millions spent by councils that have been forced by Central Government to confront a major change in the makeup of  their fiefdoms.

Well that may not be fair in most cases and putting the boot in to Regional Councils will see the biggest disenfranchising of the rural sector since 1989.

You have to question who is going to do the analysis . Inhouse? Independent? Bureaucrats ?

This is a huge waste of money and once again the long suffering ratepayer will cough up .

At the same time another headline mentions the Westland District Council (note District Council) $8.6 million payroll figure that has been defended after the number and cost of staff  was raised at the table.

Wow!

Now we are talking. Getting to the nub of the problem.

But Bish and co will carry on in their costly bid to  rearrange LG .Sad.

    

 It's a Question of Money

Reflecting on the flurry of activity following Gabrielle makes one question who was driving the decision making and who was trying to avoid money. Eg responsibility. Any responsibility.

Decisions had to be made and there were some good people involved . It was also a time for some objective analysis  and cool minds to assist in working through an emotional and traumatic period.

One mistake that was made in my opinion was the categorisation of flooded areas because this immediately caused a reaction from affected ratepayers. It was a hasty decision .Heartless and far reaching in it's pointed targeting of some and relief  for others.

The affect was to pitch ratepayer against ratepayer and cause jostling for positions in line for the best payout.

Fairness was lost in the quest to solve problems that needed better  understanding and satisfactory solutions.

At the moment I believe that move to categorise was a knee jerk reaction to copy the Christchurch earthquake situation.

I have never had time to investigate how that worked for Christchurch but it was wrong to use it as a blueprint following Gabrielle.

Large sums of money were  paid out in  and it was all confidential. We will never know the details but it is probable that some lost out and some did very well.

Was the whole deal made to benefit the banks, the insurance industry , the councils and the Government?

Something to ponder.

I feel the flood response in Carolina had a better foundation where all affected owners had a sum paid to them to help the process. I believe the payment was in the vicinity of $45 K.

A payment such as this  could have been covered by the Regional Council. This was an emergency and the responsibility for what happened could be possibly laid at the door of the HBRC given the evidence that emerged and the clarification of how events happened.

That is for another day but I suggest the RC could have made  general payment given they have such a large investment fund.

The fund has been built up in some large part due to the sale of leasehold land inherited following the 1931 earthquake.

It would be fitting to use those funds from one disaster to help in another.

Of course it is denial all the way because they do not want to admit liability and face consequences.

They have around $500 million that could have been tapped to help impacted ratepayers and Government could have facilitated that happening if required to do so.

There should be some lessons learnt from this disaster.         

Money

I was watching a discussion on YT about  financial advice and investing money.

The financial advisor was saying how every clients situation was so different and gave a number of examples of   situations where planning was made to suit the clients requirements.

Not surprising but it made me think of the situations of  residents following Gabrielle and as stories arose it was something I pondered while passing through the clouds of repair.

Talking to the church helpers and others who passed through , enabled me to build a picture of a diverse range of  life situations that were frozen in time while those affected took stock and proceeded to unpack and repack their upended lives.

It really was fascinating hearing the tales of  so many who were confronting problems with councils, insurance , banks, lost records, lost memories at the same time as having to deal with the stress of the disaster.

There were longtime residents, new arrivals, renters, old young, retirees, tradies, corporates, absent landowners and the list goes on.

The question was how can you solve every ones problems stemming from one destructive event.

Immediately  following the flood  there was a combined effort. Every one was in the same state of shock and banded together as one. It was a time of discovery and strength as we fought back from the abyss.

Ahead lay the mess and the way back to reality through masses of challenges and brick walls.

Yes every one had different circumstances but all circumstances were a challenge in our lives that we didn't need.