PARLIAMENT | PARTY | GRASSROOTS

Red Alert

Archive for the ‘local government’ Category

Time for transparency.

Posted by Annette King on April 11th, 2012

It was only a few months ago rate payers took to the streets to protest the pay increases given to some CEOs of local government.  They were outraged at the size of increases and the process used by some councils to make decisions about terms, conditions and remuneration for their CEOs.

The most galling was the $68,000 pay increase given to Tony Marriott, CEO of Christchurch City Council.  Here was a city on its knees with people homeless, businesses in ruin and many without a job.  All were facing hard work and a daily struggle.  But some on the Council thought it an appropriate time to reward Mr Marriott for his ‘hard work’.

Mr Marriott didn’t help by trying to justify a pay increase through the media.  The interview with him in ‘The Press’ incensed the public even more.  Eventually Mr Marriott backed down, somewhat reluctantly, and decided not to accept such a huge increase.  But the damage was done.  The public want a more transparent and independent process.

My member’s bill ‘Local Government( Salary Moderation) Amendment Bill‘ now lodged for the next ballot, will address many of the concerns people have expressed.

(more…)

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Uncategorized, local government
8 Comments

Government says no to Ports transparency

Posted by Darien Fenton on April 4th, 2012

Today I asked the House to agree to introduce my members’ bill, called the Local Government (Council Controlled Organisations) Amendment Bill and set it down for the next Members Day. The government said no.

The bill would have made information held by ports accessible under the Official Information Act and the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.

Currently, Ports are excluded in the definition of CCOs under the Local Government Act.  An easy amendment to the Local Government Act, as proposed by No Right Turn, (thanks NRT) would have fixed this deficiency. 

Obviously, the costly dispute at the Ports of Auckland has highlighted the need for this bill. The way in which the Ports of Auckland board and management have acted without transparency and accountability has made it very clear there is a need to ensure that these publicly-owned businesses are opened to the same scrutiny every other public institution faces.

We can get information about the local school or a public library, or even SOEs, but we can’t get information about valuable assets like our publicly owned ports, that are worth millions of dollars.

It’s hard to believe any government that claims it cares about transparency and accountability would have a problem supporting a bill like this one.  But National is demonstrating that it’s all talk when it comes to open government.

So now the bill will go into the ballot. I’m not giving up.

Filed under: Open government, asset sales, local government, members' bills
12 Comments

National’s nanny state anti-camping Bill

Posted by Phil Twyford on July 7th, 2011

The great Kiwi road trip could be at risk. A bunch of friends hit the road Friday night for a weekend of surfing. In the early hours they reach the beach and sleep in the van so they can get a few hours sleep before hitting the water at sunrise. Under the Government’s anti-Freedom Camping Bill they could be up for an instant $150.   (For surfing you can also read fishing, tramping, hunting…)

The Bill is an attempt to deal with the problem of littering and human waste left by the large number of campervans in some of the country’s most scenic spots.  It makes it easier for Councils to declare areas off-limits to freedom camping, and gives them an enforcement regime that includes instant fines for both littering, and camping in the wrong areas.

Let’s be clear: there is a problem here. Noone likes to see toilet waste on the roadside in our scenic spots. But according to submitters it is mostly caused by international visitors travelling in campervans without self-contained toilet facilities.

Our objection is that the Bill is a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.  It gives DoC and Councils the tools to effectively outlaw freedom camping by declaring large areas out of bounds for freedom campers. Both DoC and Councils can levy instant fines on offenders.  Now DoC doesn’t have a record of predatory enforcement regimes for the purposes of income generation, but you can’t say the same thing about some Councils.

It amazes me that other more targeted approaches haven’t been tried first. Why not bring in instant fines for littering and waste dumping (and not freedom camping), have the option of levying those fines on vehicles (as is done with traffic fines) and then make it mandatory for rental companies to recover the fine from the client’s credit card.

