Red Alert

Author Archive

Roll call of opposition to super city grows daily

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 16th, 2010

Rodney Hide must be getting quite lonely.  The Government’s plan to parcel up 75% of Council operations, including the powerful transport agency, into arms-length council-owned  companies has met with an avalanche of opposition.

I read out the roll call to Hide in question time today: Len Brown, John Banks, Andrew Williams, Mike Lee, Michael Barnett from the Chamber of Commerce, Lawrence Yule from Local Government NZ, The Herald, The Aucklander newspaper, Suburban Newspapers, hundreds of individuals who submitted to the select committee, and the 56% of Aucklanders who told a recent poll they didnt want to be part of the super city.

Is there anybody else out there who doesn’t like the corporatisation of Auckland local government?

Lawrence Yule was the latest to step up, this morning on RNZ. He is the mayor of Hastings, and president of the association representing local government politicians and officials. He is someone who cannot easily be written off by the Government. His opinion: the Government’s super city model is fundamentally undemocratic. “Handing over 75% of Auckland’s assets to unelected ‘council controlled organisations’ is unfathomable.”

Hmmm. Let’s see who is lining up to support the corporatisation of Auckland. John Key is. There’s Steven Joyce. And Stephen Sellwood from the Council for Infrastructure Development who Sean Plunket took delight in pointing out on Morning Report is a business lobby group that costs $9000 to join.

I am picking the Government will throw a bone to public concern by putting up some minor adjustments to the CCOs’ accountability regime. If they do, they will underestimate the depth and intensity of public concern. People don’t want transport to be run by an unaccountable council-owned company. They are concerned that one of these companies will be given control of waterfront development. They want their elected representatives on the Auckland Council to be properly accountable for the Council’s activities.

Meanwhile Rodney Hide is spinning like a top. Russell Brown this morning said he was ‘flat out lying’.  Sean Plunket’s interview is worth a listen. Plunket got him to concede that the use of CCOs will be expanded under the super city, and made the point  that Hide seems to equate commercial discipline with democratic controls.

Hide said “the ratepayers of Auckland have had a say”. How exactly?  He said the CCOs are “totally controlled by the Councils” when the whole point of them is to keep the elected representatives at arm’s length. A full catalogue of Hide’s misrepresentations awaits another post. Not enough room here.


A tale of two interviews

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 9th, 2010

Last night Minister of Local Government Rodney Hide appeared on Close Up to answer questions from host Mark Sainsbury about the super city, and claims on the front page of yesterday’s Herald that Hide’s CCOs lack transparency and accountability.

The interview was a big disappointment. Mark Sainsbury failed to ask the hard questions and repeatedly gave Hide an opportunity to spin his lines. Have a look at it here.  (The interview kicks in about halfway through the item.)

In contrast, John Campbell also recorded an interview with Hide on the same subject yesterday.  I am not sure that it actually went to air but you can watch it on the TV3 website. Campbell doesn’t let Hide off the hook.

What do you think?


ORIGIN Greek demokratia, from demos ‘the people’ + -kratia ‘power, rule’

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 8th, 2010

I have been shocked by how many of the Government’s members don’t seem to think there is anything strange about handing over government of our nation’s largest city to a whole lot of hand-picked business appointees.

The Herald is shocked too. As are most of the mayors, the Chamber of Commerce, and the overwhelming majority of the public who turned up to speak to the select committee on the third bill.

National and ACT are so imbued with neoliberalism they are quite happy to throw out our tradition of representative democracy, and replace it with a corporate governance model. That’s what they are doing. They are wrapping 90% of Council operations up into commercial entities with their own boards of directors and CEOs.  These commercial entities can meet in secret and won’t have to publish agendas, minutes, or subject themselves to members of the public asking pesky questions. And that is the whole point of it, keep the people and their elected representatives out of it.

Transport, the waterfront, water, economic development, investments and regional facilities are all due to be corporatised so they can be managed behind a veil of commercial secrecy.

