Flavell Te Ururoa: Securities (Local Authority Exemption) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Securities (Local Authority Exemption) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:646;Page:15370] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Kia ora tatou to tatou tokotoru e noho atu nei. Ka nui te mihi ki a tatou. 
[ 
Greetings to you Mr Assistant Speaker and to we three seated here. Huge greetings to us 
.]  
The origins of the Securities (Local Authority Exemption) Amendment Bill are an interesting irony. Those who argued that all activities be subject to the rules of business now suggest that the local authorities are being submerged under an avalanche of red tape and bureaucracy specifically because of the very application of those rules. 
We in the Maori Party agree with Local Government New Zealand that our local authorities are indeed subject to a rigorous schedule of planning and accountability regimes. There is an expectation that local government will abide by the commitments in its long-term council community plans annual plans and annual reports all of which are subject to independent audit. Some parties in this House will criticise the level of planning documents in this sector and suggest that the detail is unnecessary but the point of this bill is that those documents are of sufficient detail to exempt them from rules under the Securities Act when issuing debt securities. 
But in considering rules and their proper application our primary concern is more about whether the opportunities for engagement and cooperation between councils and Maori as specified in the Local Government Act 2002 are actually taken up. All the best laid plans stand for zip if the intentions are not followed through. We want to see local government honour its statutory responsibilities and build stronger relationships with hapu iwi and Maori groups. 
One of the most interesting issues set out in the rationale for this bill is the inappropriateness of the corporate governance principle of collective responsibility when applied to local authorities. At the start of this week the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Auckland Governance offered an interesting perspective on this notion of collective responsibilities. The commission raised concerns that each of the eight councils in the Auckland region dealt with Maori issues in a different way and that this lack of consistency may cause problems for Maori particularly for those whose rohe cross a number of different council territories. Although problems with issuing debt securities can be dealt with simply by providing local authorities with an exemption to the current rules it is the contention of the Maori Party that exempting councils from their obligations to Maori in the Local Government Act because of difficulties and tensions will never be an answer and that the answer will certainly not be a simple one. 
The full effect of this bill will be to provide local authorities with an exemption from the full disclosure requirements of the Securities Act 1978 when issuing debt securities to the public. That means it will no longer be necessary for local authorities to register a prospectus for the issue of debt securities. Currently as I understand it all elected members must sign the prospectus to ensure unanimous support for a project and to ensure the subsequent issuing of debt to fund the project. Although we endorse the value of consensus decision-making as a general principle of best practice the onus of having to achieve unanimous support has meant that one dissenting vote can prevent a debt security from being issued where one person simply refuses to sign. 
Why this is a problem was made absolutely clear by the submission from Local Government New Zealand. It estimated that local authorities are undertaking some $30.8 billion in capital works in the next 10 years. The funding will be required for either network infrastructure à la roads sewage disposal and water schemes or for community infrastructure such as libraries sports grounds and stadiums. This unprecedented growth spurt in infrastructural development will place considerable pressure on the financing capacity of our local authorities. 
In this respect if as the bill contends there are such obvious differences and duplications evident in meeting the disclosure requirements under the Securities Act 1978 and the Local Government Act 2002 then the Maori Party is happy to support any initiative that will assist and create efficiencies. We understand that only one council has been able to raise funds under the current dual disclosure regime—a situation that is obviously undesirable. We believe that the cost of infrastructural assets should be considered as a long-term investment in the well-being of the community. Obviously borrowing can help to spread the costs over the life of the asset and as such it is clearly preferable that an asset is able to be funded in that way rather than have community structures eroded because of a lack of capital. 
The Maori Party supports any move that will enable and facilitate affordable local and regional development but we sound a note of caution around this whole complex issue related to decisions about infrastructure development. The statutory responsibilities are pretty explicit. The Local Government Act 2002 places specific obligations on councils to facilitate participation by Maori in local authorities’ decision-making processes. The Act requires that councils must establish implement and maintain opportunities for Maori to contribute to decision-making processes consider ways in which they can foster the development of Maori capacity to contribute provide relevant information to Maori and take into account the relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral land water cultural sites wahi tapu valued flora and fauna and other taonga. This is a clear and unambiguous statement of intention to councils to be proactive and responsive in enabling Maori contribution to local decision-making. 
In order to do this councils need to consult mana whenua. They need to have adequate representation on their councils and they need to be able to understand Maori community values issues and aspirations about our economic social cultural and environmental well-being. They also need to commit funding to the building and the workability of these relationships. 
I was interested in a keynote address delivered to Local Government New Zealand’s annual conference a couple of years back by the Chief Judge of the Maori Land Court and chairperson of the Waitangi Tribunal Chief Judge Joe Williams. In his address the Chief Judge said: “Local Government in our small rapidly changing country could never be easy. It is I think where the rubber meets the road. While so much of the so-called race debate is played out in national politics it is at the local level that communities must resolve the real challenges of growing diversity. And they must do that not via media-driven sound-bites but face to face. This is much harder. It is also far more likely to produce positive outcomes.” 
The key issue for the Maori Party therefore is not so much about whether councils are to be exempted from disclosing all significant financial information but is more to do with how information about the income to be invested is shared with communities. We would hope that once councils have in place more effective mechanisms to raise income for infrastructure development they will give ongoing priority to what Chief Judge Joe Williams described as “the real challenges of growing diversity.” We hope that they will invest in the benefits of building good relationships with Maori. We hope they will understand and appreciate that early and meaningful engagement across the community can result in better-informed decision-making more streamlined processes and superior outcomes. 
The Maori Party will support this bill as a pragmatic step that Parliament can take in assisting local government to plan ahead in terms of its infrastructural development. Our sincere hope is that once the disclosure requirements are sorted out sufficient investment will go into supporting Maori expectations and aspirations for the well-being of Maori and indeed for the well-being of the wider community.