Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Sorry Rodney, it doesn't answer the question

Rodney Hide attempts to answer concerns about the Auckland super-city in the NZ Herald.

He makes a minor mistake:

"Instead of .... eight local transport entities.... there will be one of each." No Rodney, there will be three core transport infrastructure agencies, Ontrack and the NZ Transport Agency will both be responsible for the railway and the motorway networks. ARTA is the single local transport entity that is meant to co-ordinate local road network development. So no material change here.

However, more fundamentally he evades the core issue.

What should be the role of local government in Auckland?

The government's answer appears to be "whatever local government wants it to be".

ACT's policy appears quite contrary to this.

It states:
  • Local government will be required to shed its commercial activity, thereby eliminating the need to separate regulatory and commercial functions between local and regional councils.
  • Roads and piped water will be supplied on a fully commercial basis.
  • Abolish the local government power of general competency.
  • Require councils to focus on their core functions.
  • Ensure there is much greater scrutiny of regulations that undermine property rights.
  • Promote contracting out of many council services.
  • Lower the cost of complying with the Resource Management Act and other regulatory regimes.
  • Review the two-tier structure of local government.
It's a lot less than I'd want, but it's a start, but all we are seeing is the last point.

So why is Rodney Hide doing next to nothing to implement ACT policy on local government?

It isn't good enough.

If an ACT Minister of Local Government is just going to maintain the Labour/Alliance/Green policy - then what was the point?

5 comments:

Sally said...

Very clever ploy of Key to give Rodney this portfolio. Shuts him up as he is too busy wading through all the crap.

But that is no excuse for Rodney to be PC and abdicate from Act's policies.

Rachel said...

He isn't there to implement ACT policy you fool - if he did he'd be sacked. He is there to implement what the National Government agrees to in cooperation with ACT, United and the Maori Party. Do you seriously think Peter Dunne is implementing United policy as Minister of Revenue? Like their policy on income splitting?!

Get a grip.

I'd also point out that One Auckland absolutely is ACT policy - Rodney campaigned on it heavily near the end of 2007 and start of 2008.

libertyscott said...

OK, so implementing policy that is contrary to ACT policy is ok then?

Why vote for the National led government when it is implementing Labour/Alliance/Green policy on local government?

He is still evading the core question - the answer which appears to be "what Labour, the Alliance and the Greens said".

Great!

Richard McGrath said...

Rachel, if he's not there to implement ACT policy, he should resign his portfolio. If he's not interested in pushing his party's policies, why should anyone vote ACT next time around?

Anonymous said...

If you think that Auckland is going to have reduced bureaucracy then I'd be very worried by this

"The Commission recommends that the Auckland Council works closely with consumers, the industry and central government agencies to develop an energy strategy that also addresses climate change issues."

Sounds like an excuse to meddle in issues beyond their competence and, like Chch demonstrated recently, a potential licence to try and dictate individuals' energy choices.

There are plenty of people doing this at a local, regional and national level. Why add another with no expertise.

insider