One private sector group at the select committee last week defended the proposal to structure transport into one of these commercial entities by saying this would avoid transport issues being “politicised”. He meant that people and politicians would no longer be able to argue publicly about priorities and what should be done.

I am not against the commercial model in all cases. There is a place for it, as there is for the State Owned Enterprise in central government. But this Government is going way too far, applying the commercial model to the vast majority of Council operations. Not a shred of comparative analysis is available to demonstrate they have considered different organisational models or applied some criteria to guide this decision making.

What is more, they are cutting the number of elected representatives for the region in half.  I know the anti-politician crowd will celebrate that, but seriously, it will be all but impossible for 20 councillors to be accessible and give meaningful democratic representation to 1.4 million Aucklanders.

Add to that the heavy centralisation of power in the super council, leaving local boards with little in the way of real power, a far cry from the capable empowered local councils that the Royal Commission recommended.

It is a gutting of our democracy. Centralise power, take it away from communities and the city’s periphery and put it in the hands of a small number of politicians who will be remote from the people. Hand over administration of the city’s assets and services to council-owned companies, leaving the politicians to draft annual statements of corporate intent.

It all fits the contemporary neo-liberal fad for commercial governance. Small hand-picked boards in the privacy of boardrooms can make decisions efficiently. Democracy on the other hand is messy, time consuming and sometimes inefficient. There is always a balance to be struck but Aucklanders are now waking up to the fact that this Government is imposing an extremist unbalanced model.

The Government and the cheerleaders of this blighted project are forgetting some essential lessons about liberal democracy in the modern era. That the vote was a concession to contain the tensions generated by market capitalism; society and economy might be unfair but at least we can all vote Governments in and out. That the rulers rule because the ballot box allows the people to give their consent. That it is far from perfect but no one has come up with a better system yet.

ARC chairman Mike Lee put it well last week at the select committee when he described the third super city bill as Rogerpolitics. Rogernomics was the transformation of the economy in the interests of the few, now National and ACT are using the super city to do the same thing to Auckland local government.


Michael Foot R.I.P.

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 7th, 2010

foot 2

Michael Foot died this week at the age of 96. He was a writer, rebel, orator, CND supporter, Labour radical, democrat and party loyalist. A great man of the Left, and a notoriously unsuccessful leader of the British Labour Party. Have a listen to this BBC 4 programme about his life, musings from the Guardian’s editors, a great photo gallery on Foot’s political life, and the New Statesman has a collection of obituaries.


Were depleted uranium weapons used at Falluja?

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 7th, 2010

Five years after fierce battle battles left the Iraqi city of Falluja in ruins a surge in birth defects is raising questions about the weaponry used by US forces.

A heart breaking report by the BBC’s John Simpson screened on TV One on Friday. Simpson talked to doctors in the Falluja hospital who estimate around 1000 birth defects per year. You can hear his BBC radio report here. Late last year the Guardian reported Iraqi doctors had recorded a 15-fold increase in deformities in infants over the past year. Local medics were not ready to blame the war saying that there were many possible causes but a committee of Iraqi and British doctors has petitioned the UN General Assembly asking for an independent operation to clean up toxic materials left over from war.

The International Campaign to Ban Uranium Weapons (ICBUW) is  concerned by the press reports and is calling on the US Government to clarify to what extent uranium weapons were used at Falluja, and to fund independent scientific research to establish the cause of the birth defects. It has long been thought that the use of depleted uranium weapons is linked with the rise in birth deformities and cancer and other illnesses after the wars in Iraq of 1991 and 2003.

Depleted uranium is nuclear waste. It is the by-product from processing uranium for nuclear weapons and nuclear reactors.  It is very hard and heavy and is inserted into ammunition for its armour-piercing properties. It ignites on impact, burning at a very high temperature, dispersing a cloud of radioactive dust which can pass through gas masks and into the human body.

The problem with this issue is that it is near impossible to conduct scientific experiments in a war zone during or after the battle. And military authorities (the US in this case) are not exactly transparent. The ICBUW advocates a precautionary approach and says depleted uranium weapons should be banned until definitive research has been done.

