Worth Richard: Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill — First Reading 
Worth Richard: Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:642;Page:12051] 
Dr RICHARD WORTH (National) 
: 
 What a splendid speech we heard from my colleague Dr Wayne Mapp. It had splendid content and I particularly liked the allusion he made to the grandees of the Auckland region. 
National supports the Auckland Regional Amenities Funding Bill going to the select committee and as other parties have observed it is not to be assumed that our consent will necessarily carry any further. But it is significant legislation. I think an interesting starting point is that if Auckland were one city like Brisbane then this issue would never arise. The philosophical point is that regional facilities should be funded regionally. 
 As others have said there is precedent for this particular bill in two pieces of legislation one a private Act and one a local Act. The core provision of those enacted provisions is to create a differential factor that levies upon the constituent local authorities a funding share. Those constituent local authorities are Rodney District Council North Shore City Council Waitakere City Council Auckland City Council Manukau City Council Papakura District Council and Franklin District Council. Two of those councils Rodney and Franklin have the advantage of having a lower differential factor. 
I would say there are really four issues that will occupy the time of the select committee. The first I have identified. It is the philosophical issue of the extent to which regional facilities should be funded regionally. 
The second issue which Dr Sharples has made mention of is that of who should be on this list of organisations. Clearly there is room for argument there. I certainly support what the member has said in connection with the inclusion of a kapahaka trust because the Maori cultural aspect has not been addressed in this legislation. In respect of some of the listed parties I can see that there could well be real and genuine argument but that is an issue for the select committee to look at. That is then the second proposition—what is to be in the list. 
The third question is what other funding mechanisms might be available to look after these particular entities. They range obviously from a type of levy which this bill contemplates to the opportunity that local authorities have to borrow funds perhaps using bond issues. When we were young it was a commonplace for local authorities certainly in the Auckland area to raise money by way of bonds. The third possibility is simply by rating. So I would say this is the third issue that needs to be considered. It is interesting that most of the local authorities in the Auckland region have very strong balance sheets but they are incredibly reluctant to borrow money against the strength of those balance sheets. The select committee needs to consider that issue before it launches into settling a funding mechanism based on the proposed levy arrangement. 
The fourth issue which I will touch upon briefly is who the contributing authorities should be. They have been identified in the two statutes I earlier made mention of. But there is a case I would argue for limiting those contributing catchments in the far north and in the far south.