Cunliffe David: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Cunliffe David: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11536] 
Hon DAVID CUNLIFFE (Labour—New Lynn) 
: 
 Talofa lava soifua malo. Despite the Chairperson’s obvious generosity it is with some sadness that I rise to speak on the issue of local boards in the Auckland super-city debate. It has been my privilege to represent the New Lynn electorate as part of a wider group of strong Auckland communities. They are communities like Blockhouse Bay Avondale Glenavon New Lynn Titirangi Huia Cornwallis Laingholm Parau Konini Kaurilands Glen Eden and Kelston. 
They are communities where people know each other. They are communities where people have spent a long time rather than moving through as they often do in the centre of Auckland. They are communities where there are good Kiwi families who have worked hard to bring up their kids. They are communities that built the Kiwi dream. They are communities where people work in their parent teacher associations on school boards in service clubs and in their local RSA—a special plug for the New Lynn and Titirangi RSAs. They are communities where people are members of their sports clubs like the Glenora Bears or the Suburbs Rugby Football Club which it is my pleasure to be patron of. They are groups like the conservation boards the Waitakere Ranges Protection Society the Royal Forest and Bird Protection Society the Laingholm community association and many many others. Westies care about their communities. 
The same people who have grown up in the community sector that rich tapestry of Kiwis helping Kiwis have also given their time and passion to build their communities through the community boards—that is until now. The word on the street in my part of town is that those same hard-working New Zealanders do not know what these local boards will be able to do. They are deeply worried that the same legislation that took away the much-loved Waitakere City entirely will also take away any shred of power and mandate from the community boards by creating the empty shell of local democracy. At least that was the case until the Hon George Hawkins and the hard-working Phil Twyford got to work on this campaign. 
It is with some pleasure although with some sadness that I note the Minister has agreed to adopt the Hon George Hawkins’ amendment which guarantees minimum powers and standards for local boards. But why now? That is the question. If the Government was sincere about promoting local democracy why would those minimum powers not be set out from the outset? The reality is that the same people who have been committed to our community boards are now asking themselves why they should bother. 
It is little wonder that the polls show an overwhelming majority of Aucklanders oppose this legislation oppose the super-city oppose the corporate takeover oppose the divestment of billions of dollars of Aucklanders’ assets and oppose the appointment of council-controlled organisations largely by Mr Hide by fiat from Wellington rather than by the democratic expression of Aucklanders through their community boards their council and their regional arrangements to hold their representatives accountable. People resent it. They resent the Wellington takeover of Auckland. They resent the corporate takeover of Auckland. They resent the fact that all they are left with are local boards that are a hollow shell something like the cocoon of a butterfly after the butterfly has flown. There will be nothing much left. 
In order to answer why that is we have to see this whole process in context. What was the original problem that these reforms were designed to solve? Frankly it was about some lack of coordination at the regional level to deliver regional services like transport and water. It would have been possible to solve that by reform at the regional level. That is the largest part of what the royal commission sought to do. It did so after 18 months of consultation millions of dollars of investment and a document 800 pages thick that covered off on a whole range of functions and powers and provided a comprehensive draft solution for Auckland. We did not agree with all of it but National ignored it.