I agree. I have a member’s bill in the ballot that would prohibit the use of depleted uranium weapons in the same way that we ban nuclear weapons. New Zealand forces don’t use depleted uranium weapons but they could be exposed to them in the battlefield. If New Zealand was to follow Belgium, the only country in the world so far to ban DU weapons, it would be a helpful step towards outlawing such inhumane weapons.

A similar bill has just had its second reading in the Irish senate and attracted warm cross-party support.


Youth MP wanted

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 6th, 2010

This is a short video I did for my Youth MP facebook group. If you know any 16-18 year olds interested in international issue please share it with them.

Filed under: youth

Hide blatantly misleads on local boards

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 5th, 2010

The Government must know they are pushing the super city up hill in the face of an increasingly sceptical public and news media. This morning’s Herald declares:

The way it is shaping up, the single mayor and council will be a puppet show, purely for democratic appearances, while the real decisions are made by people the public has not elected and will never see. It cannot stand.

The Herald was talking about what it calls the Orwellian-named Council Controlled Organisations, but the issue of local boards is just as troubling to the Government right now, with widespread suspicion that the boards will be paper tigers. A good indicator is the level of  Government spin.

Rodney Hide and his associate minister of local government John Carter are going around town saying their local boards will have the power to “make by-laws”, when they have specifically ruled out the local boards having any rule-making powers.

Have a listen to Hide on BFM’s The Wire yesterday. Breathtaking spin. And select committee chair John Carter has been trying to pull the wool over the eyes of submitters all week with this line about local boards being able to make by-laws.

The sad truth of the Hide super city model is that the local boards can only advocate to the Super Council for a by-law, and lobby them to pass it, just like any other lobby group in Auckland can. In fact, the government banned the local boards from having any regulatory powers in their second super city bill passed last year.

The Super Council is only allowed to delegate certain non-regulatory powers to local boards in areas like parks and libraries, except where a coordinated approach outweighs the benefits of a local decision, except where decision making would be more effective if integrated with other Council decisions, and except where the impact of a decision goes beyond the local board area.

You could drive a truck through all those exceptions. Does anyone really think the new Council will willingly delegate powers downwards to local boards?

Rodney  Hide can spin all he likes about how local boards “are key to encouraging Aucklanders to become more actively engaged” but that won’t happen if the government leaves local boards as toothless talkshops.


The proper role of an MP

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 3rd, 2010

I think Key, Hide & Co are beginning to feel the heat. After a week and a half of submissions on the third super city bill it is clear Aucklanders are as opposed to this assault on democracy as they were when the Nats did their last impression of listening to the public halfway through last year.

But when the Herald gets stuck into them. And all the mayors. And the Employers and Manufacturers Association. And the Chamber of Commerce. Surely it gets a little harder to write off the critics as rent-a-mob? Perhaps not. Rodney Hide was on the radio this morning criticising yesterday’s rally outside the select committee hearings which was attended by Labour and Green MPs, and calling the 150 Aucklanders who protested ’sad’.

They are sad alright but not in the sense Hide means. They are really sad about what this Government is doing to our democracy.

Hide accused me of politicising the select committee process by organising the rally. He is joined by ACT supporter Michael Bassett, himself a former Minister of Local Government, who has written about all this, kindly sending me a copy, in which he says it is a constitutional outrage that an MP on the select committee should be taking part in a public protest outside the committee’s hearings. He is also unhappy with the Herald’s coverage.

My first response is that it is rich beyond belief for Hide to accuse anyone else of politicising the super city process. Hello Rodney? Aren’t you the guy who denied Aucklanders a referendum on the super city? Who invited them to make submissions on Maori representation when your threat to resign had already convinced John Key to drop Maori seats as an option? Who rammed the first two bills through under urgency? Who gets the power under this third bill to hand pick the directors of the powerful commercial structures who will run 90% of Council operations?

Secondly, I have always considered it an MP’s job to fight for what the people want. The select committee is not a court, and I am not a judge. When a Government blocks its ears to the public, I think it is perfectly in order for MPs and citizens to take up the right to peaceful protest.

