Auckland's leaders share their visions - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Engineering a smooth transition - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Submissions call for next supercity bill - Rodney Times 16/06/2009

EDITORIAL: The big picture - Wanganui Chronicle

Editorial: Councils need to show foresight - The Dominion Post 15/06/2009

Putting the local back in Auckland’s local government - North Shore Times 16/06/2009

Mayor criticises super-city design - Monday, 15 June 2009  Howick and Pakuranga Times

Rate rise for North Shore - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

$1m savings predicted if supercity goes ahead - North Shore Times 16/06/2009

Freedom is in the air - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

David Wilson: Time to move with a collective purpose - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Grant Frear: Better, worse, or more of the same? - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

CBD vital part of new Auckland - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Bernard Orsman: Unified approach would come to the aid of party central - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Alex Swney: Waterfront is Auckland's shop window to the world - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Charles Finny: A capital viewpoint - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Forum seeks a leading role - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Brand gains strength - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Fran O'Sullivan: Cash in Auckland's attic - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Getting serious about big events - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Players in Auckland's economic future - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Kaaren Goodall: Courage and belief will build vibrant, vital city - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Geoff Smith: Franklin deserves a community voice on the Super City - Tuesday Jun 16, 2009

Auckland enters 16 month transition to Super City -Source: Chapman Tripp

Mayors angry Key called Banks 'super mayor'

Joel Cayford: City will be truly super if it builds on regional promises

Labour upset at John Key's reported endorsement of John Banks

Attempt to hoodwink older people is disresptful

Community unconvinced by super city plan

Public Meeting on Auckland ‘Super City’ Reforms

Workshops show how to make a submission

The solution for Auckland must be workable - LGNZ

Minister confirms Local boards will be toothless

Government must get Auckland right

A major move ignores public opinion

Waterfront agency needs rethink 

The latest news release by the Rodney District Council includes an article on the councils position regarding the Super City plans.

Read the whole article here...

TV3 coverage here....

Read more....

Click here to view....

Prime Minister John Key has given an assurance that small grass-roots projects will not fall victim to the Auckland Super City structure.

It followed concerns raised yesterday by Paula Bennett, the Minister of Social Development, that "real grass-roots" projects funded by local councils could be jeopardised under the new structure of local boards.

Mr Key said the Government was still working out the powers and roles the new boards would have. However, Ms Bennett had raised a "legitimate debate" and would have an active role in determining the functions the local boards would have.

Read more.....             

Social Development Minister Paula Bennett has taken the rare step of publicly voicing concern about the Government's plans for Auckland's Super City, saying there is a risk grassroots community projects will be lost under the new local boards.

Yesterday Prime Minister John Key also indicated he was willing to move on the controversial proposal for eight of the 20 councillors on the new council to be elected by the wider Auckland population rather than by local wards.

Ms Bennett said she believed the Government had its proposals for change "80 per cent right" and she fully supported the unitary Auckland Council and structure. However, "real grassroots" projects paid for by councils were at risk under the new local boards because there was as yet no provision for funding that could be used for that purpose.
"What we haven't got right is the link between that [Auckland] council and what happens at the grassroots community level. As Minister of Social Development, I'm hugely concerned about what's happening so successfully locally - whether in Manukau, North Shore or Waitakere - that we lose the essence of those social programmes, the social cohesion that is happening because we are devolving everything up."
Under the new structure, 20 to 30 "local boards" will be set up beneath the Auckland Council to replace local councils and community boards.
They would be charged with roles such as dog control and liquor licensing, but would be unable to raise revenue. Their main role will be an advocacy role to try to secure funding for spending in local areas.

Ms Bennett had raised the issue in Cabinet yesterday and intended to further it with Local Government Minister Rodney Hide and other ministers. She agreed with critics that the boards did not have enough "teeth".
"I think we've got a bit more thinking to do on how we keep that real local stuff there. It just seems from our first take on this we haven't given that sort of control to those boards and maybe we need to have a look at it."

