Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3730 Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Bill 16 May 2009 The size of local boards is also an issue. If there are 20 local boards, as the Government says may happen at the lower end, each of them will be representing 70,000 citizens. That is a population the size of New Plymouth’s. Jonathan Young: Great city! PHIL TWYFORD: Where is Jonathan Young? Is he here tonight? He is—OK. But can Mr Young imagine a city the size of New Plymouth, with 69,000 people, but with no power to rate, to own anything, to employ staff, or do any planning for its community? Is that the kind of local government that people want in New Plymouth, I ask Jonathan Young? I suggest that it is not. If there were 30 local boards, as the Government says could happen, each would represent 47,000 citizens. Is Mr Nick Smith here tonight? Hopefully, he is out campaigning in Mount Albert. So National is legislating for local boards the size of Nelson, or New Plymouth, with no power, at all. What are Government members consulting on? They are consulting on nothing. We have asked in this House, time and time again over the last 3 weeks, for this Government to tell us the costs of the transition. How much will it cost Aucklanders to transition to the Government’s flawed undemocratic model of a super-city? Did we get an answer? We got nothing. Government members could not tell us, or they refused. So we have done the numbers, and it will cost Aucklanders up to $750 more on their rates bills, which is on top of $700 on their water bills. So this Government is stinging Aucklanders for almost $1,500 for its flawed super-city model. Aucklanders have had no say on it—there has been no consultation—all on a hope and a promise that money will be saved on the super-city. Well, we know that mergers of this size often do not generate those cost savings. The people of Auckland want a super-city. They want good world-class public transport. They want clean beaches. They want sustainable communities, good jobs, and public transport to take them to those jobs. They want a decent waterfront. They want a central business district that works. If a super-city can deliver some of those things— good infrastructure, quality of life, and democracy—Aucklanders will vote for a supercity. But they do not want to be shafted, they do not want to be dorked around, and they do not want to be tricked out of their birthright by this National Government and its ACT allies. ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tāmaki): It is a privilege to speak on the third reading of the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau) Bill. This very fine bill will enhance the growth and prosperity of the Auckland region and, therefore, of New Zealand. I commend this legislation to the House. DARIEN FENTON (Labour): In December 2006, John Key told the people of Auckland he was proposing a bill that would provide for an independent review of Auckland governance and allow for a referendum on reform choices. Grant Robertson: Who said that? DARIEN FENTON: It was John Key, the now Prime Minister. Dr Wayne Mapp, who has joined us tonight, said in his online report of 30 December that it is necessary to have a more independent review that will also give the people of Auckland an opportunity to choose their preferred system of local government. As we know, the National Party also made a promise in its manifesto. Tonight, with the passing of this bill, those promises are dead and buried. We know that they are hollow words, but are we surprised? No, I do not think we are. The people of Auckland have been silenced, and it is a shameful day. I am proud that the Labour members have put up such a fierce fight. Labour members and the broader Opposition have been the last line of defence against the determination of an arrogant Government to ram through this legislation, to get its way, and to set a new path for Auckland that is divisive, unfair, and unjust.
16 May 2009 Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Bill 3731 Throughout this debate over the last 3½ days every Labour MP has received texts and emails from Aucklanders who have been following this debate. I thought I would give some examples from my in-box. The first one says: “Thanks for your team’s great effort. At least if this Government gets it wrong Aucklanders will toss them out at the next election.” And I received this one from a National Party supporter: “We’re hacked off with National. Keep it up because this is about democracy for Aucklanders.” This one is from a Helensville resident: “I notice that National MPs are meeting but not in the Helensville electorate. Why does our MP not wish to meet the public in his own electorate?”. Who is the MP for Helensville? Oh, it is Prime Minister, John Key. This one is from a Chinese resident on the North Shore: “I put in a submission to the royal commission and presented it at a North Shore meeting. It asked that ethnic communities have a voice in the new plan. John Key is running the Government the way that he wants—i.e. big money and ignore the people.” Another really nice one says: “Sorry you have to work today but what you guys are doing is vitally important as far as democratic principles are concerned.” There are many, many more. This debate has been very enlightening, and I am looking forward to telling the people of North Shore City, of Rodney, of Waitakere, of Auckland City, of Manukau, of Papakura, and of Franklin all about how little National thinks of them. We now know with certainty from the debate over the last 3½ days what National thinks, because of the raft of amendments from Labour and the Greens that have just been tossed out without genuine consideration. Not even one amendment got through. The National Government dumped many amendments that would have improved this bill and may have restored some certainty and confidence for Aucklanders. Hon Christopher Finlayson: Name one. DARIEN FENTON: I am about to, I say to Mr Finlayson. Amendments in proposed new Part 10, for example, related to good-employer provisions for the Auckland Transition Authority and the Auckland Council. The other amendments proposed to the transitional provisions in Part 3 would have given certainty and protection to the 6,300 workers in local government in Auckland, but those amendments were dumped. Those workers have been given their cards. They have been given the sack, and they have been given their dismissal notices. National’s message to existing council workers is: “Do not apply. Don’t bother.” If the face does not fit, people should not bother to apply, because with this set-up—the jack-up that this Government has engineered—the chances of getting a job with fairness, let alone getting any respect at work, are gone. Then there were the very, very important amendments, put up by my colleague Charles Chauvel, that would have stopped the transitional authority from privatising the $28 billion worth of ratepayers’ assets that it will have charge off. Let me talk about those—[Interruption] The member looks a bit lost. Rodney’s $1.5 billion of assets will be down the tubes. North Shore’s $4 billion worth of assets will be down the tubes. Waitakere’s $2.5 billion worth will be down the tubes, as will Auckland City’s $8.7 billion, Manukau’s hard-earned $6 billion, Papakura’s $457 million, Franklin’s $1 billion, and the Auckland Regional Council’s $1.4 million. That is $28 billion worth of assets, built up over generations, that will go from communities into the hands of the “Rodney Hide Transition Authority”, ready to be handed over to a mayor with extreme powers. Also, the voice of local people will be seriously diluted. We had the extraordinary sight of National and ACT voting down a further amendment that would have made sure that the paid parental leave entitlements of 6,300 workers were not affected by the legislation. What a shocking message to workers that was! We on this side of the Chamber heard loud and clear National’s views about Māori representation. They showed their contempt for the tangata whenua and for the Pasifika people in the largest Pacific city in the world. [Interruption] I am proud to be speaking.
Page 1:
First Session, Forty-ninth Parliame
Page 5 and 6:
16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 103 and 104: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Tamak
Page 113: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Tamak
Page 143 and 144: Index to 13 May 2009 (continued on
Page 145 and 146: HIPKINS, CHRIS— Bills— Local Go
show all

Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?