Why not phase out campervans that don’t have self-contained toilet facilities?  Maybe as a country that encourages higher and higher numbers of tourists we should invest a bit more in visitor infrastructure like toilets, rubbish bins, and waste disposal facilities for campervans?

From an email just in:

Thanks for your common sense stand on freedom camping, I’m a kiwi – currently overseas.As a surfer being able to enjoy New Zealand, crashing where there are waves is worth more to me than any sum of money.This… bill represents a destruction of what I value most about New Zealand, and NZder’s tradition of camping next to lakes, the sea, enjoying what we ALL have as kiwis.

P.S. I should add that we voted for the Bill at first reading, recognising there is a problem and we thought the Bill deserved some select committee scrutiny. Having read and heard the submissions, we now think it is a dog.

Filed under: conservation, local government
9 Comments

Old dog lost his shine but hasn’t forgotten all his tricks

Posted by Phil Twyford on June 23rd, 2011

We had Rodney Hide at select committee this morning to take questions on local government estimates. His fur seems to have lost some of its shine since the Brash coup. But he was in good form this morning: typically unrepentant on the Auckland super city IT cost blow out.

When he wrote in the Herald last June the super city’s new computer system would cost only $126 million, did he know then that it would cost another $450 million to complete over the next few years?  No, apparently not.

Continuing a discussion we had at last year’s estimates hearing, did he accept now that the Auckland ratepayer considered the whole cost of the new IT system to be a cost of the establishment of the super city, as opposed to just the initial pre-amalgamation costs?  No, again.

We got on to his new review of the system of local government which a Cabinet paper had promised would begin with stakeholder consultations open to the public, but now appears to be a series of invitation-only closed-door meetings with participants asked not to discuss the proceedings outside the meeting.

He wasn’t bothered by the secretive nature of the meetings: at least officials were consulting stakeholders, they could have just gone ahead and developed the reform proposals without talking to anyone.  I guess that shouldn’t surprise anyone. This is the Minister who handed 75% of Auckland local government over to hand-picked corporate boards who now do most of their business behind closed doors.

Would he guarantee there would be no forced council amalgamations following his review of the system of local government? His bemused expression seemed to acknowledge that barring some political miracle he won’t be around to guarantee anything after November. I think he is probably mentally moving on to other things already: his answer, no he could not give that guarantee. He didn’t know what a future Labour local government minister might do.

P.S. Nikki Kaye asked some wonderful patsy questions about how successful the super city has been. I wonder if she will be campaigning in Auckland Central on its success with Rodney at her side?

Filed under: local government, select committee
9 Comments

Tau shoots himself in foot

Posted by Phil Twyford on June 18th, 2011

My opponent in Te Atatu, Tau Henare, is on the rampage campaigning on behalf of West Auckland businesses he says are being unfairly charged higher rates by the Auckland Council than businesses in other parts of the city.

Tau says this is a “constitutional outrage” and that West Auckland businesses are “being bled dry”.

He is right that West Auckland businesses should not have to pay more than those in other parts of the new super city. But they wouldn’t have to, if it weren’t for a silly law passed by National and voted for by Tau Henare.

The Local Government (Auckland Transition Provisions) Act explicitly prohibits the Auckland Council from introducing a new unified rating regime until mid-2012. Not only did Tau vote for it. He sat on the select committee that heard public submissions on the Bill.

Under the Act the Auckland Council is this year allowed only to levy a uniform percentage change on the pre-super city rates – a move carefully designed by National to make sure Aucklanders didn’t get hit by super-sized rates increases just before this year’s general election.

(For the record, Labour voted against it.)

Filed under: Auckland, local government
11 Comments

Auckland Unleashed – still time to have your say

Posted by Phil Twyford on May 26th, 2011

The new Auckland Council is taking public submissions on the first Auckland Plan – a 30-year blueprint for the new super city.  You have until May 31 to have your say.

A lot is riding on the Auckland Plan aka the spatial plan.  It is the mother of all plans, and aims to integrate land uses like transport and other infrastructure, as well as setting out the key strategies for the new Council. It is also the main way that Council and central government are supposed to line up their priorities.

