Questions in the House today pertaining to the über city:
2. Hon PHIL GOFF to the Prime Minister: Does he stand by his claim that as Prime Minister he is committed to consulting with and listening to people prior to making decisions which impact on their lives?
7. NIKKI KAYE to the Minister of Transport: What steps is the Government taking to improve Auckland transport planning and delivery?
8. PHIL TWYFORD to the Minister of Local Government: Does he agree with the Prime Minister that “for all intents and purposes” the decision on the northern boundary of the Super City has been made?
On the last issue of the Northern boundary - the suburban districts of Whangaparoa and Orewa should become part of the city. That is what the Royal Commission recommended as well. As you can see from my map in the submission to the commission (and then later to the select committee) the catchment of the Waitemata ought to rest with Auckland and the Kaipara catchment with whatever is North of the city. The assets currently held by the ARC in that Northern area can be retained as a legacy.Mike Lee was putting up a good fight over making the über city as greater as possible, but Wellsford is not really part of anything that could be described as "Auckland City". The city should be focussed on the urban area, not left to govern huge swathes of rural land as Lee advocates. I've seen arguments presented that the area left out of the city will be carved up by developers - but I'm unconvinced. It may be more likely that a Council of urbanites would sacrifice the rural areas for their agenda (be it conservation and locking it all up, or the other extreme of wholesale suburbanisation and subdivision) without the locals having any say in the matter. To me that is a more dangerous proposition. The large rural areas on either side of the city should run their own affairs and determine their own destiny rather than have Queen Street and Town Hall dictate their future. If they want to merge with the next rural council, or go it alone, so be it.