Twyford Phil: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — First Reading 
Twyford Phil: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:659;Page:8545] 
PHIL TWYFORD (Labour) 
: 
 I will begin my comments with some remarks about the political context of the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill which has been brought to the House today. What a shame for Auckland and what a shame for the super-city project that this legislation and this reform process should be shepherded through by the most damaged man in New Zealand politics. He is responsible for the shambolic process of the last 9 years— 
Hon Dr Wayne Mapp 
: The last 9 years? You’re responsible for the last 9 years. 
PHIL TWYFORD 
: It was 9 months; I thank Dr Mapp. He has delivered bad process bad judgment calls and bad law. Surely the Government must be regretting putting Mr Hide—the fallen perk-buster—in charge of the Auckland super-city. His credibility lies in tatters and unfortunately for the Government he has become the symbol in the eyes of the country of the Auckland super-city reform process. 
Right now on the eve of this important bill’s coming to the House Auckland is in disarray over the question of ward and local board boundaries. A right-wing gerrymander is evident in the boundaries that have been proposed by the Local Government Commission. Is that the fault of the Local Government Commission? No because its hands were tied by the second super-city bill by this Government’s insistence on having two-member wards and by its insistence on having an inadequate number of councillors. We are seeing the prospect of a gerrymandered council communities going without representation because of the two-member wards and under-representation right across the board. This is the Minister who professes to be an adherent of the principle of one person one vote—a vote of equal value—yet he is presiding over the most unfair electoral jack-up that we have seen in local government in New Zealand for a long time. He tried to wash his hands of it in question time today by blaming the Local Government Commission when in fact it is he who tied its hands. 
We have widespread dismay over boundaries we have iwi threatening to boycott the statutory board for Maori and we have Franklin Papakura and northern Rodney mounting a secessionist bid even before the super-city is off the ground. The whole enterprise is turning to custard and meanwhile Mr Hide is riding the rollercoaster at Universal Studios and trying to get bodybuilding advice from Arnold Schwarzenegger. Well that really says it all about the way this Minister has run this process for the Auckland governance reforms. 
The single most important issue that has vexed Aucklanders all year—the powers of local boards—is still unresolved. Mr John Carter and Mr Hide promised this House and promised Aucklanders that they would resolve it and that they would clarify it with this legislation yet we are no further ahead. They failed to take the tough decisions on the powers of local boards. What did they do? Clause 17 of this bill simply kicks the issue to touch by kicking it through to the Auckland Transition Agency and asking it to make the tough decisions. 
The matter of campaign spending limits shows this Government’s typical disregard for basic democratic principles. The status quo would set a spending limit of $70000 for a mayoral campaign. The Government is proposing that the Auckland mayoral campaign be fought with a limit of $580000. That is outrageous. Three Auckland mayors have already declared that to be completely inappropriate and undemocratic and that says it all about this Government’s approach to politics and democracy. A $580000 campaign limit for the last 3 months of election campaigning will benefit only the super-wealthy and those candidates backed by big business. I urge this Government to think again on that question and to listen to the three mayors of Auckland who have declared it to be a misjudgment. 
I will make some comments about probably the single most substantive thing in this bill which is the structuring of the Auckland Council around at least seven council-controlled organisations. The great majority of the business the functions and the activities of this council will be managed and delivered through arm’s length stand-alone commercial entities—council-controlled organisations. That I suggest has significant implications for the ability or the inability in this case of Aucklanders to hold their elected representatives accountable for the work of this council. It will undoubtedly result in a loss of democratic accountability. Two of the very things that these reforms were set up to address—silos in decision making and duplication—will be structured into the new Auckland Council by the creation of seven stand-alone commercial entities each with its own chief executive and board of directors. What is that if not duplication? What is that if not silos? 
Transport is I think an example of a significant part of this council’s business that simply should not be delivered through a council-controlled organisation or a stand-alone commercial entity. Transport is not a profit-making enterprise; it is a spending enterprise. In the minds of Aucklanders transport is the single biggest deliverable and the single most important thing that they want to see this super-city get right. It will constitute half the budget of the Auckland Council. It should be democratically controlled. It should be managed and overseen by democratically elected representatives of Aucklanders. 
There is also the matter of privatisation. This bill includes provision to strip away the protections against privatisation of the Ports of Auckland without the people of Auckland having a say. Currently the law requires that Aucklanders approve by majority in a referendum any move to sell off the shares of the Ports of Auckland. Aucklanders care about their ports; they want the ports to remain in public ownership. The opinion polls show that overwhelmingly. What does this Minister do? The Minister of Local Government knows that this Government cannot survive if it openly advocates the sale of assets even though he believes personally that the Ports of Auckland should be flogged off. So what does he do? He sets about systematically stripping away the democratic protections against privatisation of Auckland’s assets. The Government also decided to make water infrastructure able to be owned for periods of up to 35 years by the private sector. If we put those things alongside its decision to get rid of section 88 of the Local Government Act we see a privatisation agenda. 
I will comment on another important issue that should be in this bill but has been completely ignored and completely sidelined by the Government. It is one of the most important findings of the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance which was the recommendation for the establishment of a social issues board to form a tight collaborative partnership between central government and local government to tackle the entrenched poverty and inequality that is a feature of Auckland today. What has the Government done? Paula Bennett has announced a fig leaf in the form of a social issues forum which does nothing and has no decision-making power. That is a terrible shame. 
In conclusion I urge the Minister not to truncate the select committee process like he did with the second super-city bill effectively allowing given where we are in the calendar only 3 months to consider submissions and properly subject this bill to the kind of scrutiny it deserves. We have had an abuse of urgency in the previous two Auckland governance bills. The first bill had no select committee scrutiny at all and the second bill was rushed through in an inadequate process. It is not good enough. This is significant constitutional change to our system of Government and it deserves better. 
Labour has serious concerns about this bill. I have talked about the campaign spending limits the corporatisation of the business of the Auckland Council and the removal of democratic accountability. I have talked about the privatisation controls around the Ports of Auckland being stripped away and the failure to clarify or flesh out the powers of local boards. We have serious concerns about this bill. Bringing it to the House today caps off a shambolic 9-month process that is an insult to the good sense and integrity of our country’s biggest city. It has cast a pall over the entire venture of Auckland governance reforms and this Government could and should do a lot better.