What do you think?

Click this next link to see Michael Bassett’s comments in full.

(more…)


The future of our ports

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 1st, 2010

Today at the select committee hearing public submissions on the third super city bill, we had the mayors and ARC chairman Mike Lee in. There were some great submissions and useful debate. In amongst it all I took the opportunity to ask several of them their view of the provision in the bill which repeals the requirement for a binding ballot of Aucklanders before the Ports of Auckland can be sold off.

Mike Lee, Bob Harvey, Andrew Williams and Len Brown all gave unambiguous answers that the binding ballot requirement should stay.

I didn’t however get a straight answer out of John Banks after three attempts. In reply to my first two attempts he said how opposed he was to asset sales but steadfastly avoided my specific question. On my third attempt he just looked away.


Would a New Lynn happen under super city?

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 1st, 2010

It was speeches and a cooked breakfast at the New Lynn RSA this morning to celebrate the first passenger train to go through the New Lynn rail trench. A carriage load of politicians, ARTA and Kiwirail officials, mayors, local Westies, transport activists, Waitakere City councillors and staff picked up the 5.44am from Henderson and were greeted by a brass band on the flash new New Lynn platform quarter of an hour later.

There is much to celebrate. The New Lynn town centre redevelopment, of which the rail trench and station are the vital first phase, is a half billion dollar investment in urban renewal. It is the latest centrepiece of Auckland’s rail modernisation and just the kind of ambitious place shaping the city desperately needs. Big hats off to Mayor Bob Harvey and Waitakere City, my colleague New Lynn MP David Cunliffe and many others for making it happen.

But would something like the New Lynn project happen under the kind of ultra-centralised super city this Government is putting in place?

Large capable local councils with significant powers as recommended by the Royal Commission might have been able to exercise some of the place shaping leadership demonstrated by Waitakere City as it has carved out identity and jobs in a once-neglected part of Auckland’s outer suburbs. But the toothless local boards planned by the Government won’t have anything like that kind of clout. See this morning’s Herald for stories on reaction to Friday’s announcement on the powers of the boards.

And will Waitakere’s two councillors out of 20 on the new super council be able to muster enough political will to get the city to focus on much needed projects out West?

Not sure. But I do think that centralising power in the hands of a mayor and only 20 councillors, delegating huge authority to unelected corporate entities, and giving local boards the power to choose the colour of the carpet in the library is unbalanced and won’t be sustainable.


Time to stand up

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 27th, 2010

Sick to death of National and ACT’s Frankenstein vision for Auckland?

Tired of their fake listening campaigns, and bogus assurances they are going to ‘put the local back into local democracy’?

Join the protest outside the select committee hearings this Tuesday lunchtime.  Let Key, Hide & Co know that Aucklanders deserve and demand better.

12 – 2pm  Tuesday 2 March   Quality Hotel Barrycourt, 20 Gladstone Road, Parnell

If you care about:
* the corporatisation of our local democracy
* the loss of local voice
* moves to make it easier to sell the Ports of Auckland and other assets
* unfair boundaries and inadequate representation
* undermining protections for the Waitakere Ranges
* tokenistic representation for Maori
* the rushed and undemocratic process the Government is using to push the super city through
…then join this lunchtime rally and show the Government Aucklanders won’t take the super city lying down.

Spread the word – send this facebook link to all your friends.

All political parties, groups, individuals welcome to attend. The rally will be peaceful and orderly.


Local boards get to choose colour of carpet

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 26th, 2010

John Trust Me Carter has been reassuring angry Aucklanders since the middle of last year that the Government is going to give real powers to local boards. There are many undemocratic aspects of the Government’s super city agenda but for my money this is the one that people care most about. And if it is not sorted out, it is the thing that will do the Nats most damage across the Auckland electorates.

Mr Carter has been at it again this week at the select committee, repeatedly assuring submitters the boards will get real powers and inviting them to hear a briefing from officials this afternoon on the Government’s plans for board powers.

