Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

3622 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 16 May 2009
Auckland is being ridden roughshod over, and, worse then that, so is the community.
The community has been left out in the cold by this Government.
It is interesting. We will have a series of meetings all over the place that will be run
and paid for by the National Party. In my area, Mr Bakshi will have one—if he is still
around. He might be able to tell people how many houses they can turn into brothels
and things like that. I understand he is a bit of an expert in that area.
The appointment of commissioners is important because planning, resource
management, and heritage protection are very important. They need to be up to speed
with that.
Dr Paul Hutchison: You’re right, George. Get on with it.
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS: It is good to see my friend the member for Hunua up
here bright and early. It is good to see that he is awake; sometimes it is hard to tell
whether he is talking in his sleep or whether he is awake. Other important areas that
commissioners should have knowledge and experience in are environmental science,
including the physical and social sciences; architecture; engineering; surveying; mineral
technology; and building and construction. Knowledge and experience of matters
relating to the Treaty of Waitangi are also very important.
Hon Tau Henare: It’s never concerned you before, George!
Hon GEORGE HAWKINS: There is Mr Henare. He obviously did not get home
last night, considering the condition he is in. He probably went straight to the clubs. He
has come well fuelled for today. When we have Tau Henare well fuelled, it makes life
interesting.
Hon DAVID PARKER (Labour): I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. You
told us that these additional parts will not be considered in numerical order—and I
understand the reason for that—but I think it would be helpful for the Committee to
know which part is to be debated after this part, so that we can read it and be well
informed before we debate it.
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker): The member makes a good point. The
next part we will consider will be Part 10. If the member wants to look further into the
future, we will then consider Part 9. After that, we will go on to Part 5.
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn): New Part 11 is a serious response
to a serious problem. The problem is a lack of independent oversight, which has been
made worse by this bill’s being rammed through the House in the dead of the morning
and the dead of the week. This bill will still be here next week. The bill is being
rammed through without a select committee process, and we have to ask why. I say to
all those sleepy-looking members opposite that it would have been quicker for this bill
to go to select committee than to debate new Part 27. Bill English will not be happy,
because we will still be here on Budget day. What about the pre-Budget announcement
schedule? What about all of those nasty little things that those members want to hide on
the day? The whole shambles will be disrupted by the fact that Paul Hutchison—
Hon Gerry Brownlee: I raise a point of order, Mr Chairperson. We are dealing with
a new part and new material. There has been no speech from this side, so there can be
no need for any rebuttal. Members should confine themselves very tightly to the content
of the part now being debated.
Hon Trevor Mallard: It is very, very important that we have consistency through
this debate. We have had over the last couple of days—or the earlier part of this day,
depending on whether one looks at this in temporal or parliamentary time—a broadranging
debate on various parts. The Government cannot change the rules now just
because it wants to run away and go home.
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker): That is not a point of order. I say to the
member that one of the finest parliamentarians this place has ever seen, the Rt Hon