Thursday, 14 May 2009

Effects of Auckland uber-city already being felt

While Melissa Lee’s mouth was being firmly filled with her foot last night up in Mt Albert, down in Wellington your MPs were rushing through the first reading of legislation to enact NZ’s first fascist state in Auckland.  “One voice for Auckland!” shouted Paula Bennett, trumpeting the`new non-representative Transitional Agency created last night to harness the will of 1.4 million people into “one plan” written for them by four political appointees.  Ein volk, ein voice, ein big expensive politicised stuff up!

“One voice” might sound great if you’re a naive young thing, or it’s a voice with which you agree today, and whose profligacy you’d like to keep paying for forever. Not so great if you don’t. Not so great if you’re standing in the path of the uber-bulldozer.  Not so great at all.

The huge expense in merging eight councils into one supreme uber-city authority has still yet be costed (but the cost of the Royal Commission’s amalgamation proposal was all of $240million) and the full cost of the new bureaucracy itself to the pockets and property rights of Auckland ratepayers will only be felt once the behemoth lumbers into life next year.

Nevertheless, as Owen McShane points out in his CRMS newsletter this week, even though the bill establishing the uber-state is yet to be rammed through completely (there are still two readings to go) the effects of the amalgamation are already being felt. Call it another example of “regime uncertainty”:

    The Government's RMA Amendment Bill is intended to streamline and simplify the processing of applications for consents. And it may well do so. [Yeah right.]
    However, there is little point in streamlining and simplifying the processing of such applications if no one is making any significant applications to their council. 
I have spoken to many people who are involved in the development of land and property in the Auckland region and they are all reluctant to spend any money on preparing applications for major developments for the next few years because of the multitude of uncertainties they now face. 
For example:

  • When all the Auckland Councils disappear do their plans disappear too?
  • How long will it take to replace these plans with the new One Plan?
  • If the new staff of the Super City have to carry on with the six plans from the old cities how long will they take to get familiar with them.
  • Will the ARC be merged into the Super City or will it be dissolved and replaced with an Environmental Protection Agency?
  • When applicants finally get into the Environment Court what body of law, and whose body of law, will apply?

    The Managing Director of a major land and property developer told me bluntly that the Auckland Region was "off the company's radar" for the next few years, and he would be directing his attention to Northland or the Bay of Plenty.
Another retired Managing Director of a major land development company wrote to me in these equally blunt words:

    No subdivider in his right mind will be even contemplating any more developments in Auckland over the next 3 - 4 years.
    The market is a bloodbath for section sales and subdividers. The Super-city will only make matters much worse.
    Every subdivider I know has literally given up trying to fight all the ridiculous bureaucratic nonsense under RMA.  ...
Rates will go sky-high under the Super-city.  Everyone will be worse off except John Banks whose ego will get a great big boost when he is Lord Mayor. 
    It will be almost impossible to get anything done or approved. Resource consents for all but very large projects should be processed by the local community boards. Councillors from Papakura won't give a damn about Orewa, and vice versa. 
    I promise you, the Super-city will be one almighty, expensive shambles; very likely the downfall of the National Government.
    Sadly, most of our existing city councils have performed so badly in recent years, they deserve to be abolished !!! ...  The ARC has poked its nose into every little planning issue, instead of confining itself to regional matters.  The ARC is now a great, unnecessary bureaucracy we could well do without.  All the ARC ever does is impede progress.
    The ideal size for a local council is circa 25,000 to 75,000 people or thereabouts. Throughout NZ and over the years, councils of that size have always given the best and most economical service.  Between the head surveyor, head engineer and head planner, they know just about everything worth knowing, and can be personally accountable.

    People more expert than I am in electoral politics tell me that if it comes to a Mayoral race between John Banks and Mike Lee (the current Chairman of the ARC), Mike Lee would win. The larger the council the more it tends to be Left/Green. The first Mayor of Super London was "Red Ken". Think about it.
It would seem that one of the first tasks of the Transition Agency will be to stop Councils from initiating new projects during the transition period.
So if the Councils stop their new projects, and the private sector starts no new projects, what sector drives the economic and job growth in the Auckland Region? Will the Super-City soon become "Dole County"?

