Delahunty Catherine:  
Delahunty Catherine:  
[Volume:654;Page:84] 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Chairperson. I am not sure I can match the testosterone that is floating around but I will have a go at telling a few stories that are relevant to Part 2 of the Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill which we in the Green Party firmly oppose as being contrary to the best interests of the people of Tamaki-makau-rau let alone the country. 
I will address a couple of myths. One of the myths is that once the councils are “omitted” obliterated and expunged from the record under the provisions of Part 2 they will supposedly be gone. I will put money on them having to be reinstated in a few years because it is not going to work. It is a “super stupid city” idea and it ain’t going to work. 
One of the things I have heard the Government say tonight is that it will consult. It is all very well consulting after the fact but it is like consulting the corpse to find out what it thinks once it is already dead. I will comment on the word “consultation”. My father who is in his 80s and who is a fine man with a long history of meeting challenges in this community said that consultation in this country has become a cross between a con and an insult. I think that is relevant to this situation—when the Government is not really serious about making any changes based on public opinion it uses the word “con-sult-ation”. 
Many of us have experienced what “con-sult-ation” is actually like. We go along to meetings where it has already been decided by people more powerful than ourselves what is going to happen. Then those in charge say “Thank you very much for your opinion. This is what we’ve decided anyway.” That is why my father believes “con-sult-ation” is a con and an insult particularly with reference to this bill. 
In terms of why we oppose this bill there are a number of reasons. The findings of the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance were very important. One of those findings which the Government is deciding to trash is the commission’s recommendations in relation to the Maori seats for Tamaki-makau-rau. The royal commission was quite clear that three Maori seats as a minimum are needed for Tamaki-makau-rau. If we do not have any councils we sure as hell need some Maori seats. 
I will give members a couple of stories from my own experience of living in Auckland City about why Maori seats are important. Some voices have not been heard and they will be heard even less if this bill goes through. I am thinking about a place called Waterview where a number of friends of mine and I stood on the side of the highway by some trees. Those trees were planted in memory of war veterans on land that was donated on Great North Road to the city by Ngati Whatua ki Orakei. It was donated for health and a hospital was built there. But when city authorities decided to widen the highway because they could not invest in public transport for some strange reason—and we still have that problem—they ignored the pleas of Ngati Whatua and allowed a petrol station to be put on land that had been donated for health reasons. Because there were no Maori seats there was no redress. That is one example of how Maori seats are essential if these voices are to be heard. 
Another example is a place called Okahu Bay. Until Mayor Robbie came along all the raw sewage and hospital waste of Auckland was dumped straight into Okahu Bay. Because there were no Maori seats and there was no listening to Maori voices there was no way to get redress. The uncles of my friend Pakihana Hawke would go down to the bay and they would gather up the foetuses that had been flushed out of what was then called Auckland Hospital and take them to bury them because it was such an abuse of their culture that human and hospital waste should be flushed into Okahu Bay. 
It is not a pleasant story but it is important in terms of this bill because these people have not yet had redress. If the Government introduces this bill they will have even less of a voice about their specific cultural concerns which many people do not understand to this day. Hence the reason for members’ horror at what I am saying. Ngati Whatua had to do that to honour their cultural responsibility to Auckland harbour until finally the waste was taken out of Tamaki-makau-rau and out of the Waitemata Harbour and is now dumped in the Manukau Harbour. 
If Manukau has no voice and if Ngati Whatua has no voice because we have an elite of 12 people who do not understand these stories we will not be better off. Neither will those people. So we need to think about what Ngati Whatua actually says.