Hide Rodney: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
Hide Rodney: Business of Select Committees — Appointments 
[Volume:654;Page:3182] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 I apologise to Sue Kedgley because I have obviously sown some confusion in her mind. Let us be clear about the two pieces of legislation. The first sets up the transition agency—that is going to be done under— 
Hon Shane Jones 
: Talk about the select committee. Follow the rules! 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: Mr Jones has just clarified the process for Miss Kedgley who had asked about it. Yes the transition agency legislation is going through under urgency and that has been in response to the problem that once a major change like that is announced it is hard for councils and particularly their staff to be making decisions. They need somewhere to go to in order to get the OK for the decisions that they are making. That is a necessity of any change or reorganisation such as this. 
The second thing is that we are setting up this select committee in order to allow the people of Auckland to have their say. Indeed I might say here that the Prime Minister and I—and members of the Government—met with the mayors. I would be interested if Sue Kedgley would tell me privately which mayors have rung her up and told her that they have not felt engaged because every mayor at each of our meetings has individually said that he or she has never been as well engaged with a Government on a change such as this. I have been out to see them and this select committee is as a result of the discussions with the mayors. 
The mayors said that we needed a process of engagement and we suggested that we do this. The difficulty we had was that we needed—and I think Miss Kedgley will appreciate this—the boundaries to be drawn up ahead of the 2010 election. The Local Government Commission needs the parameters within which it works. The way to do that would be first to do it all under urgency which would not give people a chance to have their say would be unfair and undemocratic and would not give a good result. The proposal is that we put the key things that the Local Government Commission needs to a select committee in order to draw up the boundaries the wards and the local boards so that indeed we do reflect the communities. 
I would have thought too that Sue Kedgley would agree with the Government that communities are important and that the royal commission made a mistake in not recognising that by having just six councils and doing away with local representation through community boards. The Government has said that that is unsatisfactory because we want a second tier in Auckland that will reflect communities’ interests and this select committee will be considering exactly how that is done. I can tell members that my view as Minister of Local Government and the view of the Prime Minister and my Associate Minister John Carter from speaking to them is that we are vitally interested in what the people of Auckland have to say because this is a matter of governance. 
Hon Member 
: You’re too late! 
Hon RODNEY HIDE 
: Nothing is too late! Yes we are working to a timetable we have announced the timetable and it needs to be in place I say to Miss Kedgley so that we can have elections in October 2010. That is important. It means we are working to a timetable that we have provided. Aucklanders and others with an interest will be able to make a submission and be heard and the select committee can make a recommendation. I imagine that this Parliament and indeed the Government will be vitally interested to provide what Aucklanders would like; that is the purpose of the select committee. 
Maybe the problem that Miss Kedgley has is that she is used to another Government that actually never listened to what people had to say on things like the Electoral Finance Act and other matters. This is a Government that provides some leadership provides some direction and sets up a process by which people can genuinely interact. I draw Sue Kedgley’s attention to clause 49 of schedule 3 of the Local Government Act which sets up referenda on reorganisation. But that relates to a specific proposal: when the Local Government Commission makes a proposal for a reorganisation. 
This issue is not about the Local Government Commission making a recommendation for a reorganisation; this is because the previous Government was not satisfied with local government in Auckland spent $4 million and set up a royal commission whose report landed on this Government’s lap. The report was very good. We considered it we discussed it at length with the commissioners we made high-level decisions and thought it important that the people of Auckland had their say. And what is the best way of doing that? It is through a select committee process where everyone can come along. 
I can tell Sue Kedgley that we have an open mind on the arguments in terms of the north and south boundaries in terms of those elected at large the number of those the pluses and the minuses of that and indeed the functions of the 20 to 30 local boards. Why did we have that? It is important that we get a good outcome and the way we get a good outcome is to establish a very good process with leadership. Indeed the process has to be good for people to feel a sense of ownership—and that is important. I remind Sue Kedgley that the problem New Zealanders have with the Electoral Finance Act which the Greens and the previous Labour Government supported and now only the Greens do is that no one feels a sense of ownership. People went along to the select committee and they were railroaded. Having suffered from the Electoral Finance Act I have to say I am not a Minister who is going to railroad stuff through the select committee. 
We are setting up the select committee to learn about the proposals and the various arguments for and against the options that are on the table. I say to members that if they can come up with a better process than a properly functioning parliamentary select committee I am all ears. I took the trouble to meet with Edward Rooney editor of  
The Aucklander 
 and I was very interested in what he said because he had a very good point. He had concerns about the Government making decisions and rushing off. I said: “Here’s the timetable; here’s the process. We’re going into the select committee and I’m genuinely interested in hearing what people have to say. If you can come up with a better process I’d love to hear it.” This is what Parliament is for; it is about providing leadership it is about representation but most of all it is about listening to the arguments listening to what the people have to say and then on the basis of that making an informed decision. I know that that is a shocking way of thinking about the select committee given the last 9 years of experience but it is the way that I propose to proceed and it seems to me that is the best way to proceed in this case. 
Sue Kedgley also raised the point that somehow we are following in the footsteps of ”Rogernomics Part 2: The Unfinished Business of Rogernomics.” Again I hate to disabuse her but I remember recently coming across a news report about the difficulties of Auckland governance being fragmented an inability to get decisions and an inability to provide for the people. A previous mayor said that it was a joke the current mayor said that Auckland needed to speak with one voice and the Minister concerned said that what was needed was for Auckland to sort itself out and if Auckland would not sort itself out then Parliament would. The news report was from the  
New Zealand Herald 
 it 
was dated September 1959 and the Minister concerned was the Hon Bill Anderton—Roger Douglas’ grandfather. Almost nothing has been done to fix Auckland governance properly in the previous 50 years so if Sue Kedgley wants to accuse us of “Rogernomics Part 2” I say that we are just finishing what Roger Douglas’ grandfather started when he was Minister of Internal Affairs in the—what would that be—second Labour Government. 
Thank you Mr Deputy Speaker. I think it is fabulous that we are going to have a select committee representing the parties in this House able to meet regularly to consider this issue.