A spokeswoman for Mr Key said he had known Ms Bennett would raise her concerns publicly.
"The minister was not criticising the Super City or the boards - she was expressing a view on the powers and responsibilities of the boards and that's a matter Cabinet has yet to decide on."
At his post-Cabinet press conference yesterday, Prime Minister John Key said the "scope" of the local boards and the issue of whether councillors should be elected at large were the main issues of concern among the public.

Yesterday, Waitakere Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse released a telephone survey commissioned from Phoenix Research which showed only 16 per cent of those surveyed favoured the Government's proposal of 20 to 30 local boards.
In the survey of 401 residents in Waitakere, two-thirds favoured the six local councils recommendation of the royal commission instead.

The Government's proposed structure for an Auckland super city has low support in Prime Minister John Key's own electorate, according to poll results released today.
The survey of west Auckland residents shows that just 19 percent in the Helensville electorate backed the Government's plan for 20 to 30 local boards as a second tier below a super city council.
Instead, 72 percent in Helensville preferred the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance's model of a second tier of six local councils to represent local interests.
The split in opinion was similar in Social Development Minister Paula Bennett's Waitakere electorate, with only 16 percent wanting local boards, while 67 percent backed the Royal Commission suggestion.
The poll, conducted by Phoenix Research Ltd, involved telephone calls to 401 residents in the Waitakere City Council area.
A total of 34 percent said they were in favour of the Government's proposal, while 47 percent were not.
Deputy Mayor Penny Hulse said the poll results sounded a warning to Local Government Minister Rodney Hide and the Government.
"Make no mistake, the people of Auckland are waking up to exactly what this means and they don't like it."
She said the Royal Commission spent 18 months and millions of dollars coming up with its recommendations.
"These were rejected within days by Rodney Hide," she said.
"We'd like to see his analysis for how 20 to 30 powerless little boards could work and deliver better democracy or better services."
Last week, residents in both Waitakere and Manukau city mounted protests against the Government's plan.

Prime Minister John Key has defended Social Minister Paula Bennett speaking out over her concerns about the Auckland super city.
He said Ms Bennett was making comments about the scope of local boards and that was a "legitimate debate that needs to be had".

Ms Bennett told reporters she thought the Government did not have the super city "quite right".
"I am a huge supporter of the unitary council and what we are doing there, a huge supporter of moving Auckland forward and I just think we are hearing what the community are saying about some of those smaller groups and what we need to do there and the local boards."

She said she wanted to make sure the community has "got a voice, got to make sure that local stuff that is happening locally is happening".
The local voice would not be lost as long as the Government kept "what's happening on the ground as really important".
"My Westies are pretty fiery and like you to know what they think."

Mr Key said the Government had made it clear its preferred structure was a super city with 20 to 30 local boards.
"But the scope of those boards and what they actually do has not been determined at this time."
Ms Bennett will have an "active voice" in deciding that, Mr Key said.

He said the Government would make a decision on local boards "soon".
"Certainly some of what they (boards) will do will be small community programmes and social programmes which are very important to communities.
"Our intention is to make sure we have a good operating structure in Auckland."
Different areas in Auckland have different views of what is important and "making sure that we preserve what people think is very important in their community is very important to the Government".

Labour leader Phil Goff said there were "enormous problems" with the Government's proposal for the super city.
"Labour's position is broadly to support the concept of having a strong regional government to deal with the regional issues. I think that is really important.
"But to keep the local in local government you have to have a ward system, that is the only fair way of ensuring fair and balanced representation across the city."
He said having 30 community boards with no power was totally irrelevant, "you need six or maybe a dozen quite strong local councils under the region wide Auckland council".

Mr Goff said he wanted to see the Maori seats "in some form".
"We are relaxed about having Maori seats provided every vote is equal in New Zealand."

Meanwhile, Local Government Minister Rodney Hide said some Auckland residents' water bills might go up under a new user-pays system.
"This may create some challenges to the public acceptability of the reforms," Mr Hide said in a Cabinet paper released by the Government.

