Barry Maggie: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Barry Maggie: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 27 November 2012. Volume:686;Page:6826. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MAGGIE BARRY (National—North Shore) 
: 
 To the imaginative and fanciful utterances of the member who just resumed his seat Phil Twyford where do we start? Cheap populism? We were sort of laughing at the idea that this Labour group believes in expansive local government. What does that translate to you—expansive or expensive? There is nothing about what the last member said that will influence anyone. He witters on endlessly using much the same sorts of phrases no matter what bill he is talking about. 
Let us go back to Annette King. She took one of the first calls in this debate on the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. Conspiracy theories abounded of course and crises upon crises. But what crises does she refer to apart from the ones in her own party around leadership of course? She is a person who dismissed the submitters and I take exception to that. I take exception to the idea that all of the submitters thought like she did that they were listening to the evidence-based stuff. The Opposition members have apparently ignored any evidence that does not actually agree with their prejudices. 
I will cite just one for example—the New Zealand Chambers of Commerce and Industry submission. Michael Barnett the chairman of the management committee represents the interests of 29 chambers of commerce nationwide which in turn represent about 20000 small and medium enterprises and some of the biggest businesses in the country. This is something the opposing forces do not listen to because it is not relevant—it does not fit the mould of their particular prejudices. But for those of them who did not listen at the time let us refresh our memories about what Michael Barnett said in general terms about this Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill. He of course. thought it was very important for local government to recognise the very critical role that it plays and that it is able to make in a competitive productive economy through the delivery of efficient and responsive services. These are the kinds of things that the Chambers of Commerce and Industry wants to encourage local government to do and that is why it commended this piece of legislation. It strongly agreed with the bill’s intentions and measures that require local government to focus on activities that cannot be provided currently by individuals firms and voluntary groups and that are not performed by central government. 
The whole idea of the four well-beings is nonsense and the Chambers of Commerce and Industry agreed with us that they have to go. The submission of course made the point that we have made many times over the past 5 or so hours around rates increases. They have increased by an average of around 7 percent per annum since 2003—more than double the rate of inflation. Of course the submission talked about local government debt which had quadrupled over the past decade from $2 billion to $8 billion. This has been touched on by many members on this side of the Chamber in debating this motion today. 
There are 78 councils in New Zealand. The local government league table has identified 25 percent of them—around 30 of these territorial authorities—that are classed as financially unsustainable. That is according to a league table that was published last year. The report noted: “Over the last 10 years or more councils’ financial positions have deteriorated markedly. … Their communities will soon be pressured with increases of Council rates and charges that if left unchecked will reach unacceptably high and unaffordable levels. Now is the time to turn these circumstances around.” We agree with that. 
So not only do we have 20000 people involved in business who support this legislation but also we are told in a recent survey by the New Zealand Council for Infrastructure Development that around 80 percent of New Zealanders—that is people who live in this country; they do not dwell on “Planet Labour” “Planet Greens” or “Planet New Zealand First”—actually believe that the councils have lost focus and a majority support refocusing council roles which is exactly what this legislation does. It will give councils more tools to keep debt down and rates affordable— 
Andrew Williams 
: Tell Fulton Hogan that. Ask Fulton Hogan what they think. 
MAGGIE BARRY 
: —something that is of course going to be lost for ever and a day by the failed former Mayor of North Shore who pipes up unhelpfully from time to time. We see as well that on the select committee there was an inability of Opposition members to work constructively together on the bill. That has meant that this bill has come back to the House largely unchanged and is why we have this Supplementary Order Paper 153 which I commend to the Committee. 
I think that this is a bill that definitely does provide clarity efficiency and much more responsible financial management. It is long overdue. When this legislation first went through in 2002 National vowed to overturn it. We heard today from Moana Mackey that in the unlikely event she ever becomes powerful again in Government and Labour takes the Treasury benches which is highly unlikely—I am not sure where she fell on the leadership struggle; she might find she is a bit further down the pecking order than she might like to be—Labour will actually bring back the four well-beings. If that is not the nail in Labour’s coffin I would be surprised because there are people in this country who do pay close attention to what goes on in this Chamber and to what goes on in select committees. They clearly identify that Labour is a party that has lost touch and does not listen. 
When we sat there on the Local Government and Environment Committee we heard the submissions and heard the quality of the utterances taking away some of the more emotional stuff that some of the members have tried to do the emotional rubbish around the four well-beings and the scaremongering from the theatre luvvies and the others who really have nothing to fear because local authorities will be able to do what they feel they can do if it is economically sustainable. I commend this Supplementary Order Paper 153 to the Committee in its entirety. Thank you.