Hide Rodney: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
Hide Rodney: Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:663;Page:11537] 
Hon RODNEY HIDE (Minister of Local Government) 
: 
 I respond to the Hon David Cunliffe. It is hard to be clear in answering the questions raised by the points that the member made. I think we agree on some things. We agree that there needs to be regional decision-making across Auckland. After listening to the member’s hymn of praise for community boards I think we agree that we need to secure local democratic input. However in terms of how to do that we both depart from what the royal commission suggested. It recommended providing for one council but also getting rid of all the community boards across Auckland. It would have completely gutted the existing councils and eliminated Papakura. When I say it would have gutted the existing councils they would have been left as a physical entity but would have had no budgets and no staff. Yes we would have elected councillors to those structures but all that they would have been were advocates for their former city. 
It struck us in talking to Aucklanders—and I pick up Mr Cunliffe’s point—that there was an acceptance of the need for that regional governance but a grave concern about what we would do for local democracy. It seemed to us that the royal commission’s proposal provided none. When I asked the commissioners why they had proposed that the existing councils remain but without their having any budget or power or say the commissioners said they felt it would make the transition easier because we would just leave everyone there and put a regional council over the top of them which would have all the power and all the say. It seemed to me and to the Government that that was a mistake because if we were going through this reform why would we not go for gold and produce the best governance structure that we could for Auckland by getting the regional governance right and the local democracy right? 
The Government spent a great deal of time talking to community groups which Mr Cunliffe spoke of and in particular to the chair of New Zealand Community Boards Mr Mike Cohen who is also the chair of the Devonport Community Board. He provided a lot of input and help. We came up with the concept of local boards that would be recognised in statute and be empowered. Mike Cohen gave us a lot of help in relation to the initial structure. After having established the initial structure he gave us enormous help based on experience around New Zealand particularly on the Wanaka Community Board’s experience about how to make those boards work in terms of the legislation. 
So I think Mr Cunliffe and I both agree that the royal commission did not get that part of local democracy right. Interestingly it was my view that the issue is one of determining how low we should go. The community boards obviously capture quite a small geographical entity and they have no statutory recognition right now. I could imagine that places like Devonport and Otahuhu could all be identified as possible local board areas and local decision-making units but what quickly becomes apparent is that the region of Auckland is so large that there would be hundreds of local boards if they were taken down to that finer level. If that was done then they would become in a way powerless because they would be too numerous for a council to take a check of. So I make the point to Mr Cunliffe that when one criticises the Government for not assiduously and religiously following the royal commission’s recommendations one should not then criticise the Government for not providing for local democracy. If the royal commission’s model had been followed I ask where the local democracy would have been in it.