|
|
Post by phil on Mar 19, 2011 16:42:36 GMT 12
You mean they couldn't find any space for them in Trentham and had to lease a building in Upper Hutt CBD?
WTF? They are employing the same number of people (if the article is to be believed), so no saving there, yet now instead of occupying defence buildings that are already bought and paid for, they are now having to lease civilian buildings in town?
Good to see the process saving money.
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on Mar 19, 2011 17:41:17 GMT 12
You mean they couldn't find any space for them in Trentham and had to lease a building in Upper Hutt CBD? WTF? They are employing the same number of people (if the article is to be believed), so no saving there, yet now instead of occupying defence buildings that are already bought and paid for, they are now having to lease civilian buildings in town? Good to see the process saving money. Another question is, what will be the civilian-to-uniformed ratio, and over time? On the one hand more civilians in time (although some may be former personnel) may prefer the 'downtown' surrounds with all the usual amenities (over being stuck on a base or camp)? But then again this is presumably brought to you by the same 'sort of thinking' from those that decided they won't support spending cash to restore the nation's security insurance policy (eg no ACF or even in a training role). So to them, putting staff in downtown civilian accomodation makes perfect sense (as we are supposedly at peace) plus more costs can be trimmed over time as its possible to shift accomodation periodically to follow cheaper space leases etc. But I'm sure to most thinking NZ'ers, we've been reminded of natural disasters and see violence all around the world. Wouldn't it be safer to securely house a critical support system (that makes the NZDF function) on the comfines of a central base? Would also reduce security concerns re - access/damage to data systems and access points etc. |
|
|
|
Post by strikemaster on Mar 19, 2011 20:55:44 GMT 12
Keeping all your eggs in one basket makes them easier to break. That's why the like of the DH mossie were built from parts all over the UK. It was impossible to stop production by means of bombing. not sure if that is relevant to the topic tho, just my 2c.
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Mar 19, 2011 21:30:16 GMT 12
I fail to see how now having to lease buildings in the CBD vs using existing buildings at Trentham or Messines is a saving. And lets face it, Trentham is hardlt far from the centre of Upper Hutt anyway. Actually nowhere in Upper Hutt is far form the CBD, except perhaps Whitemans Valley. Come to think of it there is an old Stores depot or something over there they could use!
|
|
|
|
Post by 30sqnatc on Mar 19, 2011 22:05:13 GMT 12
I fail to see how now having to lease buildings in the CBD vs using existing buildings at Trentham or Messines is a saving. There is no spare existing office space in Trentham or Messines. |
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on Mar 19, 2011 22:39:04 GMT 12
Is there really a place in Upper Hutt called Whitemans Valley?? How politically incorrect is that? ;D
Who owns the building that these soldiers have been moved to? Perhaps it's Government owned anyway?
|
|
|
|
Post by phil on Mar 20, 2011 8:58:41 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by nige on Mar 20, 2011 9:28:16 GMT 12
[quote author=30sqnatc board=Postwar thread=9440 post=117604 time=1300529113 [/quote]
There is no spare existing office space in Trentham or Messines.[/quote]
That would be a healthy sign of a NZDF growing to meet current requirements to support its mandate (eg including establishment of JFHQ there etc)?
I suppose again on one hand it allows initiatives to get underway quicker (by having access to more-or-less 'modern' (21st century) accomodation to house the new groups etc).
