Ross Jami-Lee: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Ross Jami-Lee: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Sitting date: 15 November 2012. Volume:685;Page:6752. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
JAMI-LEE ROSS (National—Botany) 
: 
 The Opposition wants to characterise this bill the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill as an attack on democracy. Well I want to tell the Opposition that for the last 10 years local government in New Zealand has been attacking the pockets of ratepayers. That is why we are implementing this legislation. The ratepayers in New Zealand are calling out for relief. The ratepayers in New Zealand are calling out for assistance. After 10 years of having to operate under legislation passed by members on that side that let local government do absolutely anything it wanted to do—and saw rates go through the roof nationwide—ratepayers are calling for change. Ratepayers want something to be done about the awful local government legislation that they have had to endure. 
Since 2002 the average rates increase in this country has been 6.8 percent—6.8 percent. In that time CPI has been 3 percent. Auckland at the moment has put its rates up by 3.6 percent. Can anyone tell me what the CPI is running at at the moment? 
Michael Woodhouse 
: 1.1? 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: It is 1 percent. Actually in the last quarter it was 0.8 annualised. The Auckland Council is putting its rates up by 3½ times what the current inflation rate is at the moment. 
Hon Simon Bridges 
: That’s terrible. 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: That is awful and ratepayers are calling out for some relief. Let me tell you that in the Auckland Plan the biggest expenditure is transport. I absolutely agree with that—it is 34 percent. The second-biggest area of expenditure in the Auckland Council’s plan is on lifestyle and culture. Twenty-two percent of my rates and every Aucklander’s rates is going on lifestyle and culture. I have absolutely no idea what “lifestyle and culture” is supposed to mean and I do not know why local government is involved in lifestyle and culture. 
My colleague Paul Goldsmith read out a couple of targets in the Auckland Council’s plan. The Auckland Council wants to see all school-leavers achieving National Certificate of Educational Achievement level 2 by 2020. That is an honourable goal but why is local government trying to get involved in education? That is what people pay their taxes for. The Auckland Council also wants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020— 
Hon Simon Bridges 
: Hey that’s my job. 
JAMI-LEE ROSS 
: —based on 1990 levels. That is Simon Bridges’ job. It is not local government’s job. Aucklanders do not pay their rates for the Auckland Council to try to do what the Government should be doing to try to get involved in reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Ratepayers have been telling Parliament that local government has been out of control and it needs to be brought back in line with what reality is. 
We are implementing this legislation to bring about some sense to local government to try to narrow the focus of local government. The Opposition thinks that ratepayers are sitting at home crying because the four well-beings are being taken away. How many ratepayers actually know what the four well-beings are? Ratepayers want to see good quality public services. They want to see good quality public infrastructure. They want to see local government implementing its regulatory responsibilities in an efficient way. That is what this bill is all about. I do not understand why the Opposition hates ratepayers and wants to support the spending desires of a couple of hundred local body politicians over the ratepayers of this country. They are the ones calling out for change. They are the ones we are supporting with this bill.