At Back Benches' Auckland special, a royal commissioner took aim at the local board structure and Len Brown got a major and surprising endorsement
It was cheek by jowl at the Northern Steamship pub last night for the Back Benches 'Super City' special in Auckland, and two moments in particular leapt out and deserve some coverage.
The quality of the turnout was as important as the quantity. Local Government minister Rodney Hide, Auckland governance select committeen chair John Carter and committee member Sue Bradford, Labour Auckland's spokesman Phil Twyford and Maori Party co-leader Pita Sharples were all on the panel. All the region's mayors, Bob Harvey, Len Brown, Mark Ball, Penny Webster and Andrew Williams were in the audience... Oh hang on, someone's missing. Yep, John Banks was AWOL. An interesting choice. As the only pro-whatever-the-government-comes-up-with-next mayor he's looking increasingly alienated these days.
But the man who made the biggest impact on the night was arguably David Shand, one of the royal commissioners who spent 18 months hearing and reading over 4000 submissions on reforming the way Auckland is run. He said simply that the design of the local boards was a "shemozzle". The commission had wanted to retain the spirit and character of the existing cities and so had recommended six local councils under the super council. The government has finally settled on 20-30 boards because, Hide says, it's heard the concerns of Aucklanders who want a say over their neighbourhoods.
A cynic might say it also maximises the power of the super council and mayor; 20-30 fragmented community boards scrapping over this local park and that lampost aren't going to challenge them in a way a city-sized council would. But it's a genuine problem stemming from the fact that the new structure is to squeeze three layers of governance into two. Now there's a regional council, city councils and community boards. With the super city taking the regional role and the government wanting to flatten the bureaucracy and focus energies on the big picture, one of the other two has to go. Do you prefer to preserve your city identity or your community identity?
Shemozzle sounds about right.
After my criticism of the New Zealand media for not noticing a decent news story if it's, say, buried in a feature, as as the case with the Herald on Sunday's revelation at the weekend that SAS members are already in Afghanistan, it happened again last night. A news story leapt up waving and screaming and everyone ignored it.
Dr Sharples was asked who he would endorse for the Auckland mayoralty, and rather than duck the question as other MPs did, he replied:
"I endorse someone who's had the experience, someone who understands the make-up of the Auckland people, and that's got to be Len Brown".
That's Brown's first major endorsement, and it comes from a member of the coalition government. Brown is essentially the Labour candidate, but just where his support will come from is one of the big political questions in Auckland.
Banks got 44,000 votes to win the Auckland mayoralty in the 2007 elections while Brown got 32,000 to win Manukau, so Brown has some catching up to do from the get-go. Can and will Bob Harvey deliver him the westie vote? Which way will the rural districts lean? The Maori vote, it seems, is headed Brown's way.
On one hand that's predictable; Banks wouldn't expect to have many fans within Maoridom. But on the other he might have hoped for a Maori mayoral candidate to split the vote. Not so, it seems, with Sharples backing Brown. And let's not forget, the Maori Party is now great mates with National which will, one way or another, back Banks. The relationship between Labour and the Maori Party has been somewhat strained, but Brown seems to be a potential bridge between the two.
I would have thought that the first major endorsement of the mayoralty race would have been news. But nothing has been reported. Still, well done to Wallace Chapman for asking the question.
Comments (10)
Bob harvey may well deliver Len Brown the Western Leader, naked, on a Raleigh 20.
as for the Wesr Ak vote...?
On the plus side I have never seen a protest march in West Ak before Rodney Hides' version of the SuperCity came up. People out West do things differently to the townies.
On the minus; we voted in Paula Bennet (protest march chant; "where's Paula" could be heard as far away as Bethels Beach apparently)
Good news that Mike Lee is looking to deputy Brown and not split the Left vote though. That should put the privateers' blood pressure up a few psi.
Extraordinary that no-one else picked this up. Mr Banks must be less than impressed. First, the Left gets its act together about a candidate; then the Maori Party (or just Mr Sharples?) back Mr Brown. Interesting times.
