Red Alert

Posts Tagged ‘Auckland Super City’

Key stumbles and bumbles on Auckland

Posted by Phil Twyford on April 27th, 2010

John Key was unimpressive in question time today. He seemed unable to defend his Government’s policy on Auckland. Jet lag after Gallipoli maybe? Missing his hoodie? Or just a hard policy to defend?

Following his major speech yesterday setting out our plan for Auckland, Phil Goff asked the Prime Minister some straightforward questions that Aucklanders are asking:

Hon Phil Goff: Why is he giving the Auckland Transport Agency, which is unelected, the right to pass by-laws, but is denying that power to the elected local boards?

Hon John Key: Because we think it makes sense for the agency to be able to set some initial parameters in relation to the local boards, and that is because, over time, they need to reflect those communities. As that system plays out, I am sure that the Auckland Council will set new policies there.

What?!  It didn’t get much better. Phil went on to ask:

Why is he imposing council-controlled organisations on Auckland City when every other city in this country is able to make that decision for itself?

Why is the Government repealing the requirement for Auckland City to get the consent of Aucklanders by referendum before any privatisation of the Ports of Auckland can take place?

Why is the Prime Minister ignoring the advice given to him by four Government departments, the Auckland mayors as a group, the Auckland chamber of commerce, and the vast majority of submissions to the select committee that the transport agency should be an in-house operation and not one that is passed across to a commercial council-controlled operation?

You can see Key’s answers here in text and in video. What do you think of them?


Goff: Labour will give power back to Auckland

Posted by Phil Twyford on April 26th, 2010

Phil Goff set out today what Labour will do to fix the mess National has made of the Auckland super city.

He said Labour will give the power back to Aucklanders to decide what parts of the new city should be run on commercial lines and what should be run in house.

We will restore to Auckland the power to make its own decisions about the structure and powers of the seven council-owned companies that will manage three-quarters of the rates revenue provided by Aucklanders.

Why shouldn’t Auckland decide what goes into its council controlled companies, and what stays out? That’s what happens in every other city in New Zealand.

Four government departments including Treasury advised against setting up the transport agency as a council controlled company and proposed running it in-house instead. They said the Government’s plan lacked transparency and accountability to the ratepayers.

Labour will restore transparency and accountability to the Auckland Council.

We will give the power back to Aucklanders through their elected council to determine what structures they want for Council operations.

Phil made it clear Labour will swing the pendulum back towards local communities, enshrining the decision making powers of local boards in law.

The fundamental difference we will make is we will trust Auckland more, and work with Auckland to sort out the balance between the super council, the local boards and the organisations that control assets like water and transport.

Labour will give power back to local communities.

Labour will legislate to enshrine real decision making powers for local boards.

And we will review the ward boundaries and talk to communities about whether single rather than multi member wards would better ensure that all communities are fairly represented and feel their voice is being heard.

And on privatisation he had this to say:

A real concern I have about the government’s plans is that it is a set up for the ports, airport shares, and even the water system to be sold.

Rodney Hide would be happy to see them sold. He actually admits it, while John key and Bill English tell that to their party members and mates in private but tell a different story in public.

They are sweeping away the legal safeguards against privatisation. The third super city bill repeals the requirement to hold a referendum before the Ports of Auckland can be sold.

The ARC has warned that by transferring Auckland’s assets to council owned companies a future council could sell off strategic assets like the port or the airport shares without even consulting the public as is currently required under the Local Government Act.

Put that alongside the Government’s plan to turn over our water infrastructure to private companies for up to 35 years and you can see the clear privatisation agenda.

Labour believes Aucklanders don’t want to see their community assets sold off.

Labour will restore and strengthen the safeguards in law against the sale of assets.

We will legislate to ensure all Aucklanders have a say in a binding referendum before strategic assets can be sold.

He also signalled that the next Labour-led Government will work hand in hand with the Auckland Council to tackle Auckland’s big challenges.

Labour will make the decisions together with Auckland and we will back those decisions with the resources they need.

Whether it is building a 21st century transport network, or working to end poverty in Auckland, the next Labour-led government will work alongside the Auckland Council in a genuine partnership.

I will invite the Mayor of Auckland to attend Cabinet committees for significant decisions relating to Auckland.

That will give Auckland, where a third of New Zealanders live, a direct voice around the cabinet table before a decision is made rather than simply imposing decisions made without adequate Auckland input.

Not the reported views of Aucklanders as interpreted by the Wellington bureaucrats, but the democratically elected mayor, directly influencing the big decisions on Auckland as they are made in Cabinet.

You can read the whole speech here.


Super city a crime says Herald

Posted by Phil Twyford on April 21st, 2010

NZ Herald - Crime


Hide: super city criticism a media beat up

Posted by Phil Twyford on April 15th, 2010

Rodney Hide thinks opposition to the super city is a media beat up. From a speech to a business and investment seminar today:

One aspect of the new governance structure that has come in for some criticism, was the Auckland Transition Agency proposal for Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) under the new Auckland Council. The criticisms have been more in the mould of a political campaign run by the media, than a considered analysis of the issues, most of which have been substantially misrepresented.

Hilarious. If the Minister talked to some real Aucklanders, or read the polls, he’d know the level of discontent about his handling of the super city including the vexed issue of council-owned companies runs deep and wide.

Len Brown responded that ‘opposition to the new super-city structure is well-founded, and not simply a media campaign as claimed by Local Government Minister Rodney Hide’.

