Editorial: Council silence over Upokongaro bridge feeds frustration

Construction work at the site of the new Upokongaro Cycleway Bridge began in early 2019. Photo / Bevan Conley

Comment: Silence can be deafening - especially when there's a dormant 120m bridge in plain sight to amplify the noise.

With that in mind we can thank Whanganui mayor Hamish McDouall for the first morsels of new information on the Upokongaro cycle bridge hold-up in more than six months.

The project has stalled for almost a year with few clues as to when the $2.54 million project will be completed and why it hasn't been.

With little information of substance coming from the authorities, the public has been left to make up its own mind - as it tends to do - at the pub, in the letters the editor and on social media.

Attempts to find out anything have been met by obfuscation.

We asked Horizons Regional Council if the consent has been signed off - a simple yes or no question – and if not why it hasn't.

The written response, which acknowledged the public's frustration, said: "We have made good progress and need to ensure that a robust and appropriate decision is made that will be enduring" but did not explain why.

There is a history of one-liners from the Whanganui District Council in response to several questions since chief executive Kym Fell acknowledged in May it hadn't consulted properly, and that it was "currently concluding" this through the Te Awa Tupua (River Claims Settlement) Act.

In September: "Final approvals for this project are now very close to being concluded and we are working … to determine a suitable launch date, taking into account weather conditions."

The bridge has sat on land for more than a year. Photo / Bevan Conley

In October: "We are still working through the final approvals for this project, and a suitable launch date taking into account weather conditions."

Now, this week: "We still have a number of things to finalise before we can confirm a launch date for the bridge."

None of the statements elaborated at all, despite questions.

These garbled, managed responses which avoid some questions and raise more give the impression there something left unsaid.

Are they just trying to protect their reputation, fearing what the public might think?

But it actually makes it worse.

There are clearly things the public are not being told about.

Incorporating the new and unique legislation is always going to be difficult. Some of it may be sensitive. There may not even be that much to say.

But surely we could have been provided with a more comprehensive explanation than we've been getting.

The public might understand if given the story and if they don't, at least it quashes conspiracy theories.