If you want to have a say on the future of Auckland this is a great time to do it.

It is especially important if you care about Mayor Len Brown’s vision for a liveable city and a world class transport system. At a time when John Key and Steven Joyce are doing their best to sink the vital central city rail link, this is a good opportunity to weigh in behind Len’s election-winning vision for the city.

But maybe you have strong views on where development should take place and where not, what the Council should spend our rates on, and what the priorities should be?

The Council has produced a great discussion document called Auckland Unleashed.  You can email in comments, or take part in facebook discussions.

I have my own local issue I am submitting on. Since moving to Te Atatu and campaigning here I’ve realised how badly served this part of Auckland is by public transport. The transport planners seem to think the West’s problems were solved by electrifying and double-tracking the rail. However the rail line is too far away for people in Massey and Te Atatu who are plagued by a motorway that is  jammed up in rush hour and clogs the main feeder routes like Lincoln Rd and Te Atatu Rd.

Adding the odd lane to the NW motorway, or widening the arterial routes is not going to solve the problem. We need a public transport solution that allows people to leave their cars at home. Happily the North Shore Busway offers a very successful model. It currently takes two whole lanes of traffic off the harbour bridge in rush hour and patronage is still climbing. 

A dedicated NW Busway is the logical solution, especially given the huge population growth planned for the North West in coming years.

So if you are a Westie who is sick of the traffic, check out out our campaign You’d Be There By Now on facebook, and go here to make a submission to the Auckland Council.

Whatever your desire is for Auckland, go forth and submit!

Tags: , , , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, local government, transport
8 Comments

Double standard on double dipping?

Posted by Chris Hipkins on May 9th, 2011

John Key was asked over the weekend how he reconcilled his view that Hone’s by-election is a waste of money (which I agree with) with his view that Jami-Lee Ross should have resigned from the Auckland Council, thus forcing a by-election (which I also agree with). His response was ironic to say the least…

“There’s been a long-held view in parliament that when you come in , really, you shouldn’t double-dip and be on two different organisations” – John Key, SST, 8 May 2011

I’ve long held the view that politicians shouldn’t “double-dip”, but it seems to be a new one for the National Party. Key, English and other senior Nats defended Sam Lotu-Iiga doing just that when he stayed on the Auckland City Council at the same time as he was an MP.

In fact the case against Lotu-Iiga’s double-dipping was even worse. During the time he was an MP and Councillor, he took part in parliamentary debates about the ’super city’ legislation, a pretty clear conflict of interest if ever there was one. Shame Key didn’t hold the same position on double-dipping back then…

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: by-election, local government, parliament
18 Comments

Stop Hide

Posted by Phil Twyford on April 14th, 2011

Stop Hide 3 (2)

Rodney Hide has announced a fundamental review of local government.  He is developing a master plan he will roll out across New Zealand if National-ACT get a second term.

From anyone else this announcement would barely raise an eyebrow. But with the Hide-zilla in control, communities all around New Zealand should be very afraid.

Hide’s agenda here is to “do an Auckland” on the rest of the country. This should be reason enough to put in a shark-filled moat at the bottom of the Bombay Hills.  Or a grassroots network of towns and districts declaring themselves Hide-Free, with warning signs erected at the town limits (Welcome to our town, a Hide-free Zone).

Join the Stop Hide facebook group and register your opposition to Hide’s designs on local democracy. Suggestions on how to Stop Hide gratefully appreciated.

Why such alarm? Well, consider Hide’s track record on Auckland, his only real “achievement” in two years as Minister of Local Government.

He talked about allowing Auckland to speak with one voice and then rammed through a forced amalgamation without allowing Aucklanders the chance to decide in a referendum as would normally happen under the Local Government Act.

He talked about putting the local back into local government, and then massively centralised power in the hands of the new Council with local boards left toothless.

He handed over 75 % of Auckland’s assets and services to be run by hand-picked corporate boards.

