On the Back Benches super city special tonight, former Royal Commissioner David Shand described the Government’s handling of the super city as a shemozzle.
Noun 1. shemozzle – (Yiddish) a confused situation or affair; a mess
It’s a good description of the rushed, half-baked process Rodney Hide and John Carter have run over the past few months. It has left Aucklanders feeling distinctly uneasy: no consultation on the findings of the Royal Commission, first bill pushed through under urgency, Aucklanders’ right to a referendum legislated away, a compressed select committee process.
So far three big climb-downs (presumably as a result of the rush):
- toothless local boards – junked
- councillors elected at large – junked, but multi-member wards are a similar thing through the back door
- today’s coup de grace: an 11th hour U-turn on the northern boundary. Instead of cutting Rodney in half now it’s all in.
And still so much that is wrong with it. More detail here.
The Bill is back in the House tomorrow and the Government is, wait for it…going to push it through under urgency. Two bills on the biggest constitutional change to our system of government since the introduction of MMP, and they ram them both through under urgency.
If you want to follow the debate on Parliament TV, it is likely to be first up after Question Time tomorrow/Tuesday (sometime after 3pm).
I have heard that ethically, govenment can only push legislation through under “urgency” when there is an actual “emergency.”
It seems to me that there is no real excuse for why National has constantly rammed several pieces of legislation through under urgency, meaning they have done a half-baked job and ignored public outrage.
Mr Twyford, there were a lot of aspects about the royal commission report that Labour did not agree with, including the at large seats, the mana whenua seats, and the number of local boards. I think it shows a high degree of hypocrisy on your part to try and be the saviour of the royal commission recommendations when your political party was advocating things that were quite different from the royal commission report.
I don’t understand where you refer to “Aucklanders right to a referendum”, when as you know, the royal commission specifically said that a referendum would not be appropriate for a reorganisation like this.
As for a compressed select committee process, as you known Mr Twyford Aucklanders have been considering this issue for several years. There seems to be a lot of consultation about the process. You might not like the outcome, but then again you’re not in government so you don’t have the power to do much about it. I suppose you could try and turn it into a major political issue, like your curious attempt to turn the next election into a referendum on trees, but I don’t think it’s too much to ask for a bit of consistency from you Mr Twyford.
Another example. You appear to have come to the party albeit belatedly on supporting local boards for Waiheke and Great Barrier. Understandable if you want to fight Ms Tizard for the labour party nomination in Auckland Central. Yet you also complain about the proliferation of local boards to a number greater than 20.
I don’t think you can have it both ways. Either there are only six or seven local boards (which can’t include separate boards for Waiheke and Great Barrier), or you have much smaller communities of interest with their own boards.
If being able to state a consistent and coherent message is a bit difficult Mr Twyford, I suppose you can go back to wolf-whistling about a fire-sale of Auckland assets, but I think you have some way to go before your arguments get treated seriously.
One wonders if the tone of Mr Ellis’ comments – shall we say grumpy – reflects the level of incoherence now emerging in the government’s Supercity process. The greater the incoherence, the more pointed the commentary. I felt for Mr Carter on this morning’s radio reports. He took the bullet to protect his leader, but nothing he could say could hide the rampant and unthought-through contingency marking the government’s process. And now Dr Hutcheson is playing up about Franklin. And all to be rammed through under urgency. Shemozzle indeed.
Is that the David Shand who is a member of the Labour Party and who was seen all night cavoodling with Andrew Williams, Bob Harvey and Len Brown?
I think it is the same David Shand who twice stood as a Labour Party candidate in general elections and was a Labour city councillor over several years, Gooner. It appears to be the same David Shand who has been going to Labour Party meetings talking about the super city. The same David Shand who seems to have a lot of problems with the government rejecting some aspects of the royal commission report but seems remarkably silent about the labour party rejecting other aspects of the royal commission report.
Tetchier and tetchier. But the government’s incoherence remains!
“Toothless local boards – junked” Really? Are we reading the same Bill? Does the Bill empower the local boards in law? No. Are the local boards still, just as in the introduction version of the Bill, utterly beholden to the AC to delegate any powers and money? Yes. Are the local boards still ‘unincorporated societies’, like the local Rotary Club, and not even units of local government? Yes. Can the local boards employ a staff member? No. So, what has changed, beyond the government’s spin? Nothing.