We’ve just had the briefing. Newsflash: Local boards will get to choose the colour of the carpet at the local library but will have precious little else in the way of real powers.  Actually to be fair, they will also have the power to shift park furniture around and allocate the graffiti clean up budget.

The Government has failed again to deliver on its promise to empower local boards in the Auckland super city.

Key, Hide and Co are turning Auckland democracy upside down. Local boards elected by local citizens wont be able to pass a by-law. And yet, the new transport and water corporate structures whose initial directors are appointed by Rodney Hide will be able to make by-laws independently of the elected Council.

The boards wont have any regulatory powers at all, not even the power to regulate dogs, brothels, and liquor licensing that Rodney Hide promised in April last year.

On any issue that matters the boards will have only the power to talk among themselves, and beg the Super Council to do something.

They will be able only to “propose” local by laws to the super council, and “give input” to regional by laws and plans. They won’t be able to hire staff, own property or have any legal status.

They won’t be able to move a bus stop or paint a yellow line on the side of the road. These things and the great majority of the Auckland Council’s operations will be handled by powerful corporate entities that operate completely independently of local boards.

What is left: libraries, local parks and facilities? Officials told the select committee that libraries and facilities will be run on a regional basis, but local boards can have input into things like design and fit out. In other words they get to choose the carpet.  Welcome to the new face of local democracy.


16-18 and you want to change the world?

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 22nd, 2010

I know that counts out most Red Alert readers (the age thing I mean) but maybe you know someone?

Youth Parliament is a great annual ritual. It’s an opportunity for the young and politically minded to come to Parliament and try out the green leather chairs. As Labour’s spokesperson on international development, and disarmament, I’m looking to select a Youth MP who is passionate about global issues. The selection process is simple: post a 2 minute video to my facebook page saying what you think New Zealand should do to make the world a safer, fairer and more sustainable place.  The judging panel includes former PM and now UNDP Administrator Helen Clark, Young New Zealander of the Year Divya Dhar, and me. The winner gets to come to Parliament as a Youth MP, and also get briefed on Labour’s foreign policy and visit Wellington-based development agencies. If you know someone who might be interested please send them the link: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=320278835845


Nat tempers fray one hour into two week hearing

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 22nd, 2010

We are one hour into two weeks of select committee hearings on the third super city bill. Twelve submissions have been heard so far, and all twelve have raised fundamental objections to the Bill and the Government’s super city project.

Unfortunately Government members seem to have forgotten that select committee hearings are the people’s forum, a time for people to turn up and have their say. Government members are irritable. Deputy chair Tau Henare openly ridiculed one submitter. Committee chair John Carter interrupted the submission of an elected councillor saying her views were inaccurate.  Taurange MP Simon Bridges said he was deeply offended by one submission.

My advice to Government members: pace yourself, there is a lot more of this to come.  Sit back and listen, you might learn something.


There’s consternation in those hills

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 19th, 2010

Hackles have been raised out West by provisions in the third super city bill that could undermine the Waitakere Ranges.  Mining, undermining and our special natural areas seem to go together at the moment.

Now you can do something about it. You can print off this petition from the Waitakere Ranges Protection Society, distribute copies at work or through your networks, and gather as many signatures as you can.

There are two provisions in the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill causing concern. The first repeals s 18 of the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act which requires changes to Auckland’s growth and development strategy to be consistent with the Act. The Bill replaces the strategy with a spatial plan not subject to the Ranges Heritage Area Act. As Greg Presland explains in the Herald yesterday the city’s boundaries could be shifted into the ranges. And as Sandra Coney says, it’s critical that the boundary is protected when a lot of housing developers are hungrily looking at greenfields.

The Bill also repeals law concerning the 8500 ha Auckland Centennial Park prompting the Auckland Regional Council to ask whether the Government was trying to nationalise the ranges and that the park, acquired with donations and public money, could be sold.

Waitakere MP Paula Bennett (along with other National MPs) opposed the passing of the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act, which was shepherded through by Labour MP Lynne Pillay.  Bennett has blamed the repeal of s 18 on sloppy drafting and says it will get fixed at the select committee. Let’s make damn sure it does.


