Street Maryan: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
Street Maryan: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6550] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I wish to address some of the comments that the Minister in the chair John Carter raised earlier this evening when he talked about the fact that the assets we were talking about in respect of my colleague Phil Twyford’s Supplementary Order Paper were not the Government’s property were not owned by the Government and therefore could not be sold by the Government. I wish to advise that Minister that nobody will settle for that as an answer. There is a huge naivety about that statement which Aucklanders are past. Aucklanders are perfectly aware that even if the technicalities are that the Government does not own an asset it is perfectly possible through this legislation for the Government to grease the wheels if not the palms of commerce so that it can take advantage of the fact that there are no democratic prohibitions on the sale of assets. There would be democratic prohibitions on the sale of local assets if my colleague Phil Twyford’s Supplementary Order Paper were to be passed; there would be a referendum mechanism before the sale or privatisation of any asset. 
A number of speakers on this side of the Chamber have drawn to the attention of members the kinds of assets that are at risk. They range across all of the things that we are familiar with and that we treasure in our local communities: public facilities like libraries pools reserves and parks. Those things ought to be protected and here is a moment again that shows that if this Government is to be known for anything it will be known as the Government of lost opportunity. Here is an opportunity to protect these assets and to put a democratic prohibition on the sale of these assets or a democratic vehicle in the way of their sale by local government and local authorities—in this case the Auckland super-city governance structure. It is not good enough simply to say the Government cannot sell these assets. It is important that the Government expresses an appreciation of the importance of these assets to communities right across the Auckland area and does something that allows for a degree of protection for them in this legislation so the people of Auckland can feel some comfort. 
Given the opposition of Aucklanders to the sale of their assets flannelling the country by saying that the Government cannot sell the assets anyway is not sufficient. Aucklanders have expressed overwhelmingly their opposition to the sale of assets. Clearly 85 percent of Aucklanders oppose selling water supply assets; 82 percent oppose selling assets such as parks libraries and recreation or entertainment centres; and 78 percent oppose the sale of transport assets such as the port and airport to private companies. On the basis of that kind of democratic representation why would the Government not simply put in place one safeguard one democratic check of a referendum which would prevent the local authority that is emerging out of this legislation from putting assets of importance on the block and up for sale? 
This is another lost opportunity but more than that it is a sneaky way of ensuring National’s agenda is put in place. Although it may not be the case in this term let us make no mistake that if National is ever given a second term in office its agenda will be to privatise as much as it possibly can. There is an agenda to do that and Rodney Hide happens to be the guide.