Tim & Gooner:- this is the same David Shand who was Auditor – General of South Australia about 25 years ago and was then head hunted for European posts because of his intellect and integrity.
The same guy who has made himself available to a wide variety of groups to talk about the report.
Just take care not to defame him on Red Alert.
@Ellis… A referendum was our right under the second schedule of the Local Government Act which specifically stated that in a situation like this the ratepayers must vote for the change via a referendum… I’m assuming this was legislated away under the first bill…
@Phil “Stoner” Twyford: Does this right still remain for the rest of NZ ratepayers..? If so how can that not be against the Bill of Rights..? (Felt like a parliamentary question there… Wink, wink, to Hide perhaps..?)
Even as a National Party member I can comfortably say this has been a balls up, more through the perceived need to have it in place by 2010 than any desire to ram bad law through, 2013 would have been much better and allowed for a more robust process…
It was good to see you at the Labour Conference Phil, you’re support for the Replican movement is awesome and keep up the pressure on Supercity democratic issues…
Mr Mallard, I didn’t defame Mr Shand. I just pointed out his Labour Party history, which is fair. It should also be noted that Labour ministers appointed him to chair the Tertiary Education Commission and to serve on the board of Meridian Energy.
Mr Shand has had a distinguished public service career. I don’t doubt that. But if he is going to stand up and make political statements publicly as he has, then I don’t think it’s unfair to point out his political background or for Gooner to point out who he was spending his time with after the backbenchers’ debate.
Writing as a cynic it might seem that Nact were taking hits about “not listening.” Remedy? Lets draw a line through Rodney. Wait for it….wait for it. Right on cue- outrage! Wait a bit. Now. “To show you folks that we really care and do listen, you can have Rodney back again.”
Given the balls up of the supercity – I don’t think New Zealand is ready to become a republic.
I think what Rodney people were saying was “We don’t want to be part of your disaster Supercity”.
Hide/Key replied “we’ll teach you, we will partition you and hand some of you with a council 500 miles away, how do you like that?”.
The reply from rural Rodney was “you’ve got to be kidding”, followed by “OK we can go back to screwing you by giving you 1 councillor of 20 and telling you what to do.”
Moral of the story- The only power you will ever have is every 4 years when you get to vote.
I’d say thats a pretty long line to draw Spud…
Topcat I have a bach at Omaha and I was looking forward to the area north of Waiwera going to Kaipara. Rodney district is a joke and I am pleased it will be dissolved. At the moment it only deals with Orewa and Silverdale yet Warkworth and the matakana beaches are the lost cousin. I think there was a bit of patch protection from the rodney councillors going on to remain intact, but as a rodney ratepayer I couldn’t give a stuff if the district was carved up.
AS an occasional user of a holiday home you are probably right Tim, but for the permanent residents and businesses of North Rodney it would have been a nightmare. A pet scheme of Carters ?
Thanks for speaking on behalf of North Rodney people ghost. Given that most of the homeowners in Omaha are occasional users of holiday homes, it’s a big issue for them.
North Rodney is a rural and holiday district. It isn’t part of Auckland’s urban sprawl. There’s not a lot that people north of Waiwera have in common with Orewa or Whangaparoua. Warkworth and Wellsford fit in nicely together.
Its not as though they become an independent duchy, they merely have the same rules and regulations run out of Dargaville when these issues came via Orewa before ( and probably still remain as a local office)
The growth problems are because of the proximity of Auckland while Kaipara District is still a backwater even compared to Whangarei
This carve up was all about Carters agenda to get rid of Northlands Regional Council and the only way to make Kaipara DC a viable unit.
why hasn’t the “flip flop” comment been unleashed?
There is nothing wrong with changing your mind on things.
Labour changed its mind (flip flopped) on a few biggies are loosing the election.
Tim,
I actually agree with you about the desirability of Warkworth, Matakana, Wellsford, Te Hana, Port Albert not being part of the supercity- they will get zero representation and will be told how to run their towns by people who visit them for holidays.
Their is no reason they cannot have their own local government- but why did were they forced to join with Kaipara? As far as I am aware nobody wanted that- yet for some unknown reason that was what the select comittee decided.
Do you really think the Government considered what it was doing before it started stuffing people about?
Trevor, David Shand did an excellent job on the rates report which, unfortunately, gathers dust. I also think he was an excellent royal commissioner and a perfect choice for that role.
Trust that is sufficient atonement as I do like to be fair.
Yep