Damage control on Boag affair

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 19th, 2010

Hide and Ford

Local Government Minister Rodney Hide with Auckland Transition Agency chairman Mark Ford

The Auckland Transition Agency has swung into damage control. The Herald this morning reports Michelle Boag has been pulled from any recruitment of executive positions for the Super City.

With their decision the ATA is effectively saying their Minister was wrong. One day earlier in Parliament Rodney Hide sounded perfectly happy with Michelle Boag’s role in recruiting super city executives while being an adviser to John Banks’ mayoral campaign. He lined up with the ATA, Boag and Banks in declaring he could see no conflict of interest.

And yet all the facts were available to him: Michelle Boag’s public statements, and the tender documents released to me the day before by the ATA under the Official Information Act.

Bear in mind Boag was specifically tasked with recruiting the new super council’s chief spin doctor who was to have been appointed by March and would have been working for the duration of the mayoral campaign – the same mayoral campaign in which Boag is a campaign adviser to John Banks.

In question time Hide seemed to think it sufficient the ATA had selected the bid by Boag’s company Momentum because it was the best “in terms of quality, process, and lowest cost structure”, and he was “not responsible for what Michelle Boag does in her spare time”.

He said he was not concerned Michelle Boag’s recruitment company, Momentum, may have misled the Auckland Transition Agency when it stated in its business proposal it had no conflicts of interest to declare.

He said he saw no reason to order an investigation into the affair.

My question for the Minister: Does he stand by his statements?

My question for Aucklanders: Is this man fit to be in charge of setting up the super city?

P.S. Rodney Hide posted a comment on Red Alert last weekend in response to my post on the risk to the Waitakere Ranges posed by his latest super city bill. Rodney, if you are reading this, your comments would be most welcome on this issue.

For background on this issue, see Heather McCracken’s original story in the Herald on Sunday, my Red Alert posts from Sunday and Wednesday, Thursday’s Herald story by Derek Cheng, the transcript from question time, and the video.


Michelle Boag misleads on super city job

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 17th, 2010

Which of these is correct?

1. Former National Party president and John Banks’ mayoral campaign adviser Michelle Boag telling the Herald on Sunday she had nothing to do with her recruitment agency Momentum bidding for the contract to recruit 50 senior executives for the Auckland Super City:

It was a squeaky-clean process…A lot of people involved in the ATA I know very well. I purposely kept myself out of the tender process….My networks are such that I had to be very careful about keeping me away from that tender process.

Or:2. Momentum’s business proposal to the Auckland Transition Agency which profiles Michelle Boag as a member of the project team and specifically identifies her as responsible for recruiting the position of the super city’s chief spin doctor, Manager Communications and Public Affairs.

In my view Ms Boag’s public statements on this have been misleading to say the least.

Just as alarming is the apparent inability of the Auckland Transition Agency to see a conflict of interest that is staring them in the face.  Ironically, Momentum’s business proposal even said “Momentum has no conflicts of interest to declare.”

Hang on. Michelle Boag is on the public record as an unpaid campaign adviser to the Right’s mayoral candidate John Banks.  And she features in the bid (see p12 of the proposal), and will be vetting people who should be politically neutral public servants to run the super city. And you are telling me that didn’t ring alarm bells at the Auckland Transition Agency?

How many Michelle Boags are there in this town? Surely this is the same Michelle Boag who is a former President of the National Party. Who recruited John Key and installed a new generation of National Party MPs. Who had the Winebox Inquiry filmed under false pretences and was found by Sir Ronald Davison to have deceived the Commission of Inquiry and found guilty of contempt.

More unintentional irony from Momentum’s business proposal to the ATA:

The (recruitment) process must be objective and able to reduce any perception of bias; transparent, independent, fair and equitable.

How is that transparency and fair thing going now?

I asked Rodney Hide about this in Question Time today. He didn’t seem to know about the discrepancy between Boag’s public statements and the tender documents. He advised me to ask the Auditor General to investigate. So I will.

