Sage Eugenie: Local Government (Salary Moderation) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Sage Eugenie: Local Government (Salary Moderation) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 15 August 2012. Volume:682;Page:4454. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
EUGENIE SAGE (Green) 
: 
 I am puzzled. The previous speaker the member for Christchurch Central said “We trust local decision-making and we trust local democracy”. Yet this Government with its programme of sweeping change in local government is taking a stab at the heart of local democracy as one mayor said to me today. Its proposals to deny local electors a vote when there are proposals for amalgamation is substantially reducing local democracy. Its proposals in the changes to allow Ministers to interfere much more in appointing Crown observers review panels and managers is again not trusting local democracy. So why if we have the Minister-in-exile saying that one of the most important things that a council does is to appoint the chief executive is the Government not trusting local councils to do the other much more important things we think which is provide the services and facilities that communities value? 
The Green Party supports this bill the Local Government (Salary Moderation) Amendment Bill because it is an example of how some issues in local government can be addressed in a constructive way without undermining the current purpose and intent of the Local Government Act. The bill seeks to bring local authority processes in line with other Public Service chief executive remuneration processes. It requires any local authority to get approval from the State Services Commission on the remuneration rates—not on the appointment per se as some previous speakers have suggested—for their chief executive and that these rates must be moderated by reference to other comparable positions in for example Government departments and the public sector generally. 
Local government provides huge value to communities. It is involved in a whole range of services that make places pleasant to live work and retire in. Local councils are responsible for significant assets—up to more than $92 billion of infrastructure and other assets—and it is very appropriate that the salary scale for chief executives reflect the significant responsibilities of councils. But it is also really important that they are not out of step with council staff who provide those key services. They are the staff who manage the libraries the swimming pools and the parks and who organise the sewage treatment the stormwater the provision of water and the recycling collection. 
In Christchurch we know that it is those people who are most important for our quality of life. It is the people who dig the drains who connect the sewerage pipes and who keep the water system running who are some of the most valued council workers and contractors in Christchurch. They do the strenuous and dirty work; they are often not rewarded adequately for that work. We have seen as the member Annette King noted the very controversial process around the remuneration for the chief executive officer of Christchurch City Council when he was given a $68000 pay rise taking his salary to $538000. That was partly because the consultants advised the council and it was the council’s own policy to align the salaries with the general market—a mix of public and private sector salaries—rather than aligning them as this bill seeks to do with public sector salaries through the involvement of the State Services Commission. 
 The whole process of setting chief executive officer salaries from my experience in local government can become incredibly politicised. It puts media attention on the salary rather than on the issues that the council is dealing with. This bill is a sound step toward depoliticising that process introducing transparency and having a check and balance on what the council does. It is a bill that we will be supporting. Thank you.