Editorial: V8 chairman takes the wrong turn

COMMENT

Tony Cochrane, the chairman of the Australian Vee Eight Supercar Company (Avesco), badly needs some tuition in the New Zealand character. The type of teaching that would inform him that New Zealanders do not respond well to threats, empty or otherwise, especially when they come from overseas. The sort of education that would confirm his latest outburst has hindered, not helped, his company's chances of staging a round of the V8 Supercar series in Auckland, on an inner-city Victoria Park circuit, from 2006.

Mr Cochrane, with all the subtlety of a supercharged hot rod, has told Aucklanders that their chances of hosting the race are now in jeopardy. It was "ludicrous", he said, that the city had not got its act together and solved the traffic issues raised by the event. The likes of Singapore, Dubai and Cape Town were crying out for the race, yet Auckland, which had been "gifted" the race by Avesco, seemed unable to make the required arrangements. Other cities, said Mr Cochrane, citing Monaco, Vancouver, Montreal, the Gold Coast and Long Beach, had managed to host motor-racing in the heart of their downtown areas.

He is being disingenuous. There is good reason for the delays in Auckland, as he well knows. In none of those cities are the problems raised by racing quite so significant. In none of them does such a major motorway link - that to Fanshawe St - have to be closed. In none of them is the potential threat of bottlenecks and general traffic chaos quite so great. And in none of those cities is there potential for planned major work on an important piece of roading - the Victoria Park flyover - to be disrupted by the racing.

Given these problems, the consent process now in train is precisely the right way for dealing with the event, as much as it irks Mr Cochrane. The initial thumbs-down from planning commissioners spoke volumes of the lack of work by the race promoters. Undoubtedly, they have a marvellous product on their hands, one that would breathe life into the inner-city area. But it is still yet to be shown that feasible alternative transport can be arranged, and that the race will deliver significant economic benefit. Despite some inflated claims by the Auckland City Council, that benefit now appears to be just $2.7 million to $4.1 million.

Yet Mr Cochrane continues to portray Avesco as a kind of misunderstood benefactor. Why, he asks, cannot Auckland just accept this "gift". In reality, the company wants the race to be held in Auckland, and, whatever the threats, would be reluctant to go elsewhere. The city council package, including a $3.5 million interest-free loan, is undoubtedly highly attractive. As is the factor of New Zealanders' appreciation of, and participation in, this Australian event. The reception for V8 Supercars would be nowhere near as fulsome in Dubai or Cape Town. The loss if the event were to go to another city would not, as Mr Cochrane, suggests, be New Zealand's alone. Just as surely, it would be Avesco's.

The company has, of course, been keen to use New Zealanders' keen interest in this type of racing to its advantage. It has made great play of the "silent majority" who want the race here, and decried the opposition of what it sees as a small minority of curmudgeons.

The result of today's Herald-Digipoll should cause Mr Cochrane to rethink that line, too. When 47 per cent of those polled favour an event, and 46 per cent are against, there are no winners. Rather, there is a city divided by a race that promises much, but only if it can be carried off without major disruption.

Mr Cochrane's impatient blundering will have done nothing to assuage the sentiment of the doubters. All it will have done is get many backs up. New Zealanders, quite simply, do not like being held to ransom. Their response is to dig their toes in. The fact is that Avesco needs Auckland as much as the city needs the Supercars. Its agreement to a 90-day planning extension says as much. The company might make progress if it acknowledged this, and opted for co-operation, not confrontation.