Robertson H V Ross: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
Robertson H V Ross: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6435] 
H V ROSS ROBERTSON (Labour—Manukau East) 
: 
 Kia ora tatou no reira e te Whare e nga iwi e nga reo e nga hau e wha. While the House sits in urgency Auckland’s National members of Parliament sit on their bums. I should say “bottoms”; I withdraw and apologise for using that language. But they sit there and I issue a challenge to them to get up on their hind legs and take a call. Kia kaha! Be strong and take the challenge to rise and defend this legislation because this legislation needs to be defended. The House is sitting in urgency. It is a constitutional outrage. For the Auckland members of Parliament not to stand to take a call to justify what they are doing shows contempt for the people who voted for them. They are not taking a call. 
I challenge the Prime Minister John Key to take a call. I challenge Steven Joyce to take a call. I challenge the Hon Murray McCully to take a call. I challenge the Hon Wayne Mapp to take a call. I challenge the Hon Jonathan Coleman to get up to take a call. I challenge the Hon Paula Bennett to get up to take a call. I challenge the Hon Pansy Wong to get up to take a call. I challenge the Hon Judith Collins to get up to take a call. I challenge the Hon Maurice Williamson to get up to take a call. They are all members of the executive. But that is not to let those who are not on the executive get away scot-free. What about Sam Lotu-Iiga? Why has he not stood up to take a call? He is the silent giant they say; he has not taken a call. Then there is Kanwaljit Bakshi. He is sitting here. I challenge him to stand up to take a call to justify what the Government is doing. 
This legislation is legislatively flawed it is democratically flawed and the people of Greater Auckland are absolutely floored. This bill I guarantee members will be back before Parliament before the next general election. I have no doubts about that. The Associate Minister of Local Government who is sitting in the chair is nodding his head. He knows that the legislation is being rushed through that it is not being done democratically. We need to sit down and debate it in ordinary time so that it is done properly. 
I turn now to the number of councillors. The number of councillors is set at 20. Obviously the issue perplexes the Government and it also perplexes me. The fact that there are only 20 indicates to me an inability on the part of the Government to recognise that bigger is not necessarily better. The number of councillors proposed is 20 and that will produce wards of approximately 49000 voters with a population of about 70000—70000! That means two things and I see two difficulties. First of all it will be difficult for candidates to campaign effectively. The size of the wards that the councillors are supposed to represent is almost on a par with the area that a member of Parliament represents. It has to be asked how people can campaign effectively and do the job properly. I think the size of the wards will also undermine the accessibility and the accountability of the councillors. The wards are too big; the councillors will not be able to get around them and they will not be able to do the job. I ask the Associate Minister how the candidates can campaign effectively. Will they become like central government members of Parliament?