Parliamentary Debates (Hansard) - New Zealand Parliament

3708 Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill 16 May 2009
In response to my question in the House, the Prime Minister assured Aucklanders
that every single Aucklander would be able to be heard by the committee that is being
set up. I am sure Aucklanders will want to be heard, if only to protest at the atrocious
way in which this measure is being rammed through Parliament using shock tactics, as
Naomi Klein called them; the Government is using the blitzkrieg tactics of
Rogernomics, which are not to give people a minute to breathe but just to keep ramming
it through.
The other thing I want to say is that I am disappointed that the media ignored a very
significant clause in this bill that will help to expunge local democracy from Auckland.
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South): I move, That the Committee
report progress.
A party vote was called for on the question, That progress be reported.
Ayes 25
New Zealand Labour 25.
Noes 75
New Zealand National 58; Green Party 7; ACT New Zealand 5; Māori Party 4;
United Future 1.
Motion not agreed to.
MOANA MACKEY (Labour): It is unbelievable. The Opposition is attempting to
assist Government members who have been complaining and complaining that we have
been dragging it out, and when we say “OK, why don’t we move on?”, they vote against
it. It is absolutely unbelievable. Maybe we could call this the “Absolute Shambles and
What the Hell is the Leader of the House Doing Bill”, because Government members do
not know whether they are Arthur or Martha.
I have a lot of suggestions for alternative titles for this legislation. The first would be
the “Why Should Aucklanders Get a Say When Tories Know Best Bill”. I think that
really sums up this legislation, being rammed through all stages under urgency with no
select committee, which obliterates eight democratically elected councils overnight. It is
unbelievable; maybe we could just call it the “Democracy is So Tiring Bill” because I
think that is how National members feel about it. For them it is tiring having to stay
here at Parliament to vote on things, even though that is what we are paid to do. It is
tiring to go out and talk to people. Democracy makes us really, really quite tired and we
can see the bags under Mr Brownlee’s eyes.
My next name is a very important one, because it relates to the amendment Labour
tried to put up to secure paid parental leave for the employees of local authorities. We
could probably call it the “Gerry Brownlee Does Not Understand How Paid Parental
Leave Works Bill”. We tried to explain to him that when we move to this transition
agency the women working there will effectively have a new employer, which means
that their paid parental leave entitlement does not carry over. Mr Brownlee said that we
should not put a provision about that in the bill, because we do not need to put in a
provision to say that the residential speed limit is 50 kilometres an hour. I not sure
whether Mr Brownlee knows that the residential speed limit does not change when
someone changes employer. That is a crucial difference between the speed limit and
paid parental leave. He might want to go and talk to the Minister of Transport about
that, get a briefing, and have it explained to him.
The bill could be called the “Gerry Brownlee (Trust Me I Know What I Am Doing)
Bill”. He said the paid parental leave provisions were going to go to a select committee.
But the fact is we are passing this legislation now. It will come into force whenever this