An estimated 1,000 people marched through central Henderson today to protest against the Government’s model for Auckland governance.

Rally organisers, Community Coalition for Auckland: Voices of Tamaki Makaurau, say the event demonstrated the growing groundswell of opposition to the proposed model the Government is fast-tracking through the legislative process.

“Our protest is about demanding the right for Aucklanders to have a say about how their rates are spent and to have a meaningful say in local decisions that affect their lives and the lives of their children,” said coalition spokesman Tony Mayow.

“This is the biggest challenge that Auckland has faced in its entire history. It’s inconceivable that 1.4 million people are not able to have a say in it!”

The coalition is calling for the Government to use the original Royal Commission report as the basis for any future decisions on the governance of Auckland’s ‘Super City’.

“We reject the undemocratic ‘Rodney Hide’ version of the report that the Government has presented as a done deal to the people of Auckland,” Mr Mayow said.

“The Government’s model for Auckland regional governance will strip away democracy and replace the effective partnerships between councils and community with voiceless, powerless local boards that have no access to funding or resources.

“We are not opposed to the idea of being part of a ‘super-city’ and recognise that if it’s done well, in consultation with the community, it will bring some benefits. But change has to work for all the people of Auckland, not just for Rodney Hide and the interests of big business.”

Joint coalition spokesperson Iris Donoghue says the Government’s model is at odds with what is happening internationally.

“The rest of the world is embracing the power and effectiveness of local initiatives and local democracies. Rodney Hide’s model concentrates power in the hands of a few and harks back to the destructive ‘Rogernomics-style’ leadership of the 1980’s. This is a backward step for New Zealand’s social, environmental and economic development,” she says.

The strong support of the Waitakere community was evident at the rally, with banners and flags supporting the coalition’s call to the Government. A wide range of community organisations and residents and ratepayers joined the coalition on the march.

Rally protester Jeremy Snowsill said it was exhilarating to witness the enthusiastic support of the community at the rally.

“There are hundreds of community initiatives delivering essential services in this city that will disappear under the new proposal. There are many of us who are outraged at this prospect and that is why we are here today.”

“The Royal Commission’s proposal took 18 months to prepare, cost millions of dollars and drew on the wisdom of both ordinary Aucklanders and governance experts. The report wasn’t perfect but it was a damn good start.  Rodney Hide’s sham version that he’s forcing on Auckland was thrown together in just three days.”

The Community Coalition for Auckland: Voices of Tamaki Makaurau also supported the iwi call for Maori representation in any Auckland governance structure and reminded the crowd of the hikoi planned for May 25th.

Further regional meetings are being held around Auckland this week, with Manukau City Council holding a public meeting at 6pm tonight at the Telstra Clear Stadium.

Hundreds of people marched through Henderson yesterday in protest at the Government's aim to introduce a Super City council for Auckland. The protest was organised by the new Community Coalition For Auckland: Voices of Tamaki Makarau, which 70 groups have joined.

Co-organiser Tony Mayow began the high-spirited rally by saying Local Government Minister Rodney Hide's reform proposals were horrendous. "You are trying to gut our city and take our voice away," said Mr Mayow, who is chairman of the Community Waitakere trust. "We have to stand up and say, 'No way are we letting you steal our city."'

Read the full article here...

Protesters crowded on to the streets of west Auckland today to demonstrate their opposition to the Government's approach to the proposed Auckland "super-city".
The protest was organised by the Community Coalition for Auckland, which said about 1000 people joined in.

Coalition spokesman Tony Mayow said the protest was about protecting the right for all Aucklanders to have their say about decisions which could affect them and their children. "This is the biggest challenge that Auckland has faced in its entire history. It's inconceivable that 1.4 million people are not able to have a say in it," Mr Mayow said.

Read the full article here...