Will it?


  1. Robert Winefield14 May 2009, 14:57:00

    Ein volk, ein voice, ein neck, ein rope!

    Idiots! They will only end up shrinking Auckland. It isn't as if you ~have~ to live there. It isn't as if it's the only pretty place in NZ or the world to live.

    These fools think that industry and workers have roots. Have they learned nothing from the immigration statistics?

  2. Given that bureaucrats all over NZ must be wetting themselves at the thought of all paperwork the new metropolis will create, I think I'll invest in adult nappies.

    Might also be a good time to suggest to the dynamic force of goodness that is our beloved and noble Whangarei District Council that they start promoting the area to the inevitable disenchanted investors, developers and residents that Supercityland will create.

  3. Perhaps there will come a time when ze ein bureaucratic volk in ze ein council find there is ein hammer to auction off all their services (the ones that are valuable, such as water services) and ein central act of parliament to do away with the rest.

    In the meantime, we can only weep.

  4. Don't be too sure.

    First, you're discounting Rodders. The SuperCity rates will be set at the lowest rate of the existing cities. Have to be. That will stay a serious round of cuts for a start. Then no rates rises will be permitted.

    And - frankly - if you think Lee would beat Banks you're completely fucking nuts. Labour can't even hold Mt Albert, changes of getting the super-city, designed by Key and Rodney - ZERO!

  5. "While Melissa Lee’s mouth was being firmly filled with her foot last night up in Mt Albert,"

    For god's sake- the name of this site is "Not PC", and you're carrying on in the most PC leftist way imaginable. Give it a damn rest for chrissake.

    Melissa Lee told the unwelcome truth, (as told to her by the Police) and as is the way of those who promote the odious concept of political correctness, this unwelcome truth has made her a target. Of every leftist, and of every Libertarian, as once again the Libz demonstrate where their political roots really lie.

    Its no real issue. Just a beat up by the left and their media allies, and the Libz are too naive to leave such an odious process alone.

    Ridicule is the left's favourite tool. They use it all the time to personally destroy their opponents. Don't you know that??? How can you be such a willing participant in such a contemptible process? One that can only benefit the left.

  6. Anonymous: I'd be happier if you had any evidence for what you are saying, but there is no evidence that the rates for the supercity will be at the lowest level OR capped. If it comes then that's nice, but in the absence of anything demonstrating this what are we all to think?

    Redbaiter: You miss the point, it is not the fact of what she said (which still remains elusively odd), but the stupidity that when asked the key benefit of the motorway that she came up with that. It was brainless. THAT is what I am attacking.

    The simple answer of the benefit of the motorway could have been "it takes large volumes of traffic off of local streets, reducing congestion, pollution and noise, and improving safety". It's simple, it's what a big bypass does.

    To say it will reduce the propensity of criminals to burgle the district is simply nonsense.

  7. Redbait

    Just like the hopeless leftie scum you are, you keep trespassing. Go back to your hole. Stay there.


  8. RODBEATER, you said: "it is not the fact of what she said (which still remains elusively odd), but the stupidity that when asked the key benefit of the motorway that she came up with that. It was brainless. . . "

    Precisely, Scott.

    The silly woman went to the meeting utterly unprepared, completely uninformed about the issue she was there to "debate," so when placed on the spot instead of consulting the facts she should have had with her, she repaired instead to something she'd only half heard a few days before.

    And then when called on it, at the meeting, she pointed the blame for her silly statement at the policeman she claimed to have told her what she'd so obviously misunderstood.

    So the point is simply that she's been sown to be a complete and utter lightweight.

    Get it?

  9. Indeed Redbaiter,
    The libz have some major problems of their own with entrenched political correctness and groupthink within their esoteric little clique !


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.