Chadwick Steve: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
Chadwick Steve: Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:657;Page:6403] 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK (Labour) 
: 
 We are here to fight the good fight for those in Auckland who are unhappy with the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill. This morning I will talk on a very serious issue; I think the Committee finished on a rather trivial note last night with banter across the Chamber and a fair amount of screaming. I want to bring the debate back to the serious issue of Maori representation and I want to make things clear. Last night I heard Hone Harawira say that Labour was sitting back on its hands and doing nothing about Maori representation. Well I do not think Hone Harawira is a member of our Labour caucus which debated this issue long and hard and which has always held firm to the need for Maori to be represented in this Auckland bill. Labour has always believed that Maori should have seats on the Auckland Council like in Parliament itself. We have always supported the Maori seats in Parliament. The poor Maori Party over there has been trumped again by Rodney Hide who has said that its voice does not matter and that it can come up by means of other mechanisms through the Local Government Act. Well the Local Government Act actually talks about social and cultural well-being and we should go back to those fundamental tenets of the last raft of changes to the Local Government Act which ensured that Maori in the context of cultural and social well-being had a voice on the council. 
We also advocated for 25 seats on the Auckland Council. The current National-ACT Government is talking about only 20 seats but we think that is bizarre because it would mean that there are more MPs in Auckland than there are people on the Auckland City super-council. 
Nikki Kaye 
: What about your local boards? 
Hon STEVE CHADWICK 
: I say to Nikki Kaye that that is our position; we have always said there would be one plan. Last night Nikki asked whether we were against a unitary authority. We brought about these changes. We set up the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance. Labour led that action. We are pleased to be part of the next raft of reforms but we would have done it very differently. 
In the minority report we are very clear that we support Maori seats. I point out something to new members in the Chamber who think this is a trivial issue. I will talk about those who submitted to the Auckland Governance Legislation Committee. There were 287 submissions on separate Maori representation on the Auckland super-city council. Only 83 of those 287 submissions opposed Maori representation which is 60 percent support. The Government is really very foolish to ignore that level of support. Although it says it has listened and made changes it has skirted around this change. When Rodney Hide refused to support Maori representation on the super-city he really trumped the Maori Party. He saw to it and National supported this that the good constituents of Rodney held greater weight than Maori in Auckland. Well I think that issue will come back in the general election after the local body elections in 2010. The issue will rise up and show the National Government that it has made a fundamental error. I mention that Mr Key said nothing was set in stone. Well a trader—which is what Mr Key fundamentally was by profession—would of course say that nothing was set in stone. Of course he said that National would keep the door open and keep considering the issue; he wants to appeal to everybody on all sides of the Chamber. 
Another loser here is Mr Tau Henare and I feel sorry for him. He tried to get support within his own party which harks back to the support that Georgina te Heuheu was allowed to show in respect of the Bay of Plenty Regional Council (Maori Constituency Empowering) Act in 2001 when she was allowed to cross the floor to support that issue of Maori representation. It is interesting to see all the new members in the Chamber who think they know it all. They were not around in those days when that context of the debate that Mita Ririnui brought to the House was very bitter. We heard a race-based debate in the Chamber in 2001 when National members then in Opposition made outrageous remarks asking why we needed Maori representation. They ignored the views of people like Judge Peter Trapski who said that without Maori representation in the Chamber or any form of protection for them we would never get Maori views before the House. Look at what we have now with the Maori Party the Maori MPs and our Maori Labour MPs in the House. The new MPs forget that environment where we broke the ice. Of course it was Labour again that entrenched those seats on the Bay of Plenty Regional Council and allowed Georgina te Heuheu to cross the floor. 
It was quite interesting to hear her say at the time: “The issue of representation for Maori in local government is a significant issue and not just for Maori.” This is not an issue that we are asking just our Maori MPs to stand up and take a call on; it is one that we all must speak out on. “It has been around for a long time as evidenced by a notice in the Auckland provincial government’s  
Gazette 
 of Saturday 6 May 1867 when J. Williamson the superintendent of the Auckland Province gave notice that he had appointed Paore Tuhaere of Ngati Whatua to give advice to himself and the Auckland executive council on matters relating to the Maori people of the province of Auckland. It is a significant issue.” Tau Henare Georgina te Heuheu and other Maori MPs in National know that it is a significant issue. It will not go away. Georgina te Heuheu said herself that Maori will make sure that the issue of representation in any form of governance will not go away. 
I believe that if John Key does not take cognisance of this that issue will be the demise of the Local Government (Auckland Council) Bill which was a wonderful opportunity for reform. It was a wonderful opportunity and Labour was behind it; Labour instigated the royal commission. The royal commission report itself said that there should be three Maori seats on the super-city council but ACT with Rodney Hide’s “one vote” mantra has won the war with National. I find it absolutely astonishing that a coalition partner that sits with the local government portfolio—a major portfolio—outside of Cabinet can wield such power and influence over National. 
This issue will not go away. We in Labour will make sure that this issue does not go away. We understand that the Maori Party members are put in a dreadful position here but they have lost. They have been rolled by Rodney Hide and if that is a mana-enhancing position for them I think they will have a great deal of problems as a Maori Party to find their place in the sun and to find support when they go out in the next election. They have been rolled. 
Paul Hutchison is another loser. I feel a bit sorry for Dr Paul Hutchison; boundary issues were a big issue for him. He will be rolled. I also think that Georgina te Heuheu must be hurting. She must have put up a fight in caucus with Tau Henare but she got rolled. The National Government is saying it has a mana-enhancing relationship with the Maori Party and this is a major signal. This major initiative could have been so positive for all of Auckland and for other regions that are now looking at how they could reform local and regional council governance. An opportunity has been lost. We will be putting up further amendments that ensure statutory recognition of mana whenua on the Auckland Council. 
This is a big issue. We will be supporting it and I think the people of New Zealand will show that the Government got it wrong on this issue. It will come back to bite the Government not next year in the local body elections but—once we see that this rushed legislation has gone through—in the 2011 election. It is rushed legislation; here we are in urgency. When we look at major reform of local government in Australia we see that it took 3 years to get it right. Why are we rushing through this reform just to get it in by 2010? This is the way that mistakes are made. It will come back to bite the Government in the 2011 election.