Councillor Northey has requested the following Notice of Motion be placed on the agenda for the next meeting of the Auckland City Council:

Motion:
That Council records its concern about the following matters as issues in relation to Regional Governance reorganisation for advocacy by the City Council, preferably in concert with other councils in the region:

i) Hybrid representation, including 8 members elected at large, on the Auckland Council when single member wards for all Councillors would be preferred.
ii) Inappropriate and divisive executive powers proposed for the Mayor of the Auckland Council.
iii) Inadequate Maori participation and representation.
iv) Inadequate powers and roles for Local Boards.
v) Excessive need for the Auckland Council to involve itself in small and local issues at the expense of key and strategic decisions.
vi) Inadequate mechanisms for the Local Boards to participate in and influence the decision making of the Auckland Council.
vii) Lack of a mechanism for a political overview of the needs of the sub-regional areas currently covered by City and District Councils.
viii) Lack of mechanisms to ensure effective shared governance, partnership and collaboration between the Auckland Council and Central Government, particularly over social well-being, transport and economic development.
ix) Lack of mechanisms to ensure that the Auckand Council and the Local Boards actively promote social well-being effectively.
x) An excessive reliance on the private sector and Council controlled organisations to deliver essential activities and services that ought to be directly, democratically accountable.

Auckland City Council 's Agenda is here.

It has two major problems on which everyone seems to agree: firstly the need to clear up confusion on regional issues and, secondly, the need for additional money to make up for years of underfunding the region’s infrastructure.

A unitary authority as proposed by the Royal Commission on Governance with the special purpose bodies suggested might solve the first problem if it were elected democratically, but not “at large.” It must also have mandated linkages to the boards which are its subsidiaries. Funding to support ratepayer investment can only come from, or by the grace of, Central Government, so that is a matter for continuing dialogue.

When he says that Auckland is dysfunctional, the Minister of Local Government has been fed only one side of the story. There are many proven examples of huge cooperative initiatives which committed council representatives have worked hard to complete only to have them torpedoed by others who arrive or return to the scene and refuse to accept the agreed position. It is patently obvious that it is the behaviour and opinion of a very few who have misled him. These are the ones who refuse to work in a cooperative way, who set up separate offices away from their colleagues and senior staff, and who profess to be accessible to the public yet prevent anyone from even climbing the stairs without an appointment.

The Royal Commission spent $3.5m, 18 months of work and dealt with 3500 submissions to come up with a plan which delivered a solution for the wider regional matters, yet recognised the need for a subsidiary group of six reasonably sized councils. The number of submissions received represents less than 0.3% of the population of the region. Even Waitakere’s last long term plan drew five times that interest from its community.

The Commission rejected the suggestion of 20-30 community boards with good reason. It said it would be harder to implement. It chose the 6 council model because: “the departure from existing boundaries was not so marked, and natural features such as the coastline and Waitakere Ranges would potentially have been better managed within fewer entities. There would also have been fewer new offices and service centers required and less disruption to existing communities.”

That last point is a telling one. Local government should be about serving people not alienating them.

It is critical that the second tier councils have sufficient scale to actually be able to achieve things for their communities with the help of the unitary authority. They should continue to have a role in place-shaping through working with those communities.
The Ministers’ decision to have 20-30 community boards flies in the face of the Royal Commission report, and is a case of back to the future, [providing  the worst of all worlds. It is a perfect demonstration of divide and rule. At least the 27 cities and boroughs which existed at the time of the 1989 amalgamation had real autonomy. What is proposed now is nothing but a sop to Cerberus. It also confuses representation with empowerment.

 Those who worked through the 1989 re-organisation know that it took years to recover from those changes. Many of us have spent 20 years or more serving our communities and building cities as prescribed by a previous government. Now, we ask for what reason and at what cost? Yes there were efficiencies, better qualified staff and greater substance but no savings to the ratepayer because the region is growing and the work prescribed in legislation has grown. There will be no substantial savings this time round either - only an unhealthy concentration of power which is remote from the people. It may be good for the bureaucracy but it is not good for the man in the street.