He took away Aucklanders’ right to decide in a referendum whether their port should be privatised, and opened the door for private ownership of water infrastructure.

He rejected the Royal Commission’s popular proposal for democratically elected Maori seats, and imposed an unelected Maori Statutory Board that has voting rights on council committees and is costing the ratepayer a million dollars a year.

He promised to save the ratepayer money, but delivered redundancy and IT cost blow outs, with rates widely expected to rise once the new system kicks in.

Ignore the weasel words in Rodney Hide’s discussion paper. Look at his record in Auckland. Why should the people of New Zealand believe his master plan for local government in the rest of the country will be any different?

Rodney Hide simply cannot be trusted with the future of local government.

Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government
21 Comments

Wellington’s “quake prone” buildings

Posted by Grant Robertson on March 4th, 2011

There has, understandably, been a lot of talk in the last few days about how Wellington’s buildings will stand up to an earthquake, and the progress or lack thereof that has been made in strengthening buildings.  The information from the Wellington City Council about those buildings that might be earthquake prone is now being consumed all across town.  That’s all well and good, but what about a solution to actually get the work that needs to be done, done?

I well remember in the 2008 election campaign coming under some pretty strong criticism about the costs being imposed on building owners for earthquake strengthening in Wellington as a result of changes to the Building Act.  In 2009 the Wellington City Council allowed for a negotiated slow-down of the timeline for undertaking the strengthening work, and most owners have got on with the often massive task of raising the necessary funds to do this work.

The tragedy in Christchurch has seen many people think again about the strengthening work. The City Council is to review the process again.  I have been contacted by building owners and tenants who are worried, and are anxious both to make progress on the strengthening, but also about what new requirements might come from the Council review.

There’s no doubt we all want to see the strengthening happen, and happen quickly. But we have been, and possibly still are in a recession.  People are struggling to find the money to do the work. 

I think the time has come from a central and local government partnership to address the issue just as has been done with the leaky building issue.  It does not necessarily have to be structured the same way (it could be a loan facility for instance) but if we are to see buildings strengthened in a timely manner, the owners are going to need some help.

The government’s priority in this kind of area must, and will be, with Christchurch over the next period, but as soon as it is practical I would like to see if we can get the right people together to develop a proposal that gives building owners, residents and the rest of the city a pathway to getting this important work done.

Filed under: local government, wellington
3 Comments

Fiasco

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 17th, 2011

Fiasco

Maori representation on the Auckland Council has all the elements of a fiasco:  it started out as an ambitious undertaking but has ended in ludicrous and humiliating failure.

Aucklanders have been saddled with an unelected Maori board that has the power to appoint members to Council committees with full voting rights, after the Government rejected a perfectly good option of Maori councillors democratically elected off the Maori roll.  And the poor old Auckland ratepayer is going to be stung with $1.9 million a year, or more, to pay for this, depending on what the High Court decides.

So who is responsible? Not Local Government Minister Rodney Hide who says he opposed the provision but had it forced on him by the National and Maori Parties.  In Question Time yesterday the Prime Minister denied Hide had breached rules on cabinet responsibility because Hide had been speaking in his role as leader of ACT.  Ironically the PM criticised Pita Sharples who called on Hide to resign if he could not accept the Maori board, saying he should not have made those comments under his ministerial letterhead.

So who is responsible if the responsible Minister is not responsible?

The affair is another blow to Hide’s chances of surviving the election. First there was his spectacular fall from grace as the perkbuster and then his role in concealing his law and order spokesperson’s identity theft. Now the self-styled Minister of Ratepayers and one time champion of ‘one law for all’ has presided over a shonky and undemocratic Maori board at some cost to the Auckland ratepayer.

He is desperate to present the Auckland amalgamation as a success in election year but this has well and truly knocked the gloss off it.

It is also a failure of leadership by John Key. First he buckled to Hide’s threat to resign. Then to make good with the Maori Party he inserts a dodgy compromise option into the law without making any public statement.  The responsible Minister (Hide) openly slags the law he himself introduced to Parliament. Another Minister (Sharples) calls on the responsible Minister to resign over it. Key sees no problem with it all. The Auckland ratepayer is left to pick up the tab.

