Street Maryan: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — In Committee 
Street Maryan: Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:654;Page:3407] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 If the Government thought it was having a bad week it should believe me when I say that it is not over yet. 
Some issues around clause 9 of the Local Government (Auckland Reorganisation) Bill which we are debating at the moment go to the very heart of the question of how a city the size of the wider Auckland region should be run. Those issues are epitomised in the way that this Government has brought this legislation to the House. The arrogance that has been displayed in this urgent measure which does not require urgency at all—and in fact would be better served by a more measured careful approach that involved the people of Auckland—is testimony to the character of this Government. You know Labour was accused at the end of its 9 years in Government of having become arrogant but if ever we were arrogant it took us 9 years to get there. This Government has taken 6 months to get there and Rodney Hide has taken a nanosecond to get there. 
In fact Rodney Hide’s comments even this morning indicate how little he understands the need for consultation and how much he relies on executive power to push through unpalatable and ultimately unworkable measures in local government. Mr Hide this morning on Radio New Zealand National said that it does not matter because the Government has the numbers and it just has to sit it out—it just has to sit out the Labour Party’s filibustering. There is a difference between filibustering and recognising that the Labour Opposition is the only line between the people of New Zealand—and in this case the people of Auckland—and the executive power of Government. The Opposition provides the only defence between executive power and the people and we are exercising that defence on behalf of the people of Auckland. 
Having lived nearly 30 years of my life in Auckland I care about how Aucklanders are responding to this issue. Of course Auckland needs more efficient and more effective governance—that is not at issue. That is why the Labour Government called the royal commission. And it called a royal commission because the issues are complex; these issues are never simple and a royal commission was deemed to be the best way of addressing the inadequacies the friction the dysfunction and the complexity that have occurred in the operation of local government across numerous district councils and city councils in that region. But the Government has come to this House with a half-baked proposal and without consultation despite its protestations that it intends to engage in or is engaging in consultation; it is clear that it is not because of the supreme arrogance attached to the urgency given to this measure. 
This Government needs to recognise that the people of Auckland have an opinion and that that opinion will be expressed. It will be expressed in 2010 and further to that it will be expressed in 2011 when the mess that this Government is proposing for the governance structure of Auckland proves to be unworkable and dysfunctional. Having a dysfunctional local government arrangement across a city as large and as important to the economy as Auckland is a travesty. It is a terrible mistake. This Government did not need to ram this legislation through under urgency. This measure required more consideration more consultation and more opportunity for the people of Auckland to have their say. 
I wish to address in particular two amendments to this clause. The first amendment in the name of George Hawkins amends Part 2 by inserting a new clause 9(4): “The changes in this part will not take effect until a poll of electors has approved the changes in line with schedule 3 Section 49 of the Local Government Act 2002”. That should have been done at the outset. Why is the Government so frightened of a poll of political opinion? Why is it so frightened of that? The answer is simply that it probably is not frightened; it just cannot be bothered. It is using arrogance as a constitutional device here. This is an outrage. It is an outrage in process. It is an offence to the people of Auckland.