Hopefully this issue will not be allowed to fade away, and the news is not all bad. A majority of councillors still believe it is their duty to hold an inquiry, and a workshop should provide useful information and iron out some of the issues around such a procedure.
The problem with an inquiry is that it is costly and time-consuming.
Those factors, however, do not mean that it should not go ahead.
The 1000-plus name petition delivered by the Wanganui Ratepayers' Association makes it clear there is a substantial appetite for answers among those who have been left scratching their heads at 10 or more years of apparent blunders and dubious decision-making, and are now facing a $42 million bill for a new plant.
They have every right to ask: Why? What went wrong?
And the council has a moral responsibility to at least try and provide some answers. Where morality sits in the pecking order of local government is, of course, unclear, though some clarity may be found over the coming months.
Should an inquiry be held, here are a few things it might like to consider:
-Evidence that the old plant worked when the aerators were functioning properly;
-Evidence that the aerators failed and were not replaced;
-Evidence that the aerators were not returned to the manufacturer, even though they were still under guarantee;
-Evidence that councillors were kept in the dark by staff for some years during which the plant was failing - was this incompetence, a cover-up or what?