The government only has itself to blame for that and the widespread concerns. The super-city plan put forward by the Royal Commission has been substantially altered, and many in the Auckland region now fear for their local voice in the new structure.

The government has made a number of major mistakes including:

• It needed to put into legislation clear roles, functions and responsibilities for the local boards. It refuses to do so.

• It should not have legislated for council-controlled organisations. These should have been left to the new council to decide and establish.

• It should not have established a powerful transport CCO when that will be a key issue for the new Mayor and Council to grapple with.

• Having bulldozed ahead with the CCOs, the government should be giving the existing councils a say on the directors. It refuses to do so.

Failing to listen to the concerns of Aucklanders is the reason for widespread discontent – not any media campaign. Mr Hide and the government still have time to amend the third Bill on the super-city currently before Parliament. If they did so, they might find some of the opposition might lessen.


Will the Minister explain?

Posted by Phil Twyford on April 7th, 2010

Marty G at The Standard helpfully points out a $2295 -a-head conference on “Local Government Asset Management” where Local Government Minister Rodney Hide is the keynote speaker.  Later in the morning after Mr Hide’s speech is a session for which the blurb reads:

Privatisation is a contentious issue due to amendments in the Local Government Act 2002. Water will be the first area of local government which will move towards privatisation but what about the rest of local government controlled functions? What will the impacts be on asset management if more functions become commercialised in the future?

Hang on, I thought there was no privatisation agenda for local government?

That’s right, I remember.

The Government’s third super city bill repeals the requirement for a majority in a binding referendum before the Ports of Auckland can be sold.

The move to transfer 75% of the super city assets into council owned companies will exempt them from the Local Government Act requirement for public consultation before strategic assets can be sold.  So after the two year moratorium designed to ensure no asset sales before the 2011 election, a future Auckland Council could flog off the airport and ports shares without consulting the public.

The Government’s announced plans to free up the safeguards against privatisation of water will allow private ownership of water infrastructure for up to 35 years.

Maybe the Minister will use his conference speech to explain whether these moves amount to a privatisation agenda?


Super city appointment not without risk

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 26th, 2010

I thought carefully before criticising the Government’s appointment of Doug McKay as the interim CEO of the new Auckland Council.  There is nothing wrong with people moving between the private and public sectors, and on the strength of media reports Mr McKay has considerable experience as a corporate CEO.

But given the widespread public concern about the Government’s  handing over of 75% of Council operations to council owned companies run by hand picked business appointees, I would have thought this was an opportunity to reassure Aucklanders that corporatisation wasn’t the game plan.

Mr McKay has no public sector, or local government experience, and said this morning that when he became CEO of Sealord it didn’t matter that he didn’t know anything about the fishing industry as the organisation was full of people with industry experience he would rely on. I am not convinced by this argument and if it is what persuaded the Government, that just illustrates the poverty of their approach to the super city.

This isn’t simply a big corporate restructuring job. The creation of the Auckland Council is making a constitutional change to our system of government. It is intensely political, and Aucklanders are understandably sensitive about the loss of their democratic rights under John Key’s hyper-centralised and corporatised set up.

The partnership between public servants and politicians is how we make the machinery of democracy work. The risk with Mr McKay’s appointment is that the chief public servant of Auckland comes to the job at a very delicate time with no experience of that tradition.


Taxation without representation

Posted by Phil Twyford on March 24th, 2010

You have to wonder about the damage the super city fiasco is doing to National and ACT.

Both parties pride themselves on fiscal responsibility, and accountability. But with the super city they have created a monster that reflects neither principle.

The latest twist is Auckland City’s claim that the Government’s CCOs will incur tens of millions of dollars in taxes that the Auckland ratepayer will have to pick up. Bernard Orsman has the story in this morning’s Herald. Did the Government consider this when it announced its plan to corporatise 75% of Council operations in council-owned companies?

Local Government Minister Rodney Hide and Revenue Minister Peter Dunne put out a face saving statement this morning saying “no decisions have yet been made on taxation issues” for the Auckland Council, yet the third super city bill makes it clear that all of the CCOs except transport will pay tax. They go on to say while some current non-taxable activities will become taxable, tax losses will be offset against taxable income in the future. So we are going to set up a bunch of council-owned companies but we will run them at a loss to avoid paying tax?

At the very least it is another example of Hide’s rushed and shoddy process. See our exchange in question time on this. And more in the general debate.

Add to the possible tax liability a $34 million bill for consultancy fees and executive salaries at the Auckland Transition Agency, and that is only for the last few months.

And the fact that most Aucklanders believe their rates will go up as a result of the super city.  Ditto water rates.

Add to that Auckland Council’s share of the $11.5 billion Price Waterhouse Coopers reckon it will cost to fix to fix the leaky homes crisis.

The poor old Auckland ratepayer is getting well and truly stiffed. By the man who likes to refer to himself as the “Minister of Ratepayers”.  Last year Rodney Hide told an audience “…given how these Councils have been run I would be surprised if there wasn’t some ability to make savings.”  He doesn’t talk about the cost savings of the super city much these days.

But what Aucklanders find really galling about the Government’s super city is that while they are having their pockets picked, the Government is sticking masking tape over our mouths: we’ve been given no choice about the super city, the CCOs will lock us out of 75% of the Council’s operations, and the local boards won’t even have the power to make by-laws.

That is taxation without representation.


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.


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.


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.