Fenton Darien: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Fenton Darien: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 27 November 2012. Volume:686;Page:6790. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I really appreciate the opportunity to contribute to the Committee stage of this debate on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. I was not on the Local Government and Environment Committee but I have been kept well briefed by our spokesperson and other members of the Labour caucus about what has been going on here. 
I have to say it was pretty obvious what was coming earlier in the year when Nick Smith was still the Minister of Local Government before his downfall. It was pretty obvious because there were patsy questions to him in the House about rates—you know how much have rates increased by—and about debt. Actually it was Nicky Wagner I think who was asking the patsy questions was it not? 
Kris Faafoi 
: Surely not! 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Well I think it was actually. Maybe Jacqui Dean shared them as well. There were patsy questions about rates patsy questions about debt and patsy questions about staffing following the same pattern that we saw with his manufacturing of a crisis in ACC. And where did that end up? Where has that ended up? Not a pretty sight. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: ACC is in a lot better shape. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: It has not been a pretty sight Nick Smith. I would have thought that your successor David Carter might show a bit more wisdom and would pause to take a good look at this bill as many people have urged him and the Government to do and to slow down pause and rethink this bill. It had 700 written and oral submissions the vast majority of which were opposed to it. Seventy-eight councils opposed it. Up and down the country people are concerned about this. They are also concerned about the lack of consultation before the changes were sent to Cabinet and the lack of consultation that has gone on up and down the country as I said with various people who have come along and made submissions that were not listened to. Here we have a bill back to the Committee just a few months later with no substantial amendments at all. There are no substantial amendments at all. All of those people— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: There’s an SOP. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: —substantial amendments—who took the time to make a submission have been ignored. But we have got used to that with this Government. We have got used to it undermining democracy—undermining local democracy. It is a Nick Smith special. 
I have taken the time to put in a Supplementary Order Paper Supplementary Order Paper 156 and I have done that for a couple of reasons. Like every other ratepayer in the country I am affected by this bill. I am affected by this bill. Even though local government issues are not something that gets people marching in the streets—well occasionally they get people marching in the streets— 
Dr Megan Woods 
: It does get people in Christchurch. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: That is true. In Christchurch they get people marching in the streets. I am concerned about the removal of the four well-beings: economic social cultural and environmental. So I have taken the trouble to put in a Supplementary Order Paper to resubmit something that the National Government foolishly—foolishly—voted against when I put it forward in a member’s bill about libraries being protected from charges. As I thought about it— 
Hon Annette King 
: A good SOP. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: It is a Supplementary Order Paper. 
Hon Annette King 
: It’s a good one. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: It is a good Supplementary Order Paper. Yes it is. When I thought about it I could have gone further but the reason I did that was that people have been talking to me about the provision of services by local government and I started to feel very concerned about the impact of this bill. For example has this Government told local communities that where early childhood centres are housed on council land they could end up paying rent? I would like to ask the Minister in the chair Craig Foss whether he can guarantee that this bill will not result in early childhood centres on council land having to pay rent— 
Nicky Wagner 
: They’re already paying rent. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: —shifting the cost to the taxpayer and shifting the cost to the parents of the children who attend those centres. Nicky Wagner can look puzzled but it is a genuine question and I look forward to an answer from the Minister in the chair. If he can guarantee that I will be very happy. I will be very happy to go back to the community that I work in and tell them that Craig Foss has guaranteed that there will be no rental charges for early childhood education centres on council land under this bill. 
Another question that I have is about community houses. Every centre throughout the country has community houses that are on council land that by and large are funded by councils. What is going to happen with those under this bill? There she goes Jacqui Dean is screwing up her nose. I am simply asking for a guarantee for an assurance that community houses will not become user-pays. Of course we all know that the Government does not support protecting libraries from user-pays because it voted down a very good member’s bill on that which I proposed. It does not support that. Then there are things like sports facilities and grounds kids’ play areas parks and arts facilities. Again I ask the Minister in the chair whether he will give this side of the Chamber a guarantee that this bill will not—will not—result in user-pays for the community services that are provided for and valued by people. If he cannot I am looking forward to going to tell the parents of children who play in their local park and the parents of children who attend the early childhood centres that this Government cannot give them a guarantee that we are not moving to a user-pays system under this bill with the removal of the four well-beings. 
I do not think there has been proper discussion and consultation with communities about this I do not think the consequences of this bill are well understood and I do not think some people in this House understand the extent of the work that is done by local councils and local boards. I appreciated the comments from Tracey Martin because actually there was a bill that came forward to allow Rodney to vote on its destination sponsored by me. The National Government would not sponsor it. Guess what! Guess what! National voted that down too because it does not believe in local democracy. That is what this bill does. It takes away local democracy. It is taking the local out of local government. 
There are so many things that could be affected by this bill. I mean things like drainage in the local sportsground—does that come under a core service or not? I know that general drainage does but does drainage in a sportsground come under it? There are things like all the youth programmes that are funded. Are they affected by this? You know will councils have to make a decision—cash-strapped councils—about youth programmes? 
Hon Annette King 
: And community safety. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: And community safety—that is right. And things like Enviroschools—of course they have already been slashed to bits under this Government but they still exist. They are funded and supported by local government. Graffiti management which is done by core— 
Hon Annette King 
: How can the private sector do that? 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Well exactly. I suppose it could do it but actually those services are funded and supported by local community groups that work with young people on making sure that they come to value their environment. They work to make sure that things like graffiti do not get away from us. All the little kids in the park whom I see on the North Shore every day—I am looking forward to Jonathan Coleman going along and explaining to the Northcote community what is going to happen to its playgrounds which I know the local board has fought very very hard for has had issues about and actually has been opposed and criticised by Jonathan Coleman in the local newspaper. For all the little children who play in the areas that are provided by the local board I am really interested to have an answer so that I can go back and tell those people that this Government is prepared to guarantee that this bill will not mean that there will be user-pays for kids to play on the jungle gyms. I ask the Minister in the chair again to answer that— 
Kris Faafoi 
: What about Santa parades? 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Santa parades too—that is right. Will they be user-pays? How will that work? 
Andrew Williams 
: What about garden shows? 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Garden shows—well that is true. Garden shows—well that is right. They will probably have to pay—[ 
Interruption 
] Yes that is right. One of the other things that the Government does not seem to understand are the proposals for amalgamations in this bill. With restructuring costs the costs end up being borne by the local council. That is what has happened in Auckland. It is no wonder actually that it has ended up spending a bit more. It had to make thousands of people redundant and pay redundancy pay. Of course it has now had to re-employ a lot of them because it did not have enough staff to do the work. It is no wonder. That is the sort of thing that will happen under this bill. As I said a very simple guarantee from the Minister in the chair would be very welcome. 
The second part of my Supplementary Order Paper is about ports and I hope that I will have an opportunity to talk about that a little bit later.