Fenton Darien: Local Government (Council-Controlled Organisations) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Fenton Darien: Local Government (Council-Controlled Organisations) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 19 September 2012. Volume:684;Page:5427. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DARIEN FENTON (Labour) 
: 
 I move  
That the Local Government (Council-Controlled Organisations) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
 New Zealand has one of the most advanced systems of freedom of information in the world. We pride ourselves on our transparency and we regularly rate in the front of the pack in international comparisons. We do not have the same level of corruption as other countries but we should never be complacent about this. Since 1982— 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Order! Sorry to interrupt the member but it is the habit of the House to indicate at the commencement of the speech which select committee the bill will be referred to. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: I apologise but that was not the indication I had from the Clerk actually. 
Mr DEPUTY SPEAKER 
: Well if the member could do that. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Yes OK. At the appropriate time I intend to nominate that this bill be referred to the Local Government and Environment Committee. 
Since 1982 our Official Information Act has progressively increased the availability of information to New Zealanders so that they are able to more effectively participate in making and administering laws and policies and to promote the accountability of Ministers and officials. There have been many other legislative reforms that have built on the principles and practice established by the Official Information Act which includes the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987. That Act applies a similar regime to the local government sector. 
Section 5 of the Official Information Act sets out the basic presumption of openness or the principle of availability. The theory behind the Official Information Act is that the public owns the information that is held by the Government and publicly owned entities. Every citizen has the right to access information held by public authorities. We are entitled to see it on request unless there is good reason to withhold it and that is not just any old reason. 
But there is a gap in the accountability and transparency of our locally owned ports. Every single one of New Zealand’s 13 commercial seaports are either wholly or majority publicly owned. There are hundreds of millions of dollars of public money tied up in them yet those who own them—in other words the public—are unable to access official information. When these ports were originally built in the 19th century they were seen as providers of essential infrastructure to support other local and economic activities and to promote local economic development and employment. In the 1980s and 1990s as part of the neo-liberal attack on our economy and public assets—similar to the one we are seeing at the moment—the Government passed legislation to reform the port sector. The attempts— 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: A Labour Government? 
DARIEN FENTON 
: Yes and a National Government. The attempts to sell off these locally owned assets resulted in different legislation for ports companies in which the principal objective of ports companies is to operate as successful businesses. The ports companies were removed from the Local Government Act in relation to the requirement to be open to Official Information Act and Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act requirements and the requirement to be a good employer and have environmental and social responsibilities. 
Although there was clearly an agenda to sell off our publicly owned ports during that time that has not happened. Local authorities supported by the real owners of the assets the people have resisted the privatisation of their ports. But the exclusion of ports and the requirements in the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act has placed distance between those who actually own these assets and the accountability and openness of those appointed to run them. 
So this bill is about shining a light in dark places. My bill will bring publicly owned port companies back under the reach of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act and provide access to official information requests for those who seek information. This will mean that normal public accountabilities will be applied to ports companies. In addition it will add the requirement for ports companies to act as good employers and to exhibit a sense of social and environmental responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community in which they operate. It is a simple and common-sense bill and any political party that prides itself on openness and transparency around publicly owned entities should have no problem supporting this. 
If National opposes this bill I am going to be very interested in its justification because there is none. How can anyone oppose openness and transparency in publicly owned assets? If it is opposition maybe it is just another instance of the National Party hiding its mates from public scrutiny just like John Banks. This Government is about helping its mates hide their dirty laundry from the public. I am also wondering whether it is a clumsy attempt to cover up the incompetence of the board of the Ports of Auckland in the attempts to contract out its workforce and privatise the ports. Secret plans to contract out the workforce personal information of a worker leaked to a blogger spies down at the port and 1950s industrial relations management—I could go on. 
This dispute has cost the citizens of Auckland tens of millions of dollars in lost business in legal costs in public relations costs in redundancy payments for workers who had been dumped but who have now been re-hired on fixed-term contracts on consultants on a posse of bargaining agents and on a possible compensation paid to contracting companies that were prematurely awarded the contracts but were unable to proceed. But no one is willing to come clean and quantify the actual cost because the board of the Ports of Auckland hides behind its exclusion from the Official Information Act requirements. Without this legislation we will never know for sure what this has cost Aucklanders. 
There are legitimate concerns about the actions of the Ports of Auckland board and management that have arisen during the dispute with the Maritime Union. We need to ensure that these publicly owned businesses are open to the same scrutiny every other public institution faces. We have to wonder whether the real agenda of the Government—and Rodney Hide of course—is to set up the Ports of Auckland for privatisation— 
Hon Member 
: And Rob Campbell. 
DARIEN FENTON 
: —and Rob Campbell—supported by the Government’s Productivity Commission which came out earlier this year urging the Government to privatise New Zealand’s ports. 
It would not be the first time our ports have been up for grabs and if this Government has its way it will not be the last. So let me be very clear. This is not just about an industrial dispute at the Ports of Auckland even though there has been one and it has been awful. Accountability and transparency are fundamental aspects of democracy and the public has a right to know how its money is being spent. It has a right to know about the Ports of Auckland and other ports throughout New Zealand—other publicly owned ports—just as it has the right to obtain information about libraries schools airport authorities and numerous other entities. 
But I fear that this is a Government that is setting out to destroy democracy local decision-making and accountability. Its Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill has councils up in arms across the country. It is a disgrace. 
This is a Government that is pursuing an asset sales agenda despite it becoming more untenable every day. This is a Government that removed Official Information Act requirements from its sale of State assets bill recently so if a sale succeeds the 51 percent shares owned on behalf of the New Zealand people will not be subject to openness and transparency. This is a Government that has denied democracy to the people of Canterbury by shelving elections until 2016 for their regional council. This is a Government that shelters its mates in big business. It has no care for the environmental social employment and decent work consequences of their actions. It is all about a plan to dumb down our economy to sell New Zealand off to the cheapest bidder and to make New Zealanders pay through the loss of good jobs decent work and fair pay. 
I am hoping that the National Government will prove me wrong tonight. I am hoping that Nick Smith who may be the next speaker will stand up and say: “We agree with the Labour Party. Openness and transparency are needed for our ports our publicly owned ports throughout the country.” There is no problem with citizens being able to ask for information and receive that information which they have a right to do and which they will have a right to do if this bill is supported. Thank you.