Skip to main content

To: People of Christchurch and neighbouring councils

Have your say on the Christchurch Stadium to save the climate

This campaign has ended.

The Christchurch City Council wants to know what you think about investing extra money into Te Kaha - Canterbury’s multi-use arena (Stadium).

Have your say at Te Kaha multi-use arena budget consultation:
https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/514

Update: Thank you to all those who made a submission and/or signed this petition. Initial analysis shows 23% are against pushing on with the project. Though not ideal, it should be enough of a split to allow councillors to make their own decisions. The numbers may suggest one in four ratepayers are against the Council investing the additional money, which is significant, and more so given they will be forced to help pay for it.

Why is this important?

The construction cost of the Christchurch Stadium is massive and there are a lot of GreenHouse Gases emitted during the manufacture and transportation of steel and concrete that is needed in large volumes for the Stadium’s proposed design. https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/128957620/criticism-over-enormous-carbon-footprint-of-christchurchs-planned-stadium

The current stadium has small crowds and the planned stadium is likely oversized.
With an expected economic benefit over 25 years of $462.2 million and an expected cost over that time of $847 million (made up of $683m project cost + $4.2m x 25 years operating cost + $59m cost of land purchase), the stadium is expected to lose $385 million with a return of $0.55 on every dollar spent. (Numbers are from the Council's consultation page, and the cost of land purchase being additional was confirmed by email correspondence.)
It does not make sense to push on with the Stadium.

However previous Council decisions on the Stadium have had great interest from the rugby community, and the Crusaders chief executive has submitted for this consultation that he wants the Council to invest the additional $150 million to continue as planned. Last year, a petition signed by 24,000 people led to the Council opting for the $50m more expensive 30,000 seat option. The Canterbury Rugby Football Union has emailed the 25,000 in its database asking them to express support for the 30,000 seat covered Stadium on the Council's website, and the Canterbury Employers' Chamber of Commerce has encouraged its 2700 members to call for the stadium to be built without delay.

This is why the submission YOU (Christchurch or neighbouring council resident) make is so important for ensuring a sensible decision is made. Only a week since consultation started and already 18,000 submissions have been received.

Aside from some personal details, the consultation only has one question.
Should the Council:
- Invest an additional up to $150 million to enable the project to continue as planned,
- Stop the project altogether, or
- Pause and re-evaluate the project.

Councillors have said that people may think they pay lip service to consultations, but they would all be paying close attention to this one. They have also said that letters to the editor, posts on facebook, petitions, etc. won't make any difference unless you actually make a submission.
This petition will be closed after consultation closes on the 5th of July. So please make a submission now at Te Kaha multi-use arena budget consultation https://ccc.govt.nz/the-council/haveyoursay/show/514. It takes hardly any time to tick a box.
Spread the word and if anyone knows someone in School Strike 4 Climate this may be something they would be interested in.

How it will be delivered

Please note: This petition will not be presented. If you want to make a difference, make a submission before consultation closes on the 5th of July.

Canterbury, New Zealand

Maps © Stamen; Data © OSM and contributors, ODbL

Links

Updates

2022-09-01 20:40:16 +1200

25 signatures reached

2022-07-06 13:19:24 +1200

Thank you to all those who made a submission and/or signed this petition. Initial analysis shows 23% are against pushing on with the project. Though not ideal, it should be enough of a split to allow councillors to make their own decisions. The numbers may suggest one in four ratepayers are against the Council investing the additional money, which is significant, and more so given they will be forced to help pay for it.

2022-06-29 20:52:19 +1200

10 signatures reached