While efficiencies, excellence and service must always be striven for at all levels in a business- like way, we must also work cooperatively with integrity and honesty. So I plead with the Prime Minister and the Minister of Local Government to think again before destroying the benefits of the past 20 years. Here is an opportunity to do better and we must do it together.

Twenty to thirty community boards across the region will not provide any more effective community engagement than the six local council model proposed by the Royal Commission. To be effective there has to be funding, delegation and a real willingness to listen.  Community engagement does not just happen. It must be encouraged, worked at and respected.  This applies to all levels of government.  It must be said that there has actually been no real community engagement by the Government on this suggested return to the past.

These comments have nothing to do with patch protection or safeguarding my job,  because my days are nearly over.  They are all about my despair at yet another attempt to rip the heart out of communities at great cost but for little purpose. This time, the hearts are bigger but just as vulnerable.  They have been built up through community organisations coming together with the support of the existing larger authorities to serve their distinct areas better. It would be a tragedy if all that cooperation were now lost. And to rub salt into the wound, the ratepayers of these communities must pay for their own execution!

Meantime, it must be business as usual; yet elected members and senior staff will be diverted to assist the formation of the new entities. I remember the feeling from 1989 of treading water in that period of change while trying to keep services running, being honest in not spending excessively in the dying days and trying to obtain the best deal for our ratepayers. They will expect nothing less this time round.

The timing of all this could hardly be worse. We are in a period of recession yet are intent upon causing huge uncertainty to a large professional work force. They are expected to deliver to the community at a high level while they are fearful of the future. Even the most loyal workers, the keepers of vast institutional knowledge, cannot help but question why they find themselves in this position.
We should question it too.

 

Janet Clews
Waitakere City Councillor
Former Mayor of Glen Eden
Deputy Chairman of the Watercare Shareholders’ Representative Group
(45 years in public office)

Waitakere News

TO UNDERSTAND how bad the government's decisions on Auckland's governance are, you need to understand how comprehensively they destroy the proposals made by the Royal Commission.

Don't be fooled by the government's support of one council for the region, the top line of the commission's recommendation. By rejecting many essential elements designed to make the single council work well, the government will cause the reorganisation of regional governance to fail.

And the government will get away with this because most people have only a superficial and wrong view of the commissioners' recommendations.

They believe the new Auckland Council would be just like the existing Auckland Regional Council but with a few more powers such as collecting all rates and having an elected mayor; the six locals councils would be pretty much like the existing city and district ones; and the loss of community boards would deprive them of local accountability and representation.

But, in fact, the commissioners proposed a fundamentally new model of shared governance shared within the region and shared with Wellington. To work, it would need big changes in governance processes and political culture. The commissioners, drawing on their extensive research at home and abroad, spelt out the ways to achieve that.

The Auckland Council would devise region-wide strategies and plans, hold all municipally owned assets and employ all local government staff.

The six local councils would have strong statutory powers including overseeing the delivery of services such as building consents and local road building and repairs by the Auckland Council staff in their areas.

The councils would also develop much closer relationships with communities within their boundaries to ensure their needs and views were fully represented to the Auckland Council.

The commissioners recommended many ways to achieve this. For example, each local councillor in the four cities would represent about 20,000 people and would have an office in, say, the local library in his or her ward to foster close contact. The ratio would be 9000 people per councillor in Rodney and 12,200 in Hunua.

The commissioners also identified a raft of innovative ways to ensure much better grassroots engagement. The aim would be greater local input into plans and greater council accountability to the electorate.

To get good co-ordination between the two tiers of government, each local council would negotiate a three-year governance agreement with the Auckland Council after every election. It would cover such matters as staffing levels in local councils, service delivery benchmarks and ways to resolve disputes between councils.

Moreover, members of the Auckland Council would attend local council meetings with a speaking but not a voting role. And the chairs of local councils would attend the Auckland Council on the same basis.

Thus the local councils would be a new type of representative body, one which operates within a larger local authority and which provides services and acts as an advocate for residents, ratepayers and communities of their areas, the commissioners said.

