A petition opposing Christchurch City Council’s $15 million contribution towards Christ Church Cathedral’s restoration has been formally presented to councillors.

Christchurch resident James Pawson, who started the petition first reported by Chris Lynch Media, addressed today’s council meeting on behalf of about 19,500 signatories.

Pawson said the funding was controversial because the cathedral was owned by the Anglican Church rather than the council or ratepayers.

“We believe the Christchurch City Council must reconsider its decision to support this particular expenditure in light of its impact on local ratepayers, and there are alternative funding solutions that can be explored.”

He said the council decided in May and confirmed in June that it would provide $15 million, despite the proposal receiving only 14 percent support during public consultation.

“That alone makes it surprising that this petition has had to be started, but it was clearly ignored.”

Pawson stressed he did not want the cathedral demolished. He suggested preserving it as a safe and accessible ruin could provide a meaningful memorial to the Canterbury earthquakes.

“This is the same type of idea that Walker Architects proposed back in August 2017, where they quoted a publicly owned, preserved and accessible archaeological ruin, which, in my view, still remains a good idea and solution today.”

He said any public investment should produce a tangible benefit for Christchurch.

“There should be some form of return on investment for the city, not just a grant to the Anglican Church.”

Deputy Mayor Victoria Henstock, who was chairing the meeting, accepted the petition and said council staff would provide advice in response.

Councillor Jake McLellan questioned whether Pawson’s suggested alternatives had been fully costed and whether some could ultimately prove more expensive.

Pawson said his presentation reflected the concerns of the petition’s signatories rather than only his personal view.

“If they are more expensive, as I said, regardless of any money that goes in, there has to be some form of return on investment, not just a grant.”

Councillor Tim Scandrett said he voted for the contribution partly because government funding was also involved and because completing the cathedral could encourage development around Cathedral Square.

He said commercial property representatives had repeatedly identified the damaged cathedral as an obstacle to investment and suggested redevelopment around the Square could generate millions of dollars in additional rates.

Pawson agreed leaving the cathedral in its present condition was hindering the central city, but rejected the suggestion that a full restoration was the only answer.

“To rebuild it as new and give that money away without any return is not going to bring money back to the city.”

He said public ownership or another form of public return should be attached to any council or government contribution.

Pawson also argued that an accessible ruin through which visitors could walk might tell the story of the earthquakes more effectively than a fully restored church.

Councillor Aaron Keown challenged Pawson’s characterisation of the cathedral, saying the building had previously been open to the public seven days a week and was one of the city’s most visited attractions.

Keown said historic landmarks around the world received substantial public investment and claimed 14 sites around Cathedral Square had not been redeveloped because the cathedral project remained unresolved.

He asked whether Pawson had considered the wider economics of the Square when establishing the petition.

Pawson said he understood the economic arguments and did not support demolition or leaving the building in its current state.

However, he maintained that public money should not simply be transferred to a privately owned building.

“Are we just going to dish out public money to private buildings that have used their insurance money but now need more to do something else?”

Keown said an estimated $10 million a year in rates generated around the Square would represent a good return.

Henstock acknowledged the issue was important and thanked Pawson for presenting the petition.

“You’ve managed the questions very eloquently today, and you’ve heard staff confirm that they will give us some advice on the petition.”