Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam:  
Lotu-Iiga Peseta Sam:  
[Volume:654;Page:95] 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA (National—Maungakiekie) 
: 
 I thank the Hon David Parker for his representations tonight. We are talking about Part 3 which is about the establishment of the Auckland Transition Agency to oversee the new structure. It is about transferring power to a wider council. It is about putting together a council that will lead and drive Auckland City into the future. 
We have heard tonight from a number of our colleagues across the Chamber about public meetings. We are having public meetings because we listen to the people of Auckland. We listen to the people of Auckland Central. We listen to the people of Maungakiekie. We also listen to the people of Waitakere. We have representatives who live in the cities and the electorates that they represent. They do not live in another city and claim to represent another electorate. The issue is about having public meetings where we will be doing a lot of listening. We will not be filling our public meetings with cronies. We will not fill them with partisan people who wave placards and who ignored their right to have representation and be consulted last year. 
The debate about the new city will be about leadership because ultimately it is about people. We have heard the members opposite criticising and putting down the Hon John Banks. That honourable former member served in the House for 18 years. Members opposite should have a bit of respect for that and show a bit of integrity when they choose to criticise the Hon John Banks. What the Hon John Banks has done for Auckland City— 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. The Standing Orders specifically provide a right of redress to members whose integrity has been called into account. Our integrity has just been called into account. I seek your support to have that member withdraw and apologise. It cannot be the case that any human being who objects to John Banks lacks integrity. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: That is not a point of order; that is a matter of debate. I say to the member that I want the debate to flow and if members are going to take points of order I want them to be about order. I want the debate to flow. I invite the member to continue. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I take offence as I am allowed to do under the Standing Orders and I ask for redress. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: This is a robust debate and I cannot see how that member could have been offended by that. I struggle to see that. 
Hon David Cunliffe 
: I am. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I struggle to see how that could be so. It is my opinion that that was not offensive. That is my decision. The member raised that matter before. I said it was not in order. The member directly challenged my ruling again and I just say to the member that the matter is closed so he should not raise it again. I invite the member to continue. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA 
: Thank you Mr Chairperson and I appreciate the respectful way that you are conducting matters— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. Although the member may be grateful he is not allowed to comment on your ruling. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The member is technically correct but I say to the member that I am trying to encourage people to let the debate flow rather than tripping people up over technical things. The point of order is technically correct. When a ruling on a point of order has been made it is not appropriate to comment on it. That is why I challenged Mr Cunliffe about that. The matter is closed; you then move on. I invite the member to continue with his contribution. 
PESETA SAM LOTU-IIGA 
: Thank you Mr Chairperson and I thank you for the opportunity to speak without interruptions. I was speaking about the Hon John Banks and I say there could be no better leader to take our city forward next year than him. What he has done in his transmogrification as the leader of Auckland City has been to keep council rates increases at the rate of inflation. Keeping rates low is what the people of Auckland have asked for. 
The debate is really about how to bring together the various councils. Most people in the city and most people in the country accept that Auckland will be one city. Now the debate is really about how we organise the city going forward. Those who have been involved in mergers and acquisitions and in putting together different organisations and bodies will understand that the debate is not just about the financial assets of this city going forward. It is not just about the liabilities. It is also about the people. It is about as my learned colleague Nikki Kaye the member for Auckland Central rightly alluded to protecting the people who are employees of the city as at the transition date. This bill quite clearly protects the rights of those workers. I have spoken to some of those workers who are a little nervous but quite open to the fact that Auckland deserves to have a council that oversees the assets of the whole city. 
Let me give the Committee a couple of examples of why a single city is important. The issue really is about putting together consistent regulations consistent procedures and consistent systems—for example payroll systems.