Eckhoff Gerrard: Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Eckhoff Gerrard: Local Government Law Reform Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Volume:618;Page:14128] 
GERRARD ECKHOFF (ACT) 
: 
 Unfortunately I did not sit on the Local Government and Environment Committee. I suppose that might be something of a blessing; I am not too sure about that. As I listen to the debate I am somewhat stunned at some of the phraseology in Part 4 such as clause 44B “Use of special consultative procedure in relation to annual plan” and clause 45 “Long-term council community plan”. It is almost as though the Government believes that if one has a plan that automatically means one will be successful. There is nothing in here that I can see about benchmarking the success of the plans. Plans last for 10 years or thereabouts. Where in the bill does it state that councils will stop at some stage and assess whether the plans are working? 
I am absolutely stunned at the level of bureaucracy that this Government is imposing on communities. Whether they be in Auckland or Coal Creek it does not really matter. The level of control is literally out of control. I had occasion to speak with a Russian doctor recently at my home. He came enjoyed a wonderful meal and said he was stunned on coming back to New Zealand after being educated in Australia at the level of control that has been applied and the difficulties that people—and indeed including himself in the medical profession—were now facing following that gap of 5 or so years. It is all because Governments tend to believe that if they plan people’s lives for them things will be great. Let me ask the Minister in the chair Chris Carter whether anyone planned the city of Paris or the city of London. Was there a planning department that wrote down how people were going to develop Prague? Some of the great cities in the world did not have planners I say to the Minister. 
Hon Member 
: Yes they did! 
GERRARD ECKHOFF 
: Not to the same extent as we do now. They probably had someone who said where to site developments but they did not control and restrict matters to the same degree as we do today. What do we have in Auckland? We have planners but we do not have anything that actually works. We have gridlocking. We have a thing about getting a plan and putting it in place at a cost to the taxpayer and the ratepayer of millions of dollars. Then when a plan is in place we get the Department of Conservation in to appeal the plan. It does that on a constant basis and that has cost this country about half a billion dollars. And then all of a sudden once we write the plan off we say everything is going to be sweet. 
That is just not the case. It is a nonsense and people around the country are waking up to the fact that we cannot have the layers of government in this country planning people’s lives. It is a nonsense and sooner or later it will have to stop. We just cannot afford the level of “planning” that goes on in this country. It is to me something of an abomination to see in Part 4 that we are seeking to impose the will of a handful of people on the constituents who pay their wages. It seems to me that the Government should never forget who actually pays the piper.