Bradford Sue: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Bradford Sue: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:657;Page:6591] 
SUE BRADFORD (Green) 
: 
 It is apt I guess that we are holding the final debate on the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill under urgency today as urgency has characterised the whole process around the changes to Auckland governance ever since the royal commission first reported back. The Government’s response to the royal commission’s report took only hours or at least that was what it seemed like at the time. 
The Government then introduced the Local Government (Tamaki Makaurau Reorganisation) Bill which went through all stages in the House without any consideration whatsoever by a select committee. Then this second bill appeared to be dealt with quick smart and quick it has been although I am not so sure about the smart. At least this time round the public submissions process was allowed and I am sure that every MP who had the privilege of sitting on the select committee to hear those submissions was as impressed as I was by the number quality and heartfelt energy of those who came to give their views from whatever part of the Auckland region and from whatever perspective. 
On behalf of the Green Party I thank all submitters whether or not I was lucky enough to hear them in person. The calibre of the content of submissions and the passion with which they were presented even by those of political persuasions quite different from my own gives me great hope for the future of our city and region. I also take this opportunity to acknowledge everyone involved with the select committee which had a fairly gruelling task in its early weeks; I thank the Green MPs who sacrificed days off to step in for me when I could not break longstanding commitments and the chairperson of the committee John Carter for the courtesy and humour with which he led his little flock on a pilgrimage around the farthest reaches of our far-flung city—and some of us did get lost on a few occasions trying to find the locations of the select committee hearings. I also acknowledge my fellow MPs on the committee from all parties most of whom were absolutely dedicated to the huge job that we were tasked with. Last but not least I acknowledge the long-suffering officials who worked with us in shifts night and day over a protracted period and then had to face extremely tight deadlines back at home base. 
The Green Party continues to oppose this bill on a number of grounds even though we realise that some improvements have been made to the original version. We particularly endorse the removal of the provision for at-large councillors and the intention that most of the city be divided into multi-member wards. We seem to have some disagreement with our Labour Party colleagues on this matter as we see multi-member wards as one of the best ways of ensuring diversity of representation especially given that we are stuck with a first-past-the-post voting system. We are also pleased with the recommendation that Waiheke and Great Barrier have their own separate local boards and that the rest of the region be divided into between 20 to 30 local board areas based on communities of interest. 
On the question of the powers and responsibilities of local boards I realise that this has been a little contentious for us but I think it is a step forward that the bill as amended includes statutory decision-making powers for the boards incorporates the principle of subsidiarity and requires the Auckland Council to consider the views expressed by local boards on regional as well as local issues. 
I hope that in the third bill on Auckland governance we will see a further strengthening and clarification of the boards’ powers and roles and more detail on issues like funding and staffing of boards and remuneration for board members. I am sorry that the Government has not seen fit to pick up the Green amendment extending the minimum number of board members from four to 11 as we simply do not believe boards can operate with any real efficacy as a balance to the council if board membership remains as low as this. 
On the question of the northern boundary the Government has missed a golden opportunity to do the right thing. Although the Greens endorse the Government’s last-minute decision to pull northern Rodney back into Auckland city I believe that what should have happened as per the Supplementary Order Paper I put before the Committee is that the very northernmost part of the district should have gone to Kaipara on the west coast and to Northland on the east coast. I hope further consideration might be given to this matter at a future date. 
There are several other lost opportunities in the bill that are far more significant. The first is in relation to Maori representation. This bill was a chance for the new Government to show faith with the Maori Party with all those who marched on the hikoi in May and with the submitters who told us that guaranteed Maori representation on the new council must happen. It is a disgrace that this has not occurred.