Henare Tau: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — Second Reading 
Henare Tau: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:663;Page:11395] 
Hon TAU HENARE (National) 
: 
 I start by giving my congratulations to the select committee and also to our chairperson the Hon John Carter. He has done a sterling job in keeping the committee together keeping the committee on track and getting all of us to be part of a democratic process. I also want to make an apology about an issue and get this off my chest because it has been worrying me for some time. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Oh! 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: No no. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Oh not that one? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Not that one. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Not ready for that yet? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: I have a list of them in here somewhere. 
I want to apologise to the Federation of Country Women’s Institutes because I took its name in vain. When there was a protest outside the select committee which was organised by none other than the new Labour candidate for Te Atatu Phil Twyford I referred to that protest as “nothing more than a meeting of the Country Women’s Institute”. So I apologise to those good ladies of the Federation of Country Women’s Institutes. In fact that protest was nothing more than a ragtag bunch of old lefties from the 1970s and 1980s who have not moved on and were looking for that last opportunity to go and protest at something. 
I have always thought that the first speech made by an Opposition member on a report back a second reading speech would be one of verve and high quality and would set out what the Opposition would do given the faint opportunity of being on the Treasury benches. But all we heard was a rambling speech by one of the old warhorses of the Labour Party. I sort of feel sorry because that speech should have been given by one of the young members of Labour. It should have been given by one of the more on-to-it members like maybe William Sio who has lived his whole life in Otara. He went to my alma mater—Hillary College. 
Phil Twyford 
: Talk about the bill. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: It would have been a statement by the new Labour Party that this is where it is headed. 
Phil Twyford 
: What about the bill? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: But all we heard was a disjointed wobbly old speech. 
Members opposite want me to talk about the bill; what is there to talk about? Most people in Auckland want this thing to happen. Most people want one mayor. Most people want to go to a place where they get their resource consent in one place not umpteen dozen places. Most people wanted to have a say about council-controlled organisations and they can have a say. They can turn up to the meetings of the council-controlled organisations and have their say. 
If so many people were opposed to this there would have been thousands upon thousands of people marching in the streets. But all Phil Twyford could organise was an ambulance and 30 or 40 outdated protesters from the time of the Springbok Tour and the Vietnam War. That is all he could organise. 
I take my hat off to one of my foes in a lot of discussions we have had over the last few years about a few issues. I refer to the Minister of Local Government the Hon Rodney Hide. He did listen to the select committee and although he did not listen to all of our suggestions he listened to most. So I congratulate the Minister on his job and on his stewardship of the process. 
While I have the time I shall mention a letter from somebody who was opposed to the original super-city concept. I do not want to read out the whole letter but I will concentrate on two paragraphs. It states: “The ravings of the merchants of fear since the Government’s plans were announced make it obvious that any drawn-out reform process would have led to an extremely chaotic and costly hiatus to the total detriment of all Aucklanders especially ratepayers.” 
I want to concentre on that while I have a bit of time. We have heard from the Opposition that the process has been far too fast—far too rushed. I tell the House that if this process had gone on any longer if this process had been drawn out as the Opposition wanted it to be nothing would be moving in Auckland. And Auckland is by far and away the largest economy in this country and it is time that this House recognised that if we want this country to go ahead we have to make sure that Auckland is moving. We can talk about the rural areas we can talk about the provincial areas we can talk about the other cities and I love all cities in New Zealand but if we do not get Auckland right we can kiss goodbye to every other city making progress. I know that sounds very parochial as I am a born and bred Aucklander but if it does not happen this country faces a very very uncertain future. 
I turn to the second paragraph of that letter. It says: “I believe that with this final major piece of legislation it should be obvious to everyone that the future governance of Auckland will rest in the hands of people elected by and answerable to the residents and ratepayers of Auckland.” 
The diatribe that we heard from “Mr Wobblyman” before was nothing more than a distraction. You have got no answer—I am sorry Mr Assistant Speaker; not you—they have no answer. 
Carmel Sepuloni 
: We’re just not listening. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: Well somebody is at least—Carmel Sepuloni the new member for Waitakere— 
Carmel Sepuloni 
: The new member? 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: No a new resident living in Waitakere. I apologise to my colleague the Hon Paula Bennett who will have that seat for some time to come. I want say this. Let us talk about the bill. People want it. People want one mayor. People want a unified city. I want to end on this lovely quote by “Mr Wobbly”: “How is it that you can chop something into one piece?”. That is a quote from George Hawkins. He accused the Government of wanting to chop Auckland into one piece. I know I got school certificate only on the second try and I may not be the brightest cookie in the jar but when I was in science class and when I was in mathematics class—sometimes—I knew that when you chop something it is into pieces. I just ask the magician from Manurewa how on earth someone can chop something into one. What we are doing— 
Carmel Sepuloni 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I am a new member and I know that the Hon Tau Henare is near the end of his speech but I just want to clarify something with you. I think twice in the last 1½ minutes the member has referred to the honourable member from Manurewa by two different names names that Mr Hawkins does not use in the House. I think the member used—what were the names? 
Carol Beaumont 
: Mr Wobblyman. 
Carmel Sepuloni 
: Mr Wobblyman and something else. Thank you. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: Yes people should be referred to directly and personally by their proper names. I could have stopped the member but I saw the member concerned who was here in the House and had he felt that he was going to take objection it was up to him to do so. I say that it is normal for members to take objection on their own case. I let it go at that. But I say to the member who is speaking that all members are honourable members and they should be referred to as such. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: I apologise and I withdraw my comments. I was referring to the Hon George Hawkins when he said that all we had done was chop Auckland up into one big pie. I tell members that the people of Auckland want it and they need it and the people of New Zealand can see the benefit of what we will do and it is on behalf of all New Zealanders not just the left-wing little rag-tag mob that Mr Twyford thinks he can organise into a little old-time rally. 
Phil Twyford 
: Read the polls Tau. 
Hon TAU HENARE 
: I read the polls last week and they said 50-odd percent support the Government and 60 or 70 percent supported the Hon John Key as Prime Minister. I do not want to sound arrogant but boy I read the polls.