Logie JanJAN LOGIE (Green): After such a comprehensive contribution from the Government member Nuk Korako I am not sure how to follow that act. I will do my best to try to live up to it. I am pleased to be able to take a call on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill (No 2) which has been presented to this House. The Green Party at this stage shares actually a lot of the reservations that were raised by the Labour spokesperson on local government but those reservations or concerns have led us not to be able to support the bill at this stage.I do recognise the Minister of Local Government is presenting this as empowering legislation to address the funding constraints that we hear from councils are ultimately limiting their ability sometimes to provide core infrastructure maintain it and ensure their systems are resilient. In the discussions though with the Minister in the reading of the documents we are yet to be convinced that the solution is not a funding-based solution rather than an amalgamation-focused solution. There is no doubting that councils are in a very difficult position at the moment in terms of the limitations on their funding base and their ability to be able to secure their infrastructure into the future but we are concerned that although we are being told this is empowering legislation and it is not about forcing amalgamations the context of this is that this is the first piece of legislation after the failure of three amalgamation attempts.We have increasingly been hearing some quite strident comments from this Government in relation to local government. There have been I would almost go so far as to suggest threats being made to Auckland Council that if it does not free up more land then the Government may step in which I think is clearly the Government trying to distract from its own failure and that. Actually the housing issues in Auckland are not a result of Auckland Council but can be clearly sheeted home to this Government. But actually that kind of rhetoric of coming in and suggesting that central government will take over—I have heard the same comments being made approaching Wellington City Council in terms of the Wellington community's resistance to the flyover. So we are in a context in which this Government is not giving local government the respect the Green Party believes it deserves.For us appropriate decision-making which is decision making that is made at the level closest to the people affected by the decisions is one of our charter principles. It is one of the absolutely fundamental beliefs that guide all of our decision making. We are very concerned in particular at the increased powers for the Local Government Commission that are contained within this legislation. The Local Government Commission with this legislation will be able to initiate investigations around transfer of functions between local authorities joint governance arrangements areas of common shared interest and greater use of jointly owned council-controlled organisations (CCOs). I think it is worth remembering the Local Government Commission is appointed by central government. This bill will provide for an increase in members on that commission.Although we are told that to balance the increased powers that are being given to the commission there will be increased checks and balances some of those checks and balances are that it will be required to produce detailed accountability documents such as annual plans and reports and consult the Minister of Local Government when establishing its priorities. That is an accountability that goes back to central government. When our concern is a possibility of increased central government imposition on local government an accountability back to central government does not allay our concerns.We are being told that another check and balance is that the commission will be guided by criteria that are being set again by central government. Also there is a concern for us that this is echoed in the CCO models in the provisions that are being provided in the bill. So CCOs which are a step away from democratic control are set up as companies and the Government's rationale for promoting and privileging the CCO model over other shared service models is that it is efficient and it will save money. That is not universally true and that needs to be put on the table in the first place.But even if it was that it saved money then we still have to acknowledge that there is a removal of local democracy in that model and that this bill will restrict and prevent any local councillors from sitting on the boards of those CCOs as is very common practice at the moment. The argument given for that is that it is a potential conflict of interest. But we do have concerns that this is another quite significant step in removing local democracy. This will also provide for the CCOs to be able to comment on long-term local authority plans before a local authority starts the consultation process so that is actually giving these company structures an additional point of influence in the democratic process. So although removing democratic involvement in their model it gives them extra control and input into the democratic process.You know it has been a longstanding concern about how the public actually communicates with the CCOs and actually makes sure—we have seen examples in Auckland recently with Auckland Transport and the Ports of Auckland clearly getting it wrong in terms of reading the will of the people. This is one of the problems with the model and it is very hard for the council to then turn that round. The Minister has said: Well that can be sorted out by giving clear enough directions to the CCOs when you're setting them up." but we are yet to be convinced that that is going to do the trick.Further the bill provides that the constitution of a CCO must not preclude the organisation from using any particular form of charging or source of revenue. So that is central government dictating the conditions around the establishment of a CCO. Take the example of charging for water—a deeply deeply political issue. In the community I was living in when they were talking about putting in water meters the local response was: "You put them in; we'll smash them." It is a very political issue and there needs to be political accountability to it. This legislation says that a council cannot set up a CCO with the provision that it will not charge for water. That is off the table according to central government. Further it provides that shareholders of the CCO may impose additional accountabilities including the requirement to describe in its statement of intent how the organisation will contribute to the objectives and priorities of the shareholders and the Government. So in the structure of them they will be accountable back to central government and the Minister has said clearly that he sees that this is about getting the economic agenda of this Government moving more quickly.Well I believe that that should happen bottom-up—that the councils and communities negotiate their economic agenda and plans that they should be making the decisions about what form and structure are best going to be able to deliver on their local aspirations and that central government should be listening to them and supporting that. The Minister has said that Local Government New Zealand is very supportive. It told us it was told about the changes rather than being involved in any significant way. Again another concern."