Still concerned about the vulnerability of places like Trentham that could be isolated in the event of flooding or earthquakes, and would rather see future planning see Defence (and Civil Defence etc) build in less risky environments but near or on base infrastructure etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by guest on Mar 21, 2011 16:36:52 GMT 12
The New Zealand Defence Force is to shift its national Human Resources (HR) and Payroll operations to a refurbished Hazelwood’s Building on Main Street, Upper Hutt.In a move that strengthens the 96-year link between Upper Hutt and Trentham Camp, 110 HR admin and payroll staff will be in place in the CBD, right in the centre of the five main banks, and within walking distance of supermarkets and inter-city transport. Upper Hutt building contractor Bill Peryer has already begun gutting the former department store that called itself the “best store under the sun” because of the large sun logo on the Main Street frontage. Defence has signed a six-year lease, announced Acting General Manager of Organisational Support, Peter Thomas, saying the move is designed to make Defence Force HR functions more streamlined and efficient and also strengthens the long standing relationship between the Upper Hutt community and the Defence Force. “This is a win for the Defence Force as we can provide staff with a good working environment that is close to public transport, as well as local shops and facilities such as the pool and library,” he says. “Historically Defence Force facilities and resources have been located inside a military base in a remote location. But here we are centralising our back-office functions and locating them closer to amenities, making it a more attractive workplace.” Mayor Wayne Guppy is in no doubt it is also a huge win for the city. “We are proud of our strong links with the Defence Force which dates back to World War I when Trentham Military Camp opened in October 1914. “Upper Hutt has a long and important association with Defence Force, and we’re obviously pleased that now military and civilian personnel will be working in the heart of our city centre.” “It’s a win too for local retailers.” With some of the best cafés in the Valley, the effects of an extra 220 feet walking the CBD will have immediate effects. “It also boosts our growing role as an alternate commercial location that provides quality working accommodation at a reasonable cost to taxpayers,” Mr Guppy said. He acknowledged Council staff who have been working collaboratively with the developer behind the scenes. It’s exciting to see it come to fruition.” Trentham City Investments Ltd chair Colin Gibbs echoed the comment, and added ‘relief’ at the announcement which has been rumoured for some weeks. Asked whether this was a oneoff deal, or was there potential for others, Mr Gibbs was noncommital. “We have the land, the buildings. Upper Hutt is a great living and working environment and we hope success here will show others what can be achieved.” The contrast between Main Street, Upper Hutt and downtown Wellington is believed to have significant financial benefits for the New Zealand Defence Force. Defence Force sources say it is impossible to quantify as the personnel involved have been drawn together into a new streamlined unit. www.iloveupperhutt.co.nz/home.aspx?article=6 |
|
|
|
Post by guest on Mar 21, 2011 16:46:47 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by kiwiscanfly on Mar 21, 2011 22:47:38 GMT 12
|
|
|
|
Post by mumbles on Mar 22, 2011 10:36:15 GMT 12
Is there really a place in Upper Hutt called Whitemans Valley?? How politically incorrect is that? ;D Not at all if it is named after someone with the surname 'Whiteman', which it is  . It is pronounced as one word, no-one around here calls it 'White-MANS' valley, and no-one gives the name a second thought either. |
|
|
|
Post by nige on Mar 22, 2011 17:24:16 GMT 12
Why would you say that? They didn't mention defence! Govt is talking about no (or not a lot of) NEW spending. NEW spending could be things like eg the restoration of the air combat force. But we know that wasn't going to happen anyway. The Defence White Paper and supporting documents outline Defence cuts, to pay for the new acquisitions already signalled or approved in principle by the Govt. It could mean however a lesser capability is funded, but at least they aren't being cut! |
|
|
|
Post by kiwiscanfly on Mar 22, 2011 23:15:08 GMT 12
Why would you say that? They didn't mention defence! Govt is talking about no (or not a lot of) NEW spending. NEW spending could be things like eg the restoration of the air combat force. But we know that wasn't going to happen anyway. The Defence White Paper and supporting documents outline Defence cuts, to pay for the new acquisitions already signalled or approved in principle by the Govt. It could mean however a lesser capability is funded, but at least they aren't being cut! When it said new I was assuming that this included projects like the possible new short range MPA and advanced trainers, As i am not aware that under the new DWP any purchase or tenders have been approved in the advanced stages. And I don't mean to be a cynic but are the cuts they are going to make really going to give the cash that will be needed for all of the signaled defense projects for the NZDF. Other cash will be needed which understandably will possibly now be hard to come by. And I believe it did mention defense it listed it as one of the areas where new spending would be taken from along with DOC and other departments. |
|
. It is pronounced as one word, no-one around here calls it 'White-MANS' valley, and no-one gives the name a second thought either.