Mark Ron: Christchurch City Council (Rates Validation) Bill — In CommitteeText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeMark Ron: Christchurch City Council (Rates Validation) Bill — In Committee[Sitting date: 06 May 2015. Volume:705;Page:3286. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]RON MARK (NZ First):I am very conscious of the fact that we do need to progress quickly so we can get another bill drawn out of the ballot so I will not take up too much of your time up here like some people appear to be trying to do. I do apologise before I start now that I may well be repeating some of the things that other good speakers—Hon Dr Jonathan Coleman: Get on with it Ron.RON MARK: Jonathan Jonathan—have a holiday mate. It is coming soon; do not worry. Anyway so this is what I mean—the collegial atmosphere was in existence and then someone arrives in the Chamber. But never mind; we will move through.I do apologise if I am actually going to repeat some of the things that have been said but I do have to get them on the record for New Zealand First so bear with me please. I have got to applaud Scott Simpson again. That speech hit the nail right on the head. I unfortunately was not able to be at the Local Government and Environment Committee hearings in Christchurch that day but the one comment that came back consistently—and the member Scott Simpson has put it on the table here today—was about the attitude and the behaviour of the Christchurch City Council officials. There are some good members on that committee from the Government side. They have all expressed their dismay and their concern at the behaviour. I would like someone on the Christchurch City Council to read the Hansard to replay these speeches from this evening and to take a message because this message comes from the whole of the select committee.Dr Megan Woods: No it doesn’t.RON MARK: Well that message about the behaviour of Christchurch City Council—well OK Labour is distancing itself from that; New Zealand First is not. New Zealand First is not. New Zealand First does not like passing retrospective legislation to tidy up muck-ups mess-ups stuff-ups from people who get highly paid—well paid—to not make such mistakes. We do not actually like having to support this piece of legislation but we will because it is the quickest cleanest and most sensible way of tidying up an inexcusable situation that has arisen and been allowed to occur over 10 years.I am going to take the opportunity to mention some of the things that I raised during the select committee hearing. I have heard a lot of rhetoric from certain people promoting super-cities and telling me such things as that they bring a greater capacity to employ people with high skill sets that small councils cannot. Let us be clear about this. Carterton District Council is the third-smallest council in New Zealand. It has never made a stuff-up like this. It cannot afford to pay people the exorbitant rates that that former chief executive officer of Christchurch City Council who became infamous all over New Zealand got. In fact I think he got fired or dumped from Hamilton went down to Christchurch inflicted his misery down there and got paid an absolute fortune for doing so and yet oversaw this debacle as one of a couple of chief executive officers who oversaw it.The process and the procedures that most competent well-run councils have is that they have a run sheet sitting there to guide the mayor and to guide the council through the motions that have to be put and the run sheet is accurate. The run sheet is not inaccurate and does not lead the councillors or the mayors into such a debacle. The person who at the end of the day is ultimately responsible for making sure that that run sheet is accurate and that those resolutions that are moved are legally binding and accurate and in compliance with the law is the chief executive officer. End of story.It is absolutely appalling that we end up dealing with an issue where the uniform annual general charges were not correctly passed and seven targeted rates were inappropriately described in resolution and that we ended up here. For the council to then turn up at the select committee and behave in such a way that was less than contrite I find absolutely astonishing. And that comes from me someone who lived in Christchurch for 30-odd years and spent a hell of a lot of time working with people like Vicki Buck Garry Moore and a whole bunch of Labour councillors whom I got to know very very well through my time being a Labour Party member down there.So this annoys us in New Zealand First. It annoys us that we are wasting the time of the House and the time of the select committee and the taxpayers’ dollars tidying up a mess that should never have occurred and it annoys us that the council should have been less than contrite and in fact came across as somewhat flippant and arrogant about the whole thing. It annoys me as a former mayor of a small rural council that I continually hear about how wonderful super-cities are. Let us be clear: Christchurch City Council is a super-city. It is the first super-city. I actually also find it quite ironic that the Minister who is having to bring this legislation to the House as a member and actually advance it through was also herself a member of Environment Canterbury as well.