We need to ask for specifics from those seeking election

The water treatment plant requires concrete plans and specific answers from candidates. PHOTO/FILE

THIS newspaper has taken a position of strict neutrality with respect to the upcoming local body elections, forbidding even letter writers from endorsing candidates.

As the issues of election are nonetheless open for discussion here, let me respectfully offer some questions which citizens may ask themselves - or the candidates - at forums, such as those sponsored by the Chronicle.

We all know there are problems in the River City. We are a provincial city with an economy that, in aggregate, is 0.5 per cent of the country's gross domestic product.

Judged strictly from the bean counters' perspective, it's "not much to see there - move along, please". But, based on the many contributions of national and international significance made by those who come from here, we're punching way above our weight. I've described some of our assets in these essays: river, heritage buildings, arts community, sports, plus a good local hospital, and a diverse and talented pool of people.

Those we elect to the Wanganui District Council need to be able to maximise and build on our assets.

We hear from some candidates that they hope to deal with our growing debt by increasing employment opportunities and attracting new people to come here. We need to ask for specifics on how they plan to do this. Where is the new employment to come from?

Others propose the sale of assets - but which of our assets are on their list? It's clear that asset sales look attractive in the short run - just as they do to central government - but may be a ticket on the bus to our future decline.

Any prospect for resolution of such issues will require of council that its members be able to see past personal issues and ego to co-operate for the common good. We need to ask which of the candidates are more likely to be able to co-operate with others to make the necessary compromises that can move us to better solutions.

To be clear, grandstanding, egotism and incivility cannot have a place at a council that hopes to be successful in dealing with the issues we face now.

Our best assets are the diversity and talents of our people, and our best hopes for the city will emerge as we fully appreciate the river that runs through it. With the coming of government settlement of iwi claims, it will be co-operation between council and iwi that is the source for the future economic and cultural revival of the city. The skill sets we will need from our elected representatives are the ability to reach across lines of division and the leadership and negotiating skills that promote unity. Our present council inherited problems which have their origins in earlier councils' decisions.

That said, anyone who has served more than one term has an obligation to tell us what they've done to deserve our continued confidence. What has the long-term incumbent done to enhance our reputation, to "make our praises heard afar?"

The issues of debt and the wastewater plant require concrete plans and specific answers from candidates. They need also to be asked about our hospital - our hospital and its future is, thus far, the unattended elephant in the council chamber and, if left unattended, that elephant could go rogue. How are we going to keep our hospital in the face of this government's stated intention to regionalise? What will candidates for council offer on plans for the city's largest employer and greatest asset? Is it for sale?

A group of candidates is standing for both council and for the Whanganui District Health Board. Should a seat on those two bodies go to any single individual or would our community be better served by a greater range of representation? Are the problems before each body so simple that they demand only half the time?

It's our job to choose wisely, with as much information as possible. It's the candidates' job to inform us of their merit for the trust we give them for the future of our city.