Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3642 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 16 May 2009 recommend that the Government reinstates the three directly elected Māori seats proposed by the royal commission.” That would be excellent. Clause 101(2)(f) requires “recognition of the aims and aspirations and employment requirements, and the cultural differences, of ethnic or minority groups;”. As is well known, quite big meetings have been held in places like South Auckland, and there has been very strong Pacific Island participation in those meetings. Those people are worried about the loss of the identity of Manukau City, and about how account will be taken of the interests of Pacific people, who are concentrated in that city. But if the transition agency really takes on board the provision in clause 102(2)(f), then perhaps it would say to the Government: “Well, hold on. The structure you have put in place, which strips out local representation and knocks out sub-regional representation like that for Manukau City, really affects the rights of different ethnic groups, particularly in the case of South Auckland, Manukau City, and Pacific Island people.” Again, perhaps the agency would make urgent representations to the Government to make alterations to the legislation, at the last minute. That would, at least, improve the possibilities of subregional identity and the interests of the Pacific Island people being taken into account. The same applies to other non-European groups in our society who feel shut out by this big structure, where rich white people will tend to get the positions. There will not be— Jacinda Ardern: Rich white men. KEITH LOCKE: Rich white men; I apologise. There is also a provision in clause 101(2)(g) to recognise the employment requirements of women. Again, as has been rightly pointed out, that may educate the transition authority to recommend to the Government urgent changes to the structure, so that women are not disadvantaged in the way that they will be under this legislation and the companion Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill that will go through <strong>Parliament</strong>. Clause 104, “Appointments on merit”, is quite important, because we know that the appointments to the transition agency are to be made directly by the Minister of Local Government, without any reference to a Cabinet process. We know that will be hard to achieve, so having that provision might at least make his Cabinet colleagues and others say “Hold on, there should be a merit procedure.” Clause 105, “Acting appointments”, could be very relevant, because it deals with resignations from the transition agency. I would expect there might be quite a few resignations, even though the agency is supposed to go for only a short time. After a few weeks in the job, a new appointee might say: “I’m in a horrible position here, operating like a dictator, intervening in agenda items of local bodies all across the place. The body I’m helping to set up here isn’t going to work.” There might be a lot of resignations, so this provision could be very pertinent. Clause 108(3)(a) provides for the maintenance of service delivery levels. That could be important too, because there would be a tendency for the new— KELVIN DAVIS (Labour): I am happy to take a call to support clause 101 in new Part 10, which is in the name of Carol Beaumont. There are three points that I would like to make in this debate. Firstly, I will talk about the Auckland Council and the Auckland Transition Agency being good employers. My second point will be about the aims and aspirations of Māori. My third point will come back to the fact that this is all about democracy and transparency. In respect of the Auckland Council being a good employer, I point out that it is really about caring for and protecting the rights of workers. When I was a school principal we had a framework saying that any employer or teacher who was dictatorial and lacked support would breed a resentful child. This is what I see in the legislation that is being
16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 3643 pushed through. We are being dictated to, and there is a lack of support, which will breed resentment in the community. This issue is also about the aims and aspirations of Māori people. I say to members that Māori aspire to be heard in their workplaces, to be influential. I struggle to see what is wrong with recognising the aims and the aspirations of Māori, the employment requirements of Māori, and the need for greater involvement of Māori in Auckland public affairs. I wonder why it is such a hard issue to deal with, why it is so hard to debate, why we have to push this bill through so quickly, and why Māori people do not have an opportunity to participate in any sort of debate on an issue that really does affect them, and to participate in settings that allow Māori to be heard. To have public meetings is fine, but I just wonder how many public meetings will be held on marae, and I wonder how many public meetings will be held at times when whānau can get to those meetings and actually contribute. It is really important that the aims and the aspirations of Māori people are not overlooked in this whole debate. One of the greatest aims and aspirations of Māori is simply to get a job. When we see that our unemployment rate is up at around 11 percent, which is higher than that of most groups aside from the Pacific Island population, we realise that it is really important that Māori rights and Māori conditions at work are considered and looked after. Again, this comes back to democracy. We hear National members say they are listening. But I ask whether they have heard what the people are saying. There is a big difference. When those members sit in a meeting and simply listen to what people are saying, and then move on in their own direction, they are not hearing what people are saying. People do not like the direction that all this is heading in. To come back to the issue of the Auckland Council being a good employer, I say that this is about people having an opportunity to be selected. What we are seeing here is that the Minister of Local Government will base his selection criteria on individuals or groups that support his ideology. That ideology is quite intimidating for the Māori people, because our values are totally different from those of the Minister. We have a fear that the people being selected will be mainly male, mainly wealthy, and mainly Pākehā. Let me tell members now that Māori are certainly not Pākehā. We are certainly not generally wealthy, and we certainly do not live in the suburbs of Remuera, Pakuranga, Howick, and those other places. We tend to be the people who live in west Auckland, Glenfield, Ōtara, and Māngere. Moana Mackey: They need a code of practice. KELVIN DAVIS: They do need a code of practice. The Minister must notify the House and make a workforce transition code of practice. Moana Mackey: Why do they oppose that? KELVIN DAVIS: Indeed—why do they oppose having a code of practice? Hon SHANE JONES (Labour): Kia ora nō tātou. Thank you very much for the opportunity to speak for the voices of Auckland that have been silenced as a consequence of the chilling erosion of democracy being orchestrated by Rodney Hide and Mr Brownlee this morning. It is good to see Mr Harawira back here after practising his salute with a Melanesian flavour to it. I stand to speak about the importance of the rights of those Aucklanders whose democratic entitlements have been swiped away as a consequence of the Auckland Transition Agency. Now we focus on their rights as employees. They cover a large and vast distance. My colleague earlier spoke about those who are disadvantaged, those who occupy marginal positions. Their level of irrelevance grows by the hour in the mind of the National Government. It does not care about people who do not have powerful friends in shiny towers. It does not care about people who do not belong to the chamber of commerce, who do not belong to other powerful professional organisations. All it
Page 1: First Session, Forty-ninth Parliame
Page 5 and 6: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 25: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 77 and 78:
16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 79 and 80:
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
16 May 2009 Local Government (Tamak
Page 105 and 106:
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126:
Page 127 and 128:
Page 129 and 130:
Page 131 and 132:
Page 133 and 134:
Page 135 and 136:
Page 137 and 138:
Page 139 and 140:
Page 141 and 142:
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

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?