Interesting point Robert about whether it was a personal or party endorsement. Sharples was there as Maori Party leader, so presumably was speaking on behalf of his party. On the other hand, I wonder what Tariana thinks of his words given how much she seems to despise Labour.
... And there were several reporters at the Steamship too. None of them were rushing to phone their newsdesks.
"That's Brown's first major endorsement, and it comes from a member of the coalition government."
Had one of the MSM journos reported this, a fact-checker (do such things exist in our newspapers, and if so, do they go back to the Zoo's monkey house each night?) might have pulled them up. We don't have a coalition government in NZ. We have a minority National government, with "enhanced support agreements" from 3 parties (Act, Maori, United Future). Pita Sharples is a Minister of the Crown, but not a member of government. Hence, he is free (outside of his areas of Ministerial responsibility) to say whatever he wants/endorse whomsoever he chooses.
Good scoop, though!
You've got me there, Andrew! Bloody stickler southerners. Politically, if not constitutionally, I think my point stands, however. National and the Maori Party have an alliance and have managed the politics of it with care. The lack of rapport between the Maori Party and Labour has been remarked upon. So Sharples endorsing the left's candidate in Auckland has interesting ramifications.
As for fact-checkers, nope, haven't had them for many years. And even the subs, who have that responsibility, are outsourced and understaffed. It might just have slipped through!
The Maori Party may not be a part of "the coalition government", and it may not be accurate to claim Pita Sharples is a member of a "coalition government", but I can't agree that Pita Sharples isn't a member of the Government. I thought we got past the idea that one can be a minister outside government not too long after Winston tried to claim he was one.
I rather think Winston was a minister outside government - which was obvious every time any serious international issue came up - Goff, not Peters got to deal with it.
A Minister Outside Government (MOG) is a person with less intelligence than a housecat, who receives the pay, but does not perform the job, of a government minister. By this definition, almost all NZ Government ministers are MOGs.
Graeme:
The Maori Party may not be a part of "the coalition government", and it may not be accurate to claim Pita Sharples is a member of a "coalition government", but I can't agree that Pita Sharples isn't a member of the Government.
I'd say he's a member of the Government for some purposes (those relating to his portfolio responsibilities or those relating generally to all Ministers (such as needing the PM's sign-off to travel overseas)), but not for others (such as those relating to his role as leader of a support party). Which is why he can come out and endorse Len Brown without first clearing the matter with the PM (c.f. Paula Bennett coming out and saying "Len Brown is my man too") ... just as his party can continue to oppose the Supercity legislation in the House.
Frankly, given the Maori Party's stance on the Supercity and Len Brown's positioning as the champion of Maoridom (and Pacifica peoples), was there any other option for the Maori Party than this? I mean, consider this snippit from Brown's announcement of his candidacy:
Given the announcement last week on council Maori representation, I want to especially acknowledge Ngati Whatua and Tainui. They have a special and unique place in the history of this city. They are the kaitiaki of this place of Tamaki Makaurau. They sense a loss of place in this new structure. I want Maori around the table. The mana whenua have an increasing business presence within our city, and we need to inspire our young Maori to excel at education and take up the new economy’s opportunities. Our city will boom from tourism, and our Maori culture is our greatest asset to promote. We need to be inclusive and allow the many traditions of our indigenous culture to enrich us.
I'd say he's a member of the Government for some purposes (those relating to his portfolio responsibilities or those relating generally to all Ministers (such as needing the PM's sign-off to travel overseas)), but not for others (such as those relating to his role as leader of a support party).
I don't think I can take issue with that - Helen Clark bascially claimed the same thing about herself!
given the Maori Party's stance on the Supercity and Len Brown's positioning as the champion of Maoridom (and Pacifica peoples), was there any other option for the Maori Party than this?
Run their own candidate? Say "Len Brown's looking good, but we don't even know who all the candidates are yet"?
Winston did a lot of damage to the Labour government's election chances. How Mr Key deals with the Maori Party will shape this government and have a big influence on its chances at the next election.
Post new comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.