If John Key wants Aucklanders to have any confidence in his Government’s handling of the Auckland Super City, he needs to tell Hide to pull the Auckland Transition Agency into line, to cancel the contract with Momentum and re-open the tender process.

The whole process is looking more and more like a giant exercise in handing out jobs to the National Party’s mates. National Party ideologue and favoured pollster David Farrar is being paid by the Department of Internal Affairs to poll on the super city. (Hat tip The Standard.)  The third super city bill has Rodney Hide appointing the directors to the boards of the corporate entities being set up to run Council operations.


Snouts in trough

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 14th, 2010

The Herald on Sunday reveals former National Party president Michelle Boag has picked up the contract to recruit the third tier of executives for the Auckland super city while also being an unpaid campaign adviser for John Banks’ mayoral campaign.

Welcome to the Auckland super city. That Boag and Banks say in the story they can’t see any conflict of interest says it all. Snout wedged so firmly in  trough all perspective has been lost.

How on earth can Boag be expected to recruit what should be a politically independent public service to run the super city when she is also running the election campaign of the Right’s mayoral candidate?

Says Boag:

My networks are such that I had to be very careful about keeping me away from that tender process. I can’t help knowing the people that I know. I have very good relationships with a great number of people. The trouble for me is I’m a well-connected person.

I’m not saying Boag shouldn’t ever work in this town because her networks are so good, nor that she personally interfered in the tender process. But to work for the Banks campaign while recruiting the executives who are going to run the Council’s business? Please.

To say it is not a good look is an under-statement. It is about as damaging to the super city’s democratic legitimacy as the fact that Rodney Hide is going to hand pick the boards of directors of the commercial entities that are going to run the bulk of the Council’s business in secret, instead of letting the newly elected Council appoint them.

Aucklanders could be forgiven for asking whether this is a backdoor way of funding Banks’ campaign. Michelle Boag gets a million-dollar contract from the super city, and in return she works for Banks for free. With Transition Agency chair Mark Ford her former client, Agency board members Rob Fisher and John Waller fellow members of the Eden Park Trust Board, and Jenny Shipley a fellow principal in her recruitment company, this is getting way too cozy.

I want to know if there was an open public tender. I’ll have an Official Information Act request on Mark Ford’s desk shortly asking for the documents relating to the tender process that led to Michelle Boag getting the recruitment contract, including the evaluation criteria.


Waitakere Ranges at risk – thanks Paula

Posted by Phil Twyford on February 12th, 2010

The third super city bill has a nasty hidden sting that could put the Waitakere Ranges at risk.

Submissions close midnight tonight so there isn’t much time left. But if you love the Waitakere Ranges, or live out West, you might like to make a last-minute submission on this sneaky attempt by Paula Bennett and the National Party to undo all the years of work by Westies to protect the Ranges.

These two clauses in the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill could gut the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act and see Aucklanders lose control over Waitakare’s prized Centennial Park:

1. Section 45 of the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill sets up a spatial plan for the super city to replace the old growth and development strategy which was subject to the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area. The new spatial plan will not be subject to the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act and this opens the door for the super council to ignore its protections.

2. Schedule 3 of the bill repeals s77 in the Local Government Act which vests ownership of Centennial Park in the Auckland Regional Council. The super city bill repeals it, instead of simply switching the ownership from the ARC to the new Auckland Council.This could open the door for nationalisation of the Park as has been advocated by National MPs, and the loss of local control.

My colleague David Cunliffe has described it as a “disgusting attack by stealth on the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area”. Lynne Pillay: “We worked so hard to get the Waitakere Ranges Heritage Area Act passed. The National Party and Paula Bennett never supported it and now they are using the super city bill as a backdoor to gut the Act.”

I urge you to share this information with friends who may be interested, and if you can, make a submission. You can make your own submission on line.  (Make sure your internet browser is set to accept pop-ups). If you have problems with the on line form, send your submission to me phil.twyford@parliament.govt.nz and my office will lodge it for you.