Sio Su'a William: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — Second Reading Procedure In Committee 
Sio Su'a William: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — Second Reading Procedure In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6353] 
SU’A WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Mangere) 
: 
 Thank you for the opportunity to take a call on this important bill. I want to convey to the House the Labour Party’s acknowledgment and appreciation of the submissions made by hundreds of individuals from the four corners of the Auckland region and by the many community organisations businesses both small and large environmental groups and churches. They all gave of their time and energy to prepare and make submissions to the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee. 
I acknowledge the community board chairs and their councillors and the mayors who submitted on behalf of the eight local body authorities whose right to exist was snuffed out earlier when the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Bill was rammed through the House under urgency. I acknowledge like others the parliamentary staff who worked under the extreme pressure the Government put them under in order to rush the whole process through. 
Labour has consistently advocated for the reform of Auckland’s governance structure but Labour opposes the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill. Labour supports the general belief that Auckland is incredibly important to the future of Aotearoa New Zealand so we have fought every inch of the way to ensure that Aucklanders have a say in the process and that we get the structure right. We have fought tooth and nail to get the structure right and to ensure that Auckland’s future is assured as an internationally competitive dynamic and socially inclusive city and region. After all Auckland is home to 1.4 million people from over 180 different ethnic groups. It has the highest Maori population the highest Pacific population and the highest Asian population. In fact 70 percent of new migrants settle in the Auckland region and a third of all the people who call Auckland their home were born overseas. 
Will the governance structure enable us to be united in our diversity in the Auckland region? I do not think so. Auckland is regarded as our nation’s economic powerhouse. It is the fastest-growing region. A third of the nation’s workforce resides in the Auckland region and 38 percent of business enterprises are based in Auckland. Auckland provides 35 percent of our nation’s jobs and 70 percent of imports and 40 percent of exports pass through Auckland. My favourite place Mangere is known as the gateway where Aotearoa New Zealand touches the rest of the world. Will the governance structure enable us to release the full potential of that economic powerhouse? I do not think so. 
Labour opposes the Government’s bill to set up the super-city structure as that structure has become more undemocratic and will deliver our largest city a flawed governance model. Much-needed progress has sadly been compromised by bad decisions; poor process including a sham consultation process; and a lack of vision. Before the election Mr Key promised that once the royal commission had made its views known he would consult Aucklanders. But the Government introduced the process of reorganising Auckland under urgency. 
There were many submitters from the four corners of the Auckland region and they conveyed to the select committee their outrage at the hasty and rushed manner in which the Government was advancing this significant change to the local government as we know it today. The resultant imbalance will centralise power in the hands of a privileged few. The model is highly unlikely to achieve the royal commission’s goal of increased community engagement in Auckland’s local governance. 
National and ACT have made a mockery of the democratic process. The royal commission consulted 3500 Aucklanders and after 18 months of that work it released a comprehensive report with substantial amendments. The Government took 2 weeks to come up with a response. There was no consultation whatsoever but Aucklanders had the right to be consulted on the select committee process that was undertaken by the Government. The public was consulted on this bill only after they put pressure on the Government. Although the select committee took the time to reach out to the main centres of the Auckland region and although the chairman did a good job in facilitating those public submission sessions many submitters felt that they were not heard or that the Government was not listening. Many individuals felt they were not given enough time. 
I give members the example of the boundary changes—north and south yes or no. Many submitters right from the beginning opposed the Government’s original submission. What we have now is an eleventh-hour change—albeit a welcome change. But right from the beginning despite the overwhelming evidence from Rodney and Franklin the Government was not prepared to budge. Government members on the committee said they were listening but in reality they were not. 
Where was the mana-enhancing relationship with Maori. Where are the Maori seats in a region in which the highest proportion of Maori reside? When we talk about enhancing mana whose mana are we talking about? Whose mana was really enhanced as a result of this process? It was certainly not the mana of Maori of Pacific people or of the diversity of people in the Auckland region. It is sad that the Government having listened to the overwhelming evidence of people who supported Maori seats in the new super-city decided otherwise. 
Many people submitted on the issue of Maori seats and I would say that a significant proportion who supported Maori seats were Pakeha. Some of them talked about Auckland being an inclusive region. Some of them talked about the need to ensure that we do the right thing by our Treaty partner. Many of them did not know how the super-city would be structured with Maori seats—whether there should be two three or five representatives. There was overwhelming support for the view that this is a new era and a new opportunity for this Government to provide Maori seats if it really has the vision to benefit all the people in the Auckland region. But the Government did not do that. 
The royal commission outlined an inclusive structure for the super-city. It noted that those in power needed to consider the participation of Pacific as well as Asian communities. Every single submitter from the Pacific community—whether an individual submitter or from the Manukau Pacific Island advisory body the Waitakere advisory body central Auckland or North Shore—supported having Maori seats. But those submitters also said that there is a need for this Government to recognise that the Pacific community needed to be part of that structure and the best starting point was where things are which was strongly recommended by the royal commission’s report. 
Although the Government does not want the Pacific community to participate in the super-city I ask my friend across the Chamber Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga what the Pacific community is asking him and if he is really listening to what the public is saying unlike many of his colleagues whether he is prepared to support the Supplementary Order Paper which Labour will introduce at a later stage in the debate to ensure that there are Pacific and Asian advisory bodies in this new governance structure. 
Hon Tau Henare 
: What! 
SU’A WILLIAM SIO 
: Yes and I am asking Mr Henare whether he will be supporting the Supplementary Order Papers that the Opposition will be introducing to have Maori seats in this new structure. I say to members opposite that they should be visionary and provide good leadership and strong leadership. If they can do that they will be able to support our Supplementary Order Papers to introduce an inclusive structure for an inclusive Auckland. Then we will be able to receive the benefits of a stronger region and a stronger people in the Auckland region. 
Finally although Labour supports empowered local boards—and we credit the public for making submissions in support of them—and although we support ward councillors my colleagues and I feel that the Government still has the structure wrong.