Wagner Nicky: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Wagner Nicky: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 27 November 2012. Volume:686;Page:6776. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
NICKY WAGNER (National—Christchurch Central) 
: 
 It is my pleasure to stand and discuss the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. As we talk to Part 1 in the Committee stage I want to talk about the Minister of Local Government’s Supplementary Order Paper 153. This Supplementary Order Paper mainly focuses on two areas. These were the two areas that were of great interest to submitters and generated good debate within the select committee. The first is to do with the legislation around the Minister’s ability to intervene in local government and the second concerns the provisions and regulations relating to the reorganisation of local government. These are both complex areas and although there were some parts of the legislation that the Local Government and Environment Committee could agree on it was decided that the best way to make the changes the best way to reflect submitters’ opinion and the best way to produce well-organised and coherent legislation was to do the work as a package and hence we have this Supplementary Order Paper. 
First of all I would like to deal with the powers of the Minister of Local Government and discuss the terms of the Minister’s ability to support assist or intervene early—early as a problem arises in local government rather than having to wait until the damage is done. Most submitters were in favour of additional support to councils if problems arose and they understood the need for flexibility within the system and flexibility of response and they supported a graduated or progressive system of assistance or intervention. I suppose it really reflects the old “a stitch in time can save nine”—trying to proactively deal with issues before they get out of control. 
The other part of the Supplementary Order Paper I would like to discuss is about the provisions and schedules for the reorganisation of local government. There is no doubt that there needs to be changes in this area because there has been no reorganisation under the existing rules since 1989. There were no changes made—although the world is a very different place 24 years later—despite the huge changes in everything else. There were huge changes in society huge changes in the economy and huge changes in how we live. The only tweak that has actually happened in those 24 years was the inclusion of Banks Peninsula into the Christchurch City rating area. That was done by circumventing the rules. Yes it was a pragmatic result and I think it was a good one but that is not something that we really want to foster. In the past 24 years we have seen a big drop-off in the amount of people voting in the local government elections. I wonder whether that is partially to do with the fact that ratepayers have had no real say in the shape of their local government council. Sure they can vote for their councillors—they can vote them in and out—but if the structure is not fit for purpose and it would be better and more cost-effective in a different configuration they can do absolutely nothing. Councils have been stuck in a 24-year time warp. If the structure was not optimal in 1989 ratepayers have just had to live with it. This bill gives them the democratic right to discuss the shape of their councils and we know that some areas are keen to do just that. 
Just this week Wairarapa councils voluntarily have all agreed to support a joint move towards a single unitary authority. This is their democratic right. I hear the Opposition saying it does not like the grassroots making their own decisions but on this side of the House we support them. This legislation will allow those councils to work together through a joint process that can deliver them what their local ratepayers are asking for. 
Of course there was debate about how this should work to make sure that local democracy is enhanced rather than stifled. I think we have come up with a pretty good model. But after reading the submissions I noted that some were concerned about testing the model for a vote and to also make sure that there was enough time to raise a petition. So the Minister has amended the legislation through his Supplementary Order Papers and he has amended the original requirements to make it easier for communities to exercise their vote by changing the petition requirements to 10 percent of voters in any affected territorial authority area and increasing the number of days allowed to complete the petition from 40 days to 60 days. I believe that this will please some of our submitters. The mechanism for reorganisation is a two-stage process through which the Local Government Commission determines the preferred option for reorganisation. These options can come from anywhere within the community. They take the preferred option and they formulate that into the final proposal which may be tested by a poll and if it survives that poll will be given effect by Order in Council. The commission then develops a reorganisation scheme to implement the final proposal and that is given effect to by Order in Council. I believe that this reorganisation process increases local democracy by giving local people a say in the shape of their local council which has not been available for 24 years. I commend this Supplementary Order Paper to the Committee.