Dowie Sarah: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeDowie Sarah: Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) — Third Reading[Sitting date: 04 May 2016. Volume:713;Page:10804. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]SARAH DOWIE (National—Invercargill): It is a pleasure to rise after such a spirited contribution from Mr Mark and I am sure he will not need to go to the gym tonight with all that riling. But I understand from the Local Government and Environment Committee chair Mr Scott Simpson that none of this was actually raised in the select committee which is the appropriate place to discuss the pros and cons of this bill. But anyway I digress. It is a pleasure for me as I said to rise and take a call as the newly elected deputy chair of the Local Government and Environment Committee. It is also a pleasure because as a southern MP—one of the two MPs who represent Southland; remoter communities and only 97000-odd people across an entire region—it is interesting in turn to study a bill in respect of local government administration in the super-city in contrast with the goings on in Southland.Of course this bill is the Local Government (Auckland Council) Amendment Bill (No 3) sponsored by Mr Alfred Ngaro and the prime aim of this bill is to prevent candidates serving on multiple local boards at any one time. The premise is to have only one person on one board at any one time and the basis for it is to mitigate potential conflicts of interest and basically spread the load and get the representation of different local boards securely in the hands of locals so that they get better decision-making and better outcomes for their community. I think that this comes off the back of the Auckland demographic that I think we need to take time to discuss because it does present a unique set of challenges for administration of the super-city and of course this bill is tailored specifically for that. So if you look at Auckland it contains 1.5 million people—1.5 million people—and one-third of New Zealand’s population lives in that region compared with 97000 people who live in the district of Southland.Hon Michael Woodhouse: Size isn’t everything Sarah.SARAH DOWIE: Well it is not everything—it is not everything—and we certainly have our benefits and our strengths down in Southland but you could not really get two more polar-opposite communities compared and contrasted right now.Auckland is one of the most culturally diverse communities with a lot of migration not only from Pasifika and Asia but also from further afield. That is a strength in itself but it goes to show that there does need to be strong representation from our local community boards to get the best outcomes for those diverse pockets of people and communities. As I said compare that with Southland. Invercargill holds only 50000 people and we certainly cannot boast the same migrant statistics as Auckland does when we talk about diversity. In fact if it was not for the 2000-odd Filipino farm workers who came to Southland last year our population would be going backwards. So we are very grateful for that diversity but it is certainly not in the same vein as what Auckland experiences. As I said before Auckland is a very diverse community. It has pockets of different ethnicities different ages it is quite a varied demographic and we need to get the best outcomes via local boards with diverse representatives on those boards.Local boards in Auckland should not be controlled by a select few individuals. On those local boards of course they are responsible for a number of functions but the issues of administration range from things such as transport infrastructure event planning and even some social issues so when you look at the broad scope of duties that those representatives must administer it would be very hard to find a person who could tick all the boxes to represent all of the community and effectively manage and deliver on those tasks. Because Auckland has a large population and because there are really strong and wide-ranging education and employment opportunities in Auckland—that is a real asset—there really is no need for one individual to be on multiple boards. Again we come back to that concept: one person on one board at any one time.I actually think that this is a real opportunity for Auckland if this bill passes because it is an opportunity to bring through our aspiring young leaders. I think that Auckland has a really good talent pool available there and if you can bring those young leaders through it means that there are fresh ideas coming to the fore there is a richer contribution of ideas and better problem-solving and that of course brings about better solutions and delivery of the functions that are required within Auckland.I understand from the select committee process that there were 17 submissions with the majority in support of this bill—Hon Michael Woodhouse: How many submitted?SARAH DOWIE: Seventeen submissions and one submitter of course was the Auckland Council. The key basis of its submission was threefold: firstly to mitigate the conflicts of interest of representation between constituencies; secondly to have local interests truly represented—that is what I was talking about before. Given that Auckland is so diverse and has diverse communities and pockets of people throughout the city locals should be making local decisions. But on a practical note—Hon Ruth Dyson: Tell us about the worst day of your life Sarah.SARAH DOWIE: I miss you Ms Dyson.Hon Ruth Dyson: I miss you too. What was the worst day of your life?SARAH DOWIE: I miss you and the Government Administration Committee. I have been brought on to local government and I am really enjoying my charge here. I am loving my contribution to this bill actually—it is fascinating.Hon Members: Ha ha!SARAH DOWIE: I do I do—I am very earnest about this. I am earnest about it. But the third point brought up by the Auckland Council—it is quite a practical point—is that it recognised that board members’ workloads were actually quite heavy and that those workloads needed to be shared so as to be more effectively managed. That means sharing the workload across different people so that they can bring about better decisions and better delivery of solutions for that community. So again one person on one local board at any one time.I think too that this presents another opportunity for Auckland in that it can start to bring through more women to boards which is a fantastic opportunity to encourage more women to come on to boards to utilise their skills and to grow in a leadership capacity. You do not have to go far to look for research that supports the idea that the more diverse a board the better the decision making so that contributes to more meaningful gender equality. Creating space on boards will do that and that is a positive progression not only for women but for aspiring young leaders.One of the main points as I said before is that this bill is tailored for Auckland and I think that that should be noted. In contrast if you look at a place like Southland—in fact I would dissent a little and I wonder whether it would work there. We have a limited number of people in Southland and often there are time pressures on the people who put their hands up for civic duty so what often happens is that some of the people who put their hands up for that civic duty end up wearing two hats. Although local boards are unique to Auckland we in Southland still have varied roles in our community boards different licensing trusts and other boards that are out there. One person will often put their hand up twice or even three times.Notwithstanding the pitfalls that have been described here that could occur in Auckland Southland’s strong sense of community often rides through and that creates a really unique opportunity for us as well. Given that we are tight-knit and there is a real desire to move Southland forward often those individuals who are wearing two hats almost evolve with their statutory duty and their capacity and skill and that does give them the ability to serve on multiple boards. With all of the information at hand I support this bill.