They would be a vast improvement on existing community boards. They would have real powers and, through new ways of engaging with communities, they would represent local people more effectively within the regional governance system.

The failures of existing community boards were well documented in submissions to the commission and in its own research. Many board members and citizens expressed high levels of frustration, powerlessness and dissatisfaction with the board system.


Research also showed the commissioners that systems of say 20 community boards or even 10 local councils underneath the regional council would be expensive to set up, difficult to co-ordinate and manage and deliver inadequate local representation and accountability.

Instead, the commission decided that six new-style local councils would be more effective and efficient. Moreover, they would retain a lot of the local knowledge, institutional memory and expertise in the existing city and district councils. Greater fragmentation into say 20 community boards would cause much of that to be lost.

To work well, this new model of shared governance within the region would require a new relationship of shared governance between the region and central government.

Thus, the commissioners proposed among other things a Minister for Auckland, a permanent Auckland cabinet committee, new joint management structures between the regional transport authority and the NZ Transport Agency and NZ Railways, close co-operation on economic development and a big new regional role in helping to deliver $12bn a year of central-government funded social services.

But Prime Minister John Key and Local Government Minister Rodney Hide have rejected those essential recommendations. By wiping out the local councils, they have pushed all powers up to the Auckland Council and reduced its membership from 23 and an elected mayor to 20 councillors and a mayor.

They have replaced the local councils with 20 to 30 community boards that will be virtually powerless. So far the only powers Hide and Key have identified are graffiti, dog and liquor control.

The commissioners recommended a total of 144 elected representatives on the regional and local councils and the few remaining community boards such as on Waiheke and Great Barrier (down from 254 currently). Instead, the government wants 145-170, depending on how many community boards it forces on us.

The numbers look similar but there is a vast difference between them. All 144 of the commissioners' elected representatives would have real powers but only 21 of the governments would. This is the model the government is touting as a breakthrough for grassroots democracy. Moreover, the government has come up with its plan for community boards in barely a week without any research and analysis. It has rejected out of hand the $1.5m of work and 1 1/2 years of effort by the Royal Commission

Having comprehensively rejected the model of shared governance within the region, the government also turned its back on a new relationship of shared governance with the region.

It summarily dismissed almost all the commissions recommendations such as a Minister for Auckland and a permanent cabinet committee, joint management on transport and social services and powerful waterfront development and economic development bodies.

And the government refused to endorse any estimates of cost savings that could be made by restructuring governance.

So this is the deal that Key and Hide are offering Auckland. They are telling us to change the way we govern ourselves and to change to a drastically inferior model they have dreamt up rather than the carefully researched, considered and comprehensive one the commission did.

Disclosure: Rod Oram was hired by the Commission to write a research paper on what Auckland might be like in 2060.