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, M?ori, democracy, local government
11 Comments

Checking for signs of the apocalypse

Posted by Phil Twyford on January 22nd, 2011

up-side-down-flying-bird-8629-1242829648-8

I have just been outside to check for any signs of weirdness that might indicate the apocalypse is on us. No sign of birds flying upside down. Water still seems to be flowing down hill. Which makes this morning’s Herald editorial even more of a shock.  It is scary. I agree with every word of it.

The Herald says the Government has  breached a fundamental principle of democracy in allowing non-elected advisers to vote on Auckland Council committees. Exactly.

But wait there is more.  The editorial rightly points out it is the Government’s problem to fix.  Rodney Hide, the great advocate for one person-one vote, brought this legislation to the House. Labour and the Greens voted against it.  The Herald’s solution: Two dedicated Maori seats elected by Auckland residents on the rolls of the Maori parliamentary electorates covering the Super City.  Couldn’t agree more.

Hat tip to The Aucklander who broke the story.

Tags: , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government
15 Comments

Limiting big money in local govt

Posted by Phil Twyford on December 11th, 2010

Campaign donation returns for the Auckland mayoral race were filed yesterday and Auckland Mayor Len Brown is taking a bit of heat here and here for channeling $499,000 in campaign donations through a trust. His unsuccessful opponent John Banks accepted $520,086 in anonymous donations.

I think there should be openness about donations to political campaigns. Local government electoral law needs to be changed so donations are transparent, there are sensible spending limits, and limits on third party campaigns.

The parties have argued over these issues in recent years in relation to central government but I don’t think anyone has worried too much about tightening up the rules for local government. With the creation of the Auckland Council the power and resources at stake make it essential there are rules to limit the influence of big money.

Local Government Minister Rodney Hide says he doesn’t want to see any transparency requirements.

To be fair to John Banks and Len Brown, they have both operated within the law. The National Party has a history of using secret trusts. It was pretty obvious John Banks would rely on big anonymous donors. Len Brown would have been tying one hand behind his own back if he hadn’t been willing to accept anonymous donations too. The rules need to be changed so there is a level playing field.

National should have included transparency for campaign donations when it passed the Auckland super city legislation, as well as a lower spending cap, and limits on third parties. Now would be a good time to review the Local Electoral Act to get this sorted out.

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government
31 Comments

Urgency, local government and the democratic process

Posted by Phil Twyford on November 13th, 2010

The Government is planning to push Rodney Hide’s water privatisation bill through its remaining stages under urgency next week. This is not surprising in itself, given how much of this Government’s business has been done under urgency.

But it is irksome that urgency is being used to pass yet another local government bill that takes away democratic rights.

Two out of Rodney Hide’s three Auckland bills were passed under urgency, one without even a select committee process. They corporatised Auckland local government, and radically centralised power, without giving Aucklanders a say.

Then Nick Smith’s sacking of the Canterbury Regional Council and suspension of elections for more than three years.

Now the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill opens the door to privatisation of water supply by allowing 35 year contracts that can include private ownership of water infrastructure. At the same time it repeals many current requirements for Councils to consult the community.

The Nats are sensitive about all this.  Right up until the committee finalised its report National members continued to argue these 35 year contracts that allow private ownership of water infrastructure do not amount to privatisation. They also criticised our use of the word corporatisation in relation to the Bill’s repeal of the requirement to consult the community before shifting services into a council-owned corporate entity.

You can download the committee report here, including the Labour-Green minority view. Make your own mind up.

Tags: ,
Filed under: local government, urgency
42 Comments

It wasn’t meant to end this way

Posted by Phil Twyford on November 2nd, 2010

John Key and Rodney Hide were like awkward guests at someone else’s party at last night’s inauguration of Mayor Len Brown and the new Auckland Council.  The Town Hall was packed with Len’s mob who had come to hear the ‘it’s our time’ message so it is not surprising Key and Hide were given only a polite reception.  Key delivered a wooden written-by-officials speech suprisingly lacking in heart for such a big occasion.

