Strong reaction from South Canterbury on controversial ads

Monday, 5 February 2024

A double-page advertising spread questioning the necessity of a $57 million upgrade of the Timaru’s Theatre Royal, and creation of a heritage hub, has been the talk of the town since it ran on Thursday.

The advert placed by Conscious South Canterbury, which has the slogan “Aiming for Ethical Decision Making”, featured in The Timaru Herald and a community newspaper.

It has prompted much discussion, including letters to the editor, with councillor and radio host Owen Jackson using his breakfast show slot to address the matter.

The Timaru Herald has contacted Conscious South Canterbury via the spokesperson listed in the advertising and requested to speak to those behind the ads.

They are yet to respond.

Mayor Nigel Bowen said while the council welcomed debate, it was hard to discuss issues with a group of people who provided no real detail of who they were.

“While this kind of advertising is common elsewhere, it’s unusual in South Canterbury for people not to be more open and upfront,’’ Bowen said.

“I’ve met with many local groups and members of the public over the years, and as we’re entering our Long Term Plan process we’d really welcome this group’s input.’’

He said his door was always open to the group to discuss their issues of concern and “the significant number of misunderstandings they have about this project”.

He said context was important.

“Although individually this is a large amount, it’s only a small part of the more than $600m of community and infrastructure works we’ll be undertaking over the life of our long term plan, over 80% of which will be spent on basic core infrastructure.”

Speaking on his Friday morning show, Jackson said he was disturbed by the advertisements.

“So who are Conscious South Canterbury?’’ he asked.

“I ask you to stand up for your convictions rather than hiding behind anonymity.’’

Jackson said councillors were under enormous pressure, it was a hugely expensive process to run a district and service expectations were “extremely high’’.

He said people would be able have their say “based on balanced and considered views’’ during the council’s upcoming Long Term Plan consultation.

“There is no mention that our capital expenditure spend over the Long Term Plan is $650m, most of which will go into our water, roads, our waste, as it should.

“$60m is committed for the Theatre Royal Heritage Centre and the stadium. That is 10% to spend on the social fabric of our community.’’

He said not everybody in the district was into sport, and there was now a generation of kids who had missed the chance to perform on the Theatre Royal stage.

He told listeners to wait for balanced and informed views, rather than “just an advert that surrounds’’ the community paper.

On Thursday, the South Canterbury Chamber of Commerce also addressed the Theatre project in its regular email to members, saying it had been contacted by members over Christmas, sharing a range of views on the development, and it intended to distribute a survey to seek feedback and “add value to the consultation process’’.

Chamber chief executive Wendy Smith said she felt it was appropriate to conduct a survey as a range of views had been shared by the business community.

She said the chamber regularly asked for feedback on a range of issues including business confidence, long term and annual plans, Growth Management Strategy, the Alpine Energy Shares Sale Proposal, and The Showgrounds development.

She said it was important for everyone to have a say on the future of the district including businesses.

“Our chamber member businesses employ thousands of staff in South Canterbury and the business owners take the welfare of their employees as a serious responsibility.

“This project impacts all Timaru District residents and business owners.’’

Smith said there were many positives to ensuring the district had a vibrant arts culture and centre.

“It appears that the issues being raised around the current Theatre Royal and heritage facility are not about whether a facility is needed, or would be valuable, but about the level of spend and the debt levels of council that will be incurred under the present proposal and in the current economic climate.’’

On November 28, councillors voted (five votes to four) to take the controversial project to the next stage during a public excluded part of a council meeting.

Mayor Nigel Bowen and councillors Peter Burt, Owen Jackson, Scott Shannon and Michelle Pye voted in favour, while councillors Allan Booth, Stu Piddington, Stacey Scott and Gavin Oliver voted against the motion. Councillor Sally Parker was not present at the meeting.