Logie Jan: Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeLogie Jan: Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading[Sitting date: 17 November 2015. Volume:710;Page:8261. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]JAN LOGIE (Green): It is with some pleasure I think although it is quite late and my brain is a little foggy and I do need to say to the people of Auckland to whom this bill is important that I apologise if I am not at my sharpest right at this moment but another consequence of urgency—Phil Twyford: Come on Jan. Spark it up.JAN LOGIE: —I know I should toughen up toughen up—is that we are not necessarily at our sharpest and showing our best abilities at this time of night after sitting in the House for 11 hours.We are now about to discuss the Local Government (Auckland Transitional Provisions) Amendment Bill. I understand that since 2009 there have been 16—16—separate bills in this House dealing with Auckland local government. And this is the fourth Auckland transitional bill since just 2009. I think that is a bit of an indication of a problem and it does seem—I mean the idea has been expressed already in this House—that there is a bit of a battle going on between this Government and the local communities’ leaders. There is a battle for control of Auckland and for control of the vision for Auckland.The Green Party we have a vision for Auckland. You know we have a vision for a vibrant connected compact city with medium high-density housing along public transport lines where people know their neighbours where they have the resources to be able to feed themselves the air is fresh the school is close and it is safe to get there and the people know their local leaders and that they can talk to them and tell them what they want from their local community. This is our vision. Inherent in that vision is our willingness to adapt to what we are told is needed by that local community. At the very very heart of the Green Party vision is the belief in appropriate decision-making. Those people who are affected by decisions who are closest to those decisions should be the people who have control over those decisions. Yet we have had successive legislation coming through this House that erodes that principle.David Seymour: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We are 3 or 4 minutes into a 5-minute call and the member has not addressed the bill at all.The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Lindsay Tisch): No I am the judge. This is the first reading of the bill and it is a 5-minute call. I am listening to what the member is saying and I invite her to finish. She has 1 minute and 53 seconds to go.JAN LOGIE: The member considers my contribution to be tiresome. I guess that is his view of democracy and his depth of reading this bill. The detail of this bill is that—David Seymour: What’s in the bill?JAN LOGIE: It has quite a bit to do with democracy you might be surprised to know Mr Seymour. It reduces the quorum required for hearing sessions related to the unitary plan from three to two people. It allows for an increase in the number of Government-appointed Auckland Unitary Plan Independent Hearings Panel members from seven to 10. Clearly it is a demonstration of this Government extending its reach in terms of removing decision making and participatory representative decisions from communities and local Auckland people. It enables the panel to report back in stages which is something we probably would not have a problem with and it enables the hearings panels to hold concurrent sessions with a stand-in chairperson. Again that is something that we probably would not have a problem with. It is about speeding up the process but in a way that would ensure people’s voices can be heard.But the core principle here is around democracy and who has control over the vision of Auckland. This House is again considering under urgency—a process that removes democratic participation in the decision making in this House—a bill that puts extra additional power in the hands of central government and takes it away from local government. That is inappropriate and we will not be supporting it.