Is this a collapse scenario that's now in play in Launceston

Click here to go to The Examiner

FROM SUNDAY JAN 22  EXAMINER 

"North gathers momentum moving forward 
Piia WirsuPiia Wirsu 22 Jan 2017, 7 a.m.

Treasurer Peter Gutwein’s announcement on Saturday of a $20 million interest-free loan to the City of Launceston is another indicator the city is moving forward. 

The money will go towards a St John Street redevelopment, upgrades to the Cataract Gorge, Brisbane Street Mall regeneration works and a car park at the CH Smith site, fast-tracking estimated completion dates. 

As state tourism numbers skyrocket, ensuring the North is keeping up and has the infrastructure to both attract and handle tourists, visitors and locals is crucial, and this announcement shows it is on the agenda. 

It is an exciting time for Launceston, and the entire northern region, as the stimulus of improved tourism flow to the state, new events, and investor interest is harnessed to improve the area’s economy and infrastructure. 

This announcement comes on the back of a host of other developments and can assure Launceston residents the city is progressing and will be able to compete with the best. 

Last year saw a host of development announcements, with developer Errol Stewart and architect Scott Curran unveiling designs for a revitalised CH Smith redevelopment; plans announced for a redevelopment of the TRC site including car parking, a hotel and conference facilities; and continuing work on the Silo Hotel development. .

As City of Launceston deputy mayor Rob Soward pointed out, the accelerated projects are in addition to the council’s existing 2016-17 $20 million capital works program. 

“[This includes] the $9 million North Bank redevelopment, the major redevelopment of Civic Square, the redevelopment and repurposing of Macquarie House, the second-stage upgrade of the Seaport Boardwalk, and the $260 million University of Tasmania relocation,” he said. 

There is a growing momentum in the north, and these developments and improvements are overdue. The optimistic future they capture is welcome. 

The interest and investment from a range of sectors and people is just what Launceston needs to revitalise and continue to grow in tourism, the economy, business and industry. 

With such backing and optimism, the future looks bright for Launceston and the North. Let’s hope continued commitment and interest keeps the momentum up, as the region sets itself apart as a place for tourism, business and investment.

END

COMMENTS FROM AROUND THE TRAPS

FOREWORD: At the start of the working year this editorial speaks loudly about either Launceston Council's absolute cynicism or its ineptitude. The apparent reliance upon 'the punters' being asleep at the beach or off catching up on their reading is too, too cynical for words. In cahoots with 'The Treasurer' it seems that the Aldermen have abandoned any idea of careful fiscal management (Progress With Prudence) and have consequently left 'things' in the hands of 'management'. 

Well not everyone was as 'asleep at the wheel' as the 'cutters and dryers at Town Hall', that is Launceston's Mayor and General Manager have apparently assumed.  In attempting to 'pull a fast one' at tomorrow's Launceston Council meeting this act is just as deserving of the contempt as the contempt the entire Council appears to be holding its ratepayers and residents in.

Is this anywhere near good enough?

The following  comments and questions have been dribbling in throughout today:

• Far from being totally 'GOOD NEWS' the implications in this editorial is that Launceston's ratepayers are facing the spectre of their Council putting them into a position that might be described as an unsustainable debt crisis!

• Bulldust is bulldust even when it's printed by 'The Examiner' and far from saving Launceston,  Tasmania's Treasurer is visiting increasing debts upon the city that's ultimately to be repaid by 30,000 ratepayers and arguably for the benefit of a handful of business people working within an outmoded operational/business model.

• Just who is doing the numbers in all this? When one gets down to thinking about that, it's all the more worrying! It is especially worrying when the city's Deputy Mayor Soward comes out as a spokesperson and shows himself to be totally unable to do either "the numbers or the politics". With two chartered accountants on 'the team' just what have they been doing? In fact would you trust these people with your superannuation money?

• Before Christmas Minister/Treasurer Peter Gutwein was lending Launceston $9Million and now its $20Million all to be repaid by ratepayers over 5 years but there's no plausible explanation as to how they'll be doing it.

• Launceston's General Manager, Robert Dobrzynski, before Christmas is reported to have said that the then $9Million Loan would be repaid out of "parking income". Doing the numbers then, that meant that the new parking station was going to need to make $5K per week PROFIT. But who is/was doing 'the numbers' when "the interest free loan" was accepted? More to the pint who is doing them now that the debt is $20Million?

• It has been reported that Deputy Mayor Soward is saying that over 5 years each and every ratepayer in Launceston has been signed up to repay $700 PLUS. When did the community consultation for that take place? Is not this a rates increase by stealth? Is this the end of the 'fiscal folly' that Launceston City Council is embarked upon or is there more to come? How does this increased expenditure measure up against the city's 'Strategic or Fiscal Planning'?

• Just what value is being created via this expenditure and by whom for whom? Are the potential answers to all this being hidden and/or glossed over?

• Does West Tamar Council's decision to seek $1.7Million as an interest free loan for a project already planned for and to only accept 'the debt' after community consultation, actually tell us anything important about Launceston's apparent fiscal recklessness?

• With all this projected expenditure there is not a sausage being mentioned about 'fixing up the Tamar', so does this tell anybody anything at all about Launceston's Aldermen's concern for 'the state of the river', or for that matter 'the environment', or indeed their priorities or even their aspirations for the ratepayers they're paid to represent?

• To what extent has Launceston's fiscal planning changed, over what timeframe and at what cost to ratepayers? Who is aware – that is which Aldermen are aware – of the extent of change or indeed who has even been looking? Who is telling who what?

AND the answers to these questions pose ever more questions but who is going to answer them and/or even has the ability to do so?