Consultation Contradictions

Dr Carr has stated on several occasions in public that the University does not want to intrude where it is not wanted.   In a statement on the University website following the recent Council meeting he reiterated this point and went on to add  " it makes sense for the University to hear and understand the views of the community."

(http://www.comsdev.canterbury.ac.nz/news/2009/090723a.shtml) 

It is rather surprising, then, to read what he has to say in the very next paragraph:  

“I welcome clarification from Mayor Bob Parker that the Special Consultative Procedure is not about the development being located on the Arts Centre site or the design of the building but on the council’s role in funding the project.”

How can Mr Carr hope to understand the views of the community if he is pleased that the consultation will will limited to the role of the Council in financing it?   This comment together with the disparaging remarks he has made about those who do not share  his vision ( notwithstanding the fact that they include some highly qualified and knowledgeable citizens)  raises serious doubts about the sincerity of his desire to "hear and understand".  How many signatures on a petition would it take for Dr Carr and the University to recognise that Christchurch does not want this?  It is difficult to avoid the view that he is only concerned whether the City Council and the Arts Centre Trust Board welcome the proposal.  But both institutions have failed to canvass public opinion and the belated decision to allow comments to the Council on financial matters after the majority of Councillors have voted in favour of the proposal simply inspires the cynical view that it is a mere box-ticking exercise.  It in no way constitutes the thorough consultation called for in the public petition or by submitters to the Council meeting.