O'Rourke Denis: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
O'Rourke Denis: Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Sitting date: 27 November 2012. Volume:686;Page:6801. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
DENIS O’ROURKE (NZ First) 
: 
 The National Party hates local government—it always has and it always will—and the reason for that is that local government represents ordinary people and their needs. The National Party sees local government as a poor relation and that it should do what it is told. National says to hell with what local people want. True to form this Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill overrides core democratic principles established over a long period of time and again undermines local government in New Zealand and in doing so it undermines the viability of the governance of local communities. This results in a loss of confidence by local communities in their local government. 
An overwhelming majority of the 775 written submissions and 186 oral submissions on the bill oppose it. It is not what the people want. It is really all about halfwitted National Party ideology—nothing more. I was a member of the Christchurch City Council in 2002 when the current Act was passed after very comprehensive public consultation. That Act clarified what local government was about and it had the widespread support of communities throughout New Zealand. 
People then saw and now see local government as being required to take a much more holistic approach than the traditional roads rubbish regulations and rates approach. They do not want a narrow basic services approach; they want much more than that. 
The principle of subsidiarity was adopted in 2002 and decision making was devolved to appropriate levels with community boards having a much more important role to play for the well-being of their communities. This amendment makes the Act a much narrower Act in terms of the purposes of local government. It says: “… to meet the current and future needs of communities for good quality local infrastructure local public services and performance of regulatory functions in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses.” 
So what it is really about is money. What it is really about is just basic services. What it is not about is the welfare of local communities. It replaces those four well-beings—economic environment social and cultural—with something that is much more narrow and not what the people of New Zealand want. It returns local government to the bad old days where its scope of operations is far too narrow to meet the needs of today’s communities and nowhere is that better shown today than in Christchurch where I live and was a city councillor for 15 years. Yes there is a huge need for the repair and reconstruction of basic services in that city and the Stronger Christchurch Infrastructure Rebuild Team and the city council are doing just that and yes there is a need for the prudent direction of Government money in the rebuild process and the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery Authority and again the city council are doing just that but few would argue that that is nearly enough. There is a need for as I have said a much more holistic approach to the re-establishment of communities in the most affected areas of Christchurch. 
The welfare of communities and of people is every bit as important as or more important than the traditional approach of roads rubbish regulation and rates. Councils must also be interested in housing and not just housing for the elderly. They should be interested in rental rates because rent gouging is commonplace in Christchurch today. I was contacted by somebody last week concerning a family of nine children whose rent went up by $100 a week from $460 to $560. That is unconscionable. Councils need to play a role in those issues too as they do in health services—especially in what district health boards do not provide—and also in recreation and in opportunities for healthy living in economic development in job creation in emergency preparedness and the organisation of community responses to adverse events and also in the provision of public events which are supported—