Submission
Which option do you prefer?
Option Two – The alternative option – Keep Aurora Energy
Further comment
The proposal to sell Aurora Energy demands scrutiny beyond financial gains.
Let’s delve into why the DCC councillors’ decision-making process raises red flags:
a. Lack of Public Mandate: The DCC councillors, entrusted with representing our community, have not received a clear mandate to sell Aurora Energy. The public consultation process, while initiated, lacks overwhelming support for this move. Without a resounding endorsement, proceeding with the sale undermines democratic principles.
b. Expertise and Accountability: Are our councillors equipped to make informed decisions about energy infrastructure? Aurora Energy’s complexities extend beyond balance sheets. We need expertise in energy distribution, regulatory compliance, and long-term planning. Selling without a thorough understanding risks compromising our community’s interests.
c. Transparency and Redacted Information: Significant financial details, including a possible asking price, were redacted from the public report2. Transparency is essential when dealing with public assets. The lack of clarity erodes trust. Citizens deserve openness, especially when decisions impact their lives.
d. Aurora’s Future Potential: Councillors must recognize Aurora’s untapped potential. Its capital value is poised to rise, and dividends could become consistent. Selling prematurely denies us these benefits. Our elected representatives should prioritize long-term community welfare over short-term gains.
e. Community Voice Ignored: By selling Aurora, councillors relinquish our collective voice. We lose influence over service quality, pricing, and investment priorities. Our community’s needs should guide decisions, not just financial considerations. A sale without robust public support disregards our interests.
DCC councillors must reconsider their stance. Selling Aurora Energy requires more than financial calculations—it demands genuine representation, expertise, and unwavering commitment to our community’s well-being.
Protecting Our Community: Why Selling Aurora Energy Is a Risky Move
As concerned citizens, we must critically evaluate the Dunedin City Council’s proposal to sell Aurora Energy. While the promise of reducing debt and creating an investment fund seems enticing, we believe this decision could have detrimental consequences for our community. Here are our key arguments against the sale:
1. Loss of Local Control: Aurora Energy is a vital part of our region’s infrastructure. Selling it would mean relinquishing local control over an essential service. We risk becoming dependent on external entities whose priorities may not align with our community’s needs.
2. Long-Term Impact: The proposed investment fund might generate short-term gains, but at what cost? Aurora Energy’s consistent service and reliability could be compromised. We must consider the long-term effects on our residents and businesses.
3. Consumer Protection: Aurora Energy operates under strict regulations, ensuring fair treatment for consumers. If sold, these protections may weaken. A new owner might prioritize profits over maintaining affordable rates and reliable electricity supply.
4. Job Security: Aurora Energy employs local workers who understand our unique landscape and challenges. A sale could jeopardize jobs and disrupt the livelihoods of our neighbors.
5. Community Resilience: In times of crisis—natural disasters, power outages, or emergencies—local ownership ensures a swift response. Selling Aurora Energy risks compromising our ability to handle such situations effectively.
Conclusion: Let’s protect our community’s interests by opposing the sale of Aurora Energy. Instead, let’s explore alternative solutions that maintain local control, prioritize consumer well-being, and safeguard our region’s future.
Supporting information
No associated documents with this submission.
Submitter
Submission id number: 1045084
Submitter name:
Organisation