I didn’t intend to post three times in a row about the Government’s privatisation agenda for local government. But hey, they keep giving me new material.
The latest is a Cabinet decision in just-released papers to set the new $5 billion Auckland water company up for privatisation in 2015.
All year the Government has been denying they have any privatisation plans for local government. National and ACT MPs voted down my private member’s bill to protect Auckland’s assets from privatisation under the super city. Hide said the issue was a distraction and a ‘pretend debate’.
But Aucklanders have been deeply uneasy all year that Rodney Hide, the Nats and their surrogate Cits and Rats local body organisation is lining up the super city’s assets to be sold off, and council services contracted out.
Well, here is why those fears were well grounded:
1. Two weeks ago Hide announced the Government would amend the Local Government Act to encourage public-private partnerships and allow private ownership of our water infrastructure for periods of up to 35 years.
2. At the same time Cabinet decided to repeal s 88 of the Local Government Act which requires Councils to consult the public before privatising or contracting out council services. And then, drum roll…
3. On 19 October Cabinet decided to over-ride the provisions of the Local Government Act restricting private involvement in the water system, and allow the new Auckland Council from 2015 to “determine the governance arrangements and asset ownership for the delivery of water services, rather than fixing Watercare’s form in legislation”.
If it looks, smells and sounds like a privatisation agenda, I reckon it is one.
Stranger still though, the Minister is now apparently saying that the 26 October Cabinet decision to amend the Local Government Act to loosen up the restrictions on public-private partnerships in water services overrides the 19 October decision to allow full privatisation of the Auckland water company. Which is very bizarre.
Rodney Hide has been going around the country slagging his ministerial colleagues as distracted and inattentive. But if the report is true he cannot manage his own portfolio to avoid the Cabinet making inconsistent decisions in consecutive weeks. What a shambles.
More to the point, the 19 October decision to open the door to full privatisation of the Auckland water company is clear evidence once and for all that this Government has a privatisation agenda when it comes to local government and the super city in particular. Mr Key has some explaining to do.
For more see Bernard Orsman and Brian Rudman in the Herald.
“At the same time Cabinet decided to repeal s 88 of the Local Government Act” – Now there’s democracy at its finest.
Poor Auckland, poor NZ
Mr Twyford, I’m puzzled why you don’t point out that the 19 October decision was overturned on 26 October in your post. You are quoted discussing it in Mr Orsman’s article, so this is not new knowledge to you. I think it is a bit mischievous for you not to report in this post that the 19 October decision no longer stands, and yet rail against the government as if it did.
Then again, if you did highlight the 26 October decision it would tend to suggest your argument of a great conspiracy to privatise assets has feet of clay.
Read the post again Mr Ellis.
And how do you know of these papers/ideas Mr Twyford?
Hide is releasing these papers without request for transparency and accountability reasons. You should congratulate him for that. He could stonewall them for months if he wanted, like Labour frequently did during its last nine years.
Gooner, yes it is good that Mr Hide is pro-actively releasing them. But what do you think about the privatisation agenda?
I love it!
I hate it!
Mr Ellis – I’m confused by your remark “your argument of a great conspiracy to privatise assets”. We now there is no imaginary conspiracy as you imply – various MPs have made it clear they intend to privatise assets – either now or later. An imaginary conspiracy isn’t an imaginary conspiracy when it is reality.
Phil,
No doubt the moderators will consider this a thread-jack, but I would like to know what your position is – and your party’s for that matter – in relation to the leaky homes issue which is currently under negotiation. This is a significant super city issue, is it not?
I also noted on One News last night that Mayor Banksie was interviewed on this issue whilst enjoying coffee in Takapuna on the North Shore – interesting…
Even more interesting was the company he was keeping – a caffe latte with the ACT Party national secretary…
Things are clearly ramping up on the Shore with Banksie keen to tap into ACT’s networks and resources. Probably not the best look given Rodney’s tarnished image.
Am I missing something here?John Key always said no asset sales in the first term, so selling AK’s water in 2015 is well within the schedule, and part of a disclosed position?
Phil Goff spoke of Labour accepting they needed to reconnect with the people of New Zealand.I hope for all of our sakes that this wasn’t just spin.If National gain a second term the fire sale is on.
Banksie – our position is that the package leaked and reported over the last few days may well not be enough to make it worthwhile for the owners of leaky homes to give up the right to sue. The document leaked indicates home owners would still have to stump up with 64% of the cost of fixing the house. Part of the problem for the Government is they talked up expectations while in Opposition and raised hopes that they would write the big cheque. It is appropriate that central government contributes financially given that it was our elected representatives back in the 1990s that deregulated the Building Code which caused a lot of the problems. However it is also important that the Government is careful with taxpayers’ money.
Dave – Key said no STATE asset sales in their first time, as opposed to local government assets. Also, it is clear from listening to the Nats in the House, that they dont consider paving the way for privatisation of Auckland assets (as in the case of water) is the same as privatising it themselves. They say it is up to the people of Auckland. Pure spin.
I agree with Mr Twyford on the leaky homes “package”.
Ratepayers are actually coming up with 90% of the money – 64% through homeowners and the remainding 26% through rates.
[...] times Phil Twyford reminds me of Chicken Little. He runs about a lot claiming the sky is falling in over the Auckland Super City. Absolutely everything is to do with privatisation. I think he’d call more money for [...]
[...] link to the transcript here as soon as it appears on line.