At Auckland City Council’s Regional Governance Committee meeting yesterday, Citizens and Ratepayers (C&R) councillors decided not to hold public meetings about Council’s position on Auckland’s regional governance.   They also voted to restrict membership of this key committee to the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and three male councillors.   In addition, the Committee refused to recognise concerns expressed by elected members across the region.
Councillor Richard Northey said he was shocked at the Mayor and C&R majority councillors voting en bloc against his sensible amendments to convene public meetings to inform the public and open up debate.
“I am very disappointed that Aucklanders can only use the council’s Ten-Year Plan hearings to let councillors know how they feel about the biggest shift in power since Auckland ceased to be the capital city in 1863.
“My attempt to expand the committee with a Community Board representative and two additional councillors was also voted down.  When I moved a general resolution seeking to work in concert with other councils in the region on shared concerns about the Government’s proposals, it was voted down before I had even finished putting the case.  Surely now is the time for the wisdom and views of other councillors and the Auckland public to be brought to bear on the Government before irreversible decisions are made.”
Councillor Cathy Casey said she was very concerned at Mayor John Banks’ statement that the Government’s proposal is “a done deal - just get on with it”.
“Mr Banks and C&R councillors are riding roughshod over the people of Auckland regarding the proposed amalgamation.  People need to be given an opportunity to persuade the Minister to give the proposed Local Boards a powerful community voice and ensure that precious local identity is maintained.”
Councillor Graeme Easte said it was vital that councils across Auckland work together and that the Auckland public makes an informed response to the inadequacies in the Government’s proposal for the region.
“The Government’s proposed structures for Local Boards and for transport coordination are ill-formed and contradictory.  Aucklanders need to be able to put them right.”
Councillor Leila Boyle said, “I find it absolutely outrageous that John Banks and the C&R majority won’t hold public meetings to help Aucklanders understand the National-led Government’s proposals for Auckland’s regional governance, and hear what citizens think about this major issue confronting the region.  I am shocked that Bank and C&R would do this after the submission process to the Royal Commission identified accountability and responsiveness as two key characteristics that Auckland’s governance needs to support the development of a successful and sustainable city and region.  Clearly Banks and C&R see responding to community concerns and being accountable to the people of Auckland as a waste of their time.  Goodness knows what will happen if they get their hands on the Auckland Council and Local Boards after the local body elections in 2010 but there certainly won’t be any listening to the people going on!”
ENDS
Contact:
Councillor Richard Northey        027 247 9662
Councillor Leila Boyle                  027 245 1440
Councillor Cathy Casey               027 474 4231
Councillor Graeme Easte             027 209 7565

A packed Council Chamber heard feedback from the Mayor on the meeting with the Minister of Local Government on the Governance of Auckland and to resolved to take any action considered appropriate as a result of the Mayor’s report. A joint press statement with the Community Coalition for Auckland: Voices of Tamaki Makaurau is below. The Mayor and Councillors were angry at the loss of 20 year's work to build the EcoCity community and determined to join the community's fight to save local democracy for Waitakere.

Community and council combine to oppose Government proposals, April 17, 2009

Waitakere community groups and Waitakere City Council have vowed to work closely together to put the local back into local government.
 
More than 300 people crammed into the council’s chamber this evening for an extraordinary meeting called to provide an update on a meeting held yesterday between the local government minister and Auckland local government representatives.
 
Waitakere Mayor Bob Harvey, who is on the Minister of Local Government’s working group, welcomed the growing groundswell of community support.
 
“This is a battle and it’s a battle that needs to be taken to the streets of Waitakere and I salute you for doing that,” he told the meeting.
 
“Democracy is at stake here.”
 
A group of community organisations, called the Community Coalition for Auckland: Voices of Tamaki Makaurau, says the government’s preferred model of one Auckland council and up to 30 local boards will see the demise of a city people have spent years building.
 
“We didn’t work for 20 years for the gains of the eco city to be stolen away from our communities,” said Tony Mayow, chair of the Community Waitakere and co-spokesperson for the coalition.
 
“After only three weeks, we now have over 70 organisations in our coalition – with over 30 others from across the region.
 
“We are not going away. We embrace meaningful change and that’s why the Royal Commission was formed. In fact we demand that the Royal Commission report be used as the basis for discussions at select committee.”
 
The coalition has organised a rally and march in Waitakere on April 22 and councillors have vowed to join them. Meet at 3pm at the Corban Estate Arts Centre.
 
For further information please contact Mayor Bob Harvey on 021 986 107 or Tony Mayow on 0211 309 794.

It's the only way we'll get democracy for Auckland.

14 MPs have been elected by voters to represent the people of the Auckland region. They are your local members of a Government which has decided to rewrite the findings of a Royal Commission report on our councils and how they should be restructured. They had no right to do it.

This Government will rush its plan into law within weeks by fast-tracking the Parliamentary process - in a way that it has not yet deigned to outline. There will be no invitation for residents to have their say about the most important issue in our history.

Take action! Write or email to all the Auckland MPs now and tell them your views - if they want to be re-elected they need to listen to the voices of the people of Auckland.

Read the complete article.