Rolleston and the General Election

Press, Volume CXV, Issue 33775, 22 February 1975, Page 14

Rolleston and the General Election

The new town at Rolleston shows every sign of becoming one of the most important regional subjects for dispute before this year’s General Election. When he spoke in Christchurch last December, the Leader of the Opposition (Mr Muldoon) promised that, if the National Party were returned to power next November, all development of the new town would cease The two men who will contest the Rangiora seat in November for the major parties have already crossed swords over the effect that building at Rolleston will have on Rangiora, Kaiapoi and other similar centres in Canterbury. The supporters of the plan are arguing that, if it is abandoned these secondary centres will have to absorb people and industries which will destroy their present character. Tbe opponents of the plan are arguing that if a new' town is built at Rolleston, the secondary centres will magnate. Both these arguments have flaws in them

When the Government decided to build the new town it was. clearly less concerned about the fate of Canterbury's secondary centres than about relieving the pressure of development in Christchurch, particularly pressure on land for housing. It is increasingly obvious that neither building a new town at Rolleston. nor actively fostering development in other centres, would alone solve Christchurch’s problems. Whatever happens elsewhere in Canterbury, Christchurch will continue to grow simply because social and economic pressures make it impracticable for many businesses to establish themselves away from the South Island's main centre of population. Apart from the formidable cost of providing a full range of services from scratch on an inhospitable site, only very large incentives would encourage the businesses that could sustain a large community of people to move to Rolleston. The money would be better spent on tackling the problems caused by growth in Christchurch directly, and on stimulating the orderly growth of existing smaller centres. Not all future growth in Canterbury can lake place beyond Christchurch, but some effort to foster the growth of the smaller centres will mean that Christchurch will not be denied the minor relief that development elsewhere will provide and will ensure that the smaller centres do not decline.

The Government may already be regretting that it has committed itself so firmly to establishing the new town at Rolleston. It has already indicated that it no longer believes it can solve the problems of Christchurch with this one stroke by proceeding with schemes to make more land available for building within Christchurch and to do so with the object of restricting land prices. The advantages of using different policies to solve problems created by growth in Christchurch and to ensure the continued vitality and growth of other centres are so great that the Government would be well advised to shelve the whole project, even though this mehnt selling off the land already acquired and writing off the costs of planning alreadv undertaken. This would cause the Government political embarrassment: but in the long run the Government would be admired for being willing to abandon a scheme of which the worth is becoming more dubious every day. If the Government can devise sensible alternative policies to achieve the ends it once hoped to achieve by building the new town, it will earn even more credit.

So long as the Government adheres to its intention to build the new town, it will be tempting for the National Party to exploit the issue. But this will onlv make it harder for the Government to admit its mistake Having stated its views, the National Partv would now serve the people of Canterbury better bv giving the Government an onportunity to heed the voice of reason and abandon its plans without having to appear to be canitulating to its political opoonents The Government may find it easier to do this now that the main supporter of the new town in Cabinet will no longer be closely involved in internal matters. But, if the Government persists in its mistake, the National Party has a clear duty, in November, to offer an alternative plan for ensuring that growth in Canterbury is orderly and sensibly distributed.