It wasn’t meant to end this way. John Key had all but endorsed John Banks for mayor. The Nats set out to remake Auckland in their own image.  But Len Brown’s campaign was driven along by deep public unease with Hide’s over-centralised and corporatised super city. In the end Aucklanders gave a thumping mandate to Brown’s inclusive vision, his pledge to protect communities and save our assets, and his promise to build a modern rail network.

This puts Key in an interesting spot. Any public goodwill for having unified Auckland was long ago corroded away by Hide’s handling of the process. The Nats must be furious with Hide for having stuffed their Auckland agenda and lost the mayoralty for Banks. That alone must be reason enough for pulling the plug on Epsom.

Aucklanders’ expectations however have now been raised.  The mayoral election made one thing clear.  If the super city is to mean one thing it has to mean action on public transport. Len Brown has staked his political career on this. He has invoked the memory of Robbie’s Rapid Rail. But he cannot deliver the level of investment needed on his own. Only central government can do it.

The Mayor dropped several references to rail into his inaugural speech. John Key didn’t take up the challenge, and noted that on some things ‘we will disagree’. National-ACT don’t get it. Auckland cannot go on building motorways, and now must invest in rail the equivalent treasure it has sunk into motorways over the past few decades. Steven Joyce is wedded to his Holiday Highway but won’t commit to the central city rail loop.

So what is Key to do:  Embrace a left-leaning mayor and council who ran against his plan for Auckland? Wean his party off its historic dependence  on the roads lobby by cranking up a big investment in rail?  If he doesn’t, and National are seen to be white-anting the popular mandate of the new Mayor for all of Auckland, I predict Aucklanders will make National pay at the polls next year.

Tags: , , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, Rail, Uncategorized, local government, transport
20 Comments

The Wellington Mayoralty

Posted by Grant Robertson on October 13th, 2010

Further to Brendon’s post, the result in the Wellington mayoralty is very interesting indeed. First off, huge congratulations to Celia Wade-Brown and her team. I have known Celia for a few years now and she is a person of integrity and strong values. She adopts a principled approach to her work, and that will stand her in good stead for what will be a very challenging role.

I also do want to acknowledge Kerry Prendergast for her time as Mayor. I have very different politics to Kerry and I have disagreed with a number of things she has done (or not done) as Mayor. But I can not fault her work ethic, commitment to Wellington or her willingness to engage with me as an MP.

Obviously the result continues the succcess of the left/progressive candidates in local body elections. While Celia is a Green party member she ran as an independent at the election and had the support of a broad spectrum of left/progressive voters. Wellington is traditionally a centre-left town and it is that majority that has prevailed here.

Despite what Kerry has said this result is actually a vindication of the STV system, rather than some kind of undemocratic outcome. STV ensures that the person who wins the Mayoralty of Wellington is genuinely the most preferred candidate of all voters. For too long FPP ensured that people with minority support won against a large majority.

In any case I, and the other Wellington Labour MPs, really look forward to working with Celia on some exciting new ideas for Wellington, especially in the area of transport and community development.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: local government, wellington
11 Comments

Celia in, Kerry out

Posted by Brendon Burns on October 13th, 2010

Wellington has a new mayor.  Celia Wade-Brown has a 176 vote majority over Kerry Prendergast after specials were counted.

Another centre-left victory

Filed under: local government
26 Comments

Cabinet won’t be a happy place as tories around the country get their faces slapped

Posted by Trevor Mallard on October 10th, 2010
  1. Labour Party Mayor of the Supercity with a clear centre left majority. Key’s nightmare.
  2. National Mayor of Hamilton given the boot. Martin Gallagher top polling for council.
  3. Harry Duynhoven Mayor of New Plymouth
  4. Laws team routed in Whanganui with a left leaning Mayor.
  5. Act Mayor of Hutt City given the boot.
  6. Prendergast National Mayor of Wellington ahead by 40 with 1,000 specials to count. Her Wellington supermayorlty dreams in tatters.
  7. Tony Ryall’s bette noir Richard Thompson tops the poll for Dunedin City.
  8. One of Wellington’s best analysts David Choat got elected to the DHB.

