Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3668 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 16 May 2009 (b) protecting public assets vested in Council from damage, accelerated deterioration or abuse: (c) ensuring future generations of Auckland citizens have the use of public assets: (d) protecting important public assets from privatisation which may limit the access of future generations of Auckland citizens. A party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment to the amendment be agreed to. Ayes 52 New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 7; Māori Party 3. Noes 64 New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. Amendment to the amendment not agreed to. The question was put that the following amendment in the name of Charles Chauvel be agreed to: to add the following new part: Part 9 Protection of Public Assets 38 Protection of Public Assets Nothing in this Act, the Local Government 2002, the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Act 2004, the Local Government Act 1974, the Local Electoral Act 2001, or any regulations made under those Acts, shall permit the Transition Agency to— (a) sell or otherwise dispose of, or sell any equity securities in; or (b) surrender any voting rights in: (c) relinquish any right to appoint trustees, directors, or managers of any asset or organisation listed in Schedule 2 during the transition period. A party vote was called for on the question, That the amendment be agreed to. Ayes 52 New Zealand Labour 42; Green Party 7; Māori Party 3. Noes 64 New Zealand National 58; ACT New Zealand 5; United Future 1. New Part 9 not agreed to. Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour): I move that progress be reported, and that there be an instruction to the House that this bill be referred to the special select committee for Auckland legislation for it to have hearings on it, and to report back to the House within 4 weeks. The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): A member can only move that progress be reported; an instruction cannot go with it. If the member wishes to move that progress be reported, I will accept that proposition, but he cannot include with it an instruction about what will happen after that. Hon DARREN HUGHES (Senior Whip—Labour): I seek the leave of the Committee to move a motion to report progress that includes an instruction that select committee consideration take place, and that the select committee report back to the House within 4 weeks of it receiving the bill. The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Leave is sought for that purpose. Is there any objection? There is objection.
16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 3669 New Part 5 Mechanisms to ensure representation of Maori, Pacific and Ethnic groups in the reorganisation of the Auckland Council Hon SHANE JONES (Labour): Tēnā tātou katoa. New Part 5 is a very grave part of the bill, because it points to the delinquency and the severity of the complete disregard for the history, constitutional, and demographic importance of Auckland in the planning for Auckland’s future mega-city status, and the complete level of ignorance about the future character of the mega-city of Auckland. That is why we stand with a degree of hope that is clouded by the bad decision-making that has guided the Minister of Local Government, Rodney Hide, to date, which has resulted in his isolating, marginalising, and completely neglecting a growing percentage of Auckland’s population. In 1867 Donald MacLean derived a response to the growing unrest amongst iwi that the Crown was governing the country without any inclusion of a meaningful nature of Māori. That was when statutory Māori representation—after the failure of the rūnanga experiment early in the 1850s—took root. This part is an extension of that. Why would a modern nation want to provide distinctive Māori representation in its largest city, as it seeks to use that city as a catalyst to transform the wider economy? Why would it want to do that? Not only because of heritage but because the reality is that these are the people whose population percentage is growing disproportionately faster. They are the Asian proportion, they are the tangata whenua in a broader sense, and they are the Pasifika people. So what is being asked for here is a continuation of that proud tradition that exists at the level of national Government. Nā reira, ko tāku ki te Whare, he aha oti te raruraru me whakaae tātou kia waihangatia wēnei tūranga Māori hei noho, e kitea ai te kanohi Māori i te aroaro o te motu; ngā tūru Māori e rua, mā te marea me tētahi atu tūru motuhake mō ngā tāngata whenua? Nui noa atu te pōuri ahakoa te moe tahi a Te Pāti Māori ki ō rātou hoa, kāhore he paku aroha e puta ana ki a rātou. [An interpretation in English was given to the House.] [So, mine to the House; what problem is there that we agree to create these Māori positions to enable the face of Māoridom to be seen before the nation—the two positions for Māori, for the public, and a special one for the people of the land? I am greatly saddened that although the Māori Party has bedded together with their colleagues, they display no compassion for them.] Hon Trevor Mallard: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. I apologise. This is a matter in which I have no expertise, but I think, from my limited knowledge, that we might have had a slight miss in the interpretation right at the end. I think the “two” that my colleague outlined was for Māori seats and the “one” was for mana whenua. I think it is important that we get that right. The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): Thank you. If there was a wrong interpretation, I am sure that when the member resumes his speech he will pick up on it. I am leaving that to the discretion of the Hon Shane Jones. Was there a mistake in the interpretation, or was it accurate? If there was a mistake, you have an opportunity to correct it. Hon SHANE JONES: I shall take that opportunity. With due respect, this correction, I am sure, is not included as part of my formal speech. I mean absolutely no disrespect to the interpreter, a senior scholar of our language, but the essential point is that my proposed new part corrects the absence of tangata whenua and mana whenua representation, and provides two slots for Māori in general. The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch): My proposition to you was about the interpretation provided by the interpreter. Did the interpreter report accurately what you
Page 1: First Session, Forty-ninth Parliame
Page 5 and 6: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
Page 51: 16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
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:
16 May 2009 Local Government (Auckl
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

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

Delete template?

Save as template?