Sio Su'a William: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Sio Su'a William: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11534] 
SU’A WILLIAM SIO (Labour—Mangere) 
: 
 Talofa lava. Malo le soifua i lau afioga i le Ta‘ita‘ifona. Fa’afetai to my colleagues for giving me the opportunity to contribute to this debate on the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill. I sat through the select committee hearing and heard many Aucklanders complain about the process undertaken by this Government. I heard many Aucklanders say that the process by which this Government has undertaken to establish a super-city was undemocratic. I heard Aucklanders say that the Government led by the Minister of Local Government was determined and fixated on undermining democracy and undermining the contribution of Aucklanders to that region. In so far as our local communities are concerned they still do not have the confidence that the structure set up by this Government will achieve the so-called aims that were set out by the bill. A  
Herald- 
DigiPoll survey of Aucklanders found that nearly 60 percent were opposed to the level of council services being run by council-controlled organisations. A poll found that 54 percent believed that the Government had not handled the super-city reforms well as opposed to a small group of about 32 percent who believed they were being handled well. In so far as local boards are concerned numerous people in my neck of the woods do not believe that they will have any significant input as a result of the way in which local boards have been established. 
I heard the member representing Pakuranga say that there was significant support for the name for the Te Irirangi ward being changed to Howick. I think a pattern has now been set by this Government of saying that this is the process to follow and that after the people follow that particular process the Government goes ahead and changes things. An example of this was in the second bill on Auckland local body reorganisation where there was a process for us to undertake and overwhelmingly Aucklanders said that we should have Maori representation on the Auckland Council. What happened? Before that process was even completed this Government changed its mind because the Minister of Local Government decided he was not happy about it. The same thing is now happening with the Te Irirangi ward. A process was established involving the Local Government Commission. The name Te Irirangi was consulted on and the Local Government Commission then decided that we would maintain the name Te Irirangi. A couple of Ministers who did not like that decision decided to lobby the Minister of Local Government who will now be introducing a Supplementary Order Paper to change the name of the Te Irirangi ward to the Howick ward. 
One would think that having undergone a process set out by this Government we would give the benefit of the doubt to those who were consulted by the Local Government Commission and that we would allow for the new local board representatives who will be elected come 9 October to decide for themselves whether to hold on to the name Te Irirangi or to change it to Howick or whatever other name. I have met with and spoken to significant members of the Howick Pakuranga and Botany communities and they are also significant members of the National Party. There still remain many who are not happy with the way that this Government just seems to ram through the things that it believes are right when clearly that undermines the Government’s own process that it has set up. 
I will read out something from a longstanding member of the community that I am referring to. The chair of the Botany Community Board says that she is standing up for the silent majority of over 97 percent who are perfectly OK with the name Te Irirangi; just over 3000 people or as she says 2.75 percent want the name changed. She says that the Te Irirangi ward is over 17 kilometres long incorporates Howick Pakuranga and Botany and comprises over 128000 people. She asks whether we can honestly say that the people who live at the southern end of Botany want their area to be called Howick. Flat Bush is their new town. It is just starting to become identified in its own right. Some people from Howick and Pakuranga have never been happy to have Botany included in their area and they absolutely hate the idea of Flat Bush being included in their district. She says that the people of Botany love having Flat Bush as part of their new growth area. They are proud to have Barry Curtis Park in Botany. They want to be identified as being separate from Howick and the name Te Irirangi is the best solution. According to the chair of the Botany Community Board and other significant members of the National Party there has been a lot of misrepresentation about this issue. Many of them have complained that they cannot pronounce the name Te Irirangi; many of them felt that the name Howick would be changed into the name Te Irirangi. The names Howick Botany and Pakuranga still remain the same. Te Irirangi is the name of the ward and it will continue and should continue to remain the name. 
Dyann Calverley the chair of the Botany Community Board does not mind my mentioning her name. She is a wonderful person out in the Botany community. She said that Te Irirangi is the most suitable name for this huge area which is larger than Hamilton in area and population. She is pleading with the Minister of Local Government to please let them keep the name Te Irirangi. I am conveying that message to this Committee so that it knows the depth of feeling of other people who have remained silent and maintained their dignity. They have not been out there trying to manipulate the whole process through the use of a local newspaper and other people. Dyann Calverley is maintaining her dignity and simply pleading with this Committee to allow the process to be concluded to allow the new board to come on board and to allow its members to determine whether Te Irirangi should remain the name for the ward or whether there should be another new name. 
This plea is not from just one person; there are many people who want this. They are members of the National Party and they do not like what this Government has done. They do not like the hasty manner and the way it is riding roughshod over democracy in the city. They do not like the bully tactics—that is what they have called them—of this Government. They believe that this is a hostile takeover by the Government. Nothing has changed significantly from what the three bills intended to do. This is a hostile takeover by the corporate friends of this Government. 
I want to lay those comments on the table for the Committee’s consideration and for the consideration of the Minister of Local Government. This is important coming from the people of Auckland. They matter and at the end of the day it should be about the people of Auckland. I do not believe that there has been enough consideration given by this Government to the impact of the legislation. I suspect that this Government having increased the cost of living for the numerous working-class communities throughout this country will now burden Aucklanders more because of the additional costs of this super-city. Who knows what other unknown costs have yet to reveal themselves but I have a suspicion as do the people of Auckland that we will pay up to our necks as a result of the determination of this Government to ride roughshod over democracy and to take control of significant income-generating assets that belong to the people of Auckland. Fa‘afetai ma ia soifua.