I’ve been at a Labour fundraiser tonight – plenty added to the war chest – so my look at results has been cursory.

What these results show is that when people actually cast their votes they are rejecting the right wing approach of Key and those who support him.

Just had a look at Kiwiblog – even the National Party cheerleader isn’t even pretending there was any real good news for National yesterday.

Filed under: local government
45 Comments

Super mayoral win

Posted by Phil Twyford on October 9th, 2010

Just to add to Grant’s post, I think Len’s win is a pretty clear rejection of the Rodney Hide-John Key model for the super city.

John Banks said this was a contest between him and a Labour mayor from south Auckland. Well, the people have spoken, and it is great to have a mayor who has campaigned and will govern as an independent but comes from the Labour side of politics.

Rodney Hide has bullied and bulldozed his super city through in a way that has left Aucklanders uncomfortable and uneasy for the last 18 months. This is the first time Aucklanders have had a say on the super city at the ballot box. They have voted for a man who has promised to undo much of the damage done by Rodney Hide.

I don’t think Aucklanders trusted a former National Party Minister to implement the agenda that National has set in place for Auckland. In Len Brown they have chosen a mayor who will not sell our assets, who they trust to give real powers to local boards, and who will hold the powerful council-owned companies to account.

Tags: , ,
Filed under: Australia, democracy, local government
35 Comments

Its a Lendslide

Posted by Grant Robertson on October 9th, 2010

Awesone news from Auckland that Len Brown has won, and won convincingly in the mayoralty. There is the makings of left leaning majority on the Council as well, which is terrific. I sat at the same table as Len at the Music Awards on Thursday night and I was struck by his ability to relate to all kinds of people, and the strong support he has. The first term of the Auckland Council will be a hellish job- but they have the best of the candidates to lead them through it.

Meanwhile, in Wellington we wait. Elsewhere, sad to see Jim Anderton not get over the line in Christchurch. Some good results coming through, including Ray Wallace winning in Lower Hutt (over David Ogden), Harry Duynhoven winning in New Plymouth, and various Labour folk winning in Council seats around the country. I want to make special mention of Hamish McDouall, my friend and Labour candidate in Whanganui. He has been elected to the Council up there with one of the highest votes, and he beat Michael Laws. Well done that man!

Filed under: Auckland, local government
25 Comments

Mark Ford, czar of water and transport

Posted by Phil Twyford on October 7th, 2010

When Mark Ford took the job of chairman of the Auckland Transition Agency 16 months ago he said he would seek no further employment with the Super City once the Auckland Council was set up. That promise was made amid concerns about how much power Mr Ford would wield in the ATA role. The Herald reported at the time that some National Cabinet Ministers were understood to have had concerns about his conflicts of interest heading Watercare and the transport authority.

But such official concerns seem to have dissipated. Mr Ford, working closely with Local Government Minister Rodney Hide, has overseen the establishment of the super city, at times directly advising Cabinet. He was responsible for the recruitment of the executives and hand-picked boards who will run the city. And now he himself has landed two of the most powerful roles. He is the new CEO of the new water monopoly. He is also chair of the powerful transport agency which will spend more than half of Aucklanders’ rates.

I think Mr Ford’s competence is unquestioned but I have been critical of the concentration of power in the hands of one unelected official. It is particularly galling such a significant appointment has been made three days out from a new mayor and council taking office. There is a convention in central government that senior public service managers don’t get appointed during an election campaign. Why couldn’t they have waited until the new mayor and council were in place?

Tags: , , , ,
Filed under: Auckland, democracy, local government
19 Comments

« Older Entries