Carter John: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
Carter John: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6513] 
Hon JOHN CARTER (Associate Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 If we have ever had an example of why this debate is turning into a disappointment it was the contribution by the previous speaker the Hon David Cunliffe. One of the things that I had hoped would happen in this debate given we had a time limit of 16 hours was that the Opposition would want to set out very clearly its direction its policies and what it hoped to achieve for Auckland. But the contribution from the previous speaker is just an example of why the Labour Party is 27 percent in the polls and going down. It is unfortunate. 
Let me just state again the direction that this Government is setting out for Auckland. I must say in that regard the Opposition agrees with this. The Government is looking to have an authority that looks after regional issues. The Opposition agrees. Indeed I think everybody agrees maybe with the exception of the Greens—and I am not even sure about that now. Everyone understands that we need to have a structure that will address the regional matters that people want addressed. That is the first and most important point. It is the fundamental reason why we are making this change. Members talked about an amalgamation of local government but actually this structure is not an amalgamation. I think it was Sue Kedgley who talked about amalgamation. This is not an amalgamation in the sense of the amalgamations of putting local authorities together. We are changing the structure. We are making sure there is clarity in the ability of the unitary authority to have regional decision-making on those matters that concern Aucklanders—transport water parks and the environment. Those are the sorts of things that matter across the city and across the whole of the region. 
The second thing that the Government is making sure will happen is that there is the opportunity for the local voice—the local democracy—to express itself. That is one thing and again I have heard the Opposition say that as well. Su’a William Sio made it very clear that one of the things that he heard in volumes was that people expected this Government to ensure that their local communities were empowered. We have done that. I want to make a couple of points in that regard because when we started out we were thinking that we would prescribe in law the functions of the local boards; that we would give them lists of things that they could do. But as we listened to the submissions we realised that there was such a variety of things that communities wanted within their Auckland areas that we could not put them in a list because we would miss something out. Something might be relevant for one local board but would not be pertinent or relevant for another. So the people of Auckland asked us for the ability to have flexibility to allow them to carry out the things that they want to do in their communities. So we have put into the bill the principle of subsidiarity. It is about functions. It is about the things that the community wants. Again I have to say the members of the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee without exception accepted that principle in general. I know that Sue Kedgley particularly—although Sue Bradford is more relaxed—is still concerned about it. We accept that but I say to Sue Kedgley that as we move forward we will be able to show her that it will work but it will take some time. 
The point I make is that it was important that we reflected that community voice and allowed those people to have their say. Alongside that we knew that if all we did was give them the ability to make decisions but did not allow them the financial ability to carry them out we would fail. So the Auckland Transition Agency as it moves forward—once we know the local boards and we have heard the results from the Local Government Commission—will then allocate a budget to the local boards. That will be set from then on in. As the new unitary authority sets its budget so too will it prescribe that money for those local boards to carry out those functions. Let me just make it very clear that those functions that are prescribed by the Auckland Transition Agency cannot then be removed from the local boards unless it is by agreement between the local boards and the unitary authority. It has to be by agreement. That is where we are going to put in place in case of dispute a dispute resolution system that will make sure that the unitary authority cannot overpower the local boards. 
Certainly local boards have the ability to look at things on a regional basis. There is no question about that. We have made that very clear and of course there will be some things that they will want to consider on a regional basis. Libraries are a classic example. Of course each local board or community will want to have its library outlet so people will have access to their library. But it makes sense—and indeed we have heard it from people who are far better versed in administering libraries than I am—that we administer libraries on a regional basis. We cannot have them isolated so that people are reading the same books. The whole purpose of having a Library Service is so there is an exchange. So there will be a regional policy basis for the libraries but within that each of the local boards will be able to make its own policy around how its library is run for its people. It will be a two-tier thing. They will work in conjunction and in unison with each other. 
Ross Robertson asked about swimming pools. There is no question that the unitary authority may well make a policy about swimming pools. I do not know; it may or it may not. But even if it does it will be on a regional basis that will permit the local board that looks after the Manukau area or whatever area it may be to decide whether it wishes to continue with its policy of allowing its ratepayers to have free access to its swimming pools. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: What about Otahuhu John? 
Hon JOHN CARTER 
: Well again the unitary authority can take that matter up I say to Ross Robertson and create free swimming pool access if that is what is happening or the local board within the area can be provided with the funding to make it happen. That is the beauty of this system. We will allow those communities to make it happen. Even better than that if for some reason the unitary authority says it cannot provide the funding the local community can say it will provide a targeted rate and do it itself. So there is that flexibility as well. 
Besides that the next thing we need to do is to make sure that those facilities can be serviced and we are making sure that happens as well. The Auckland Transition Agency is putting in place a structure so that there is service delivery. To me to the select committee and most important to the people of Auckland the most fundamental thing was to get the local board the local democracy and the local voice right. We have gone a long way towards answering the questions that the people of Auckland asked. 
Indeed I have to say that the Opposition in the main agrees with the principles. We might argue about whether there are 20 or 30 local boards or 14 or 20 but actually it is a moot point. The point is that the Opposition is saying that we have all these 20 or 30 boards and they have theirs defined down to 14 or 20. Well I say that there does not seem to me to be a hell of a lot of difference in the sense that we will give the Local Government Commission the scope to go out there and ask the people of Auckland what structure they think best represents them. That is why we have made it flexible. We have said there will be 20 or 30 boards generally so that there can even be some tolerance one way or another if it is needed. That is the point. We are ensuring that the local voice will prevail. 
Alongside that I make one other point about the wards. I know the Opposition is concerned about the multiple wards and the function of the unitary councillors. Let us not forget that their purpose is to look after regional matters. Their whole purpose is to worry about things at a regional level and not at the local level. Sure there will be an exchange; there is no question about that. But their primary function is to make sure that the region functions in a way that it should and in such a way that makes the region efficient and makes the city the world-class city that we know Auckland can be. At last there will be an opportunity for people to come together and deal with things on a unified basis across the city that for so long have held back the opportunities that Aucklanders have been looking for and that New Zealand needs Auckland to achieve. 
Although we can sit here and debate the little bits and pieces and although there is still a lot of work to do and although we will absolutely concede that as the Greens and the Opposition keep saying we have not got it all together—and that is absolutely true; it is a work in progress—we will continue developing it as we move forward. The only way we could make it happen was to do it in stages. It was not possible to come up with one big package all at once. We would have got that badly wrong. We are working our way through. The likes of George Hawkins and others will actually help and assist us as we move it forward and we respect them for that as well. We appreciate the contribution that has been made generally. This bill is moving a good way forward and we will make good progress on it as we pass it.