Martin Meehan and the Hands off Hagley group have decided not to gently. He says that he has a legal opinion which states the decision about leasing the land in Hagley Park should go to an independent body – which is something similar to what I’ve argued about the limitations of the Environment Court’s decision. There was also this: 

Today he also released a council-commissioned independent report from June 2008 that identified four sites for an international cricket ground with QEII and Canterbury Park rating higher than Hagley Park. Meehan claims the report was withheld from elected members so when they allocated funds to developing Hagley Oval in 2009, and again in 2012, they were doing so without all the relevant information.

So the council commissioned a report, which it then hid from councillors. Surely this would be considered relevant? Also, why have Canterbury Cricket gone with the third-best option? What was wrong with the other two? I haven’t seen the report, but hopefully it will be made available, so that we can be more informed on why CC ignored the recommendations of this report.