Kedgley Sue: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
Kedgley Sue: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6488] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 I am glad to see that John Carter is the Minister in the chair and I am wondering whether he could answer a question. I must say I was delighted that the Minister of Local Government Rodney Hide actually rose to answer one question I asked but I had one other question which the Minister has not yet answered and it concerns the clause dealing with the role of the Mayor of Auckland. Subclause (3) of clause 9 “Mayor of Auckland” states that the mayor and the mayor alone has the power “to establish processes and mechanisms for the Auckland Council to engage with the people of Auckland whether generally or particularly”. Does this power override the Local Government Act? Can this particular clause override the consultation procedures set out in the Local Government Act? I would be very appreciative if the Associate Minister of Local Government John Carter was able to answer that question 
I am worried about what might happen in a year or so. If for example John Banks achieves his ambition and becomes the Mayor of Auckland and then achieves his further ambition to sell off some of the Auckland Council’s $28 billion of assets Aucklanders might wake up and ask why they had not been consulted. They might ask why no one had gone through a consultation process on such a major issue—or even on a minor issue—and they might be puzzled as to how it had happened. Then they would realise it was because of a provision in this bill. If John Carter is not able to answer this question then maybe another member of the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee like Phil Twyford can. Maybe George can answer it. Was a legal opinion given on it? I think it is a very serious issue. Did someone on the committee ask why the mayor has such extensive powers and is able to choose the mechanism by which people are consulted? I wonder whether the select committee was given a legal opinion as to whether this provision overrides the Local Government Act. It is a serious concern and I do not want Aucklanders to wake up in a couple of years’ time and ask how it happened. I do not want them to find that it happened because Parliament was asleep or had not recognised the implications of this particular clause. So I would really appreciate it if Mr Carter could answer that question about the mayoral powers of consultation. 
I know that Mr Carter has become irritated with my questioning some of the functions that he believes the local boards will have but let me take this opportunity to congratulate John Carter on providing excellent and impartial chairing of the submission process. The only thing I would say is that when I was there I felt he raised the expectations of submitters that a whole lot of new powers would be given to the local boards and I think they will be deeply disappointed when they discover that the powers are very limited—especially by the veto power of the Auckland Council. 
The other issue I want to raise is the cost of this huge transition. Rodney Hide said in a speech that local government representatives were coming to see him to complain about the tens of millions of dollars of costs being imposed on local government by the National Government the Government of the day. Yet this bill will impose a huge amount of cost on Auckland ratepayers. The Royal Commission on Auckland Governance estimated that the cost of the transformation from the eight existing councils to the super-city would be $120 million to $140 million. In answer to questions raised in the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee the Government members could only say they thought it would be about the same amount—$120 million to $140 million. As for the benefits they hoped the super-city would bring annual savings of between 2.5 and 3.5 percent. So the first question is where the $120 million to $140 million will come from especially given that Vote Local Government approved only $10 million for the implementation of the recommendations. Where will the rest of the $120 million to $140 million come from? Why have we not been given proper costings not just some vague estimate by the royal commission of how much it will all cost? We now know that Auckland ratepayers will have to foot the whole bill. Also what are the estimated savings?