Nat MPs distancing themselves from Super City

29 comments on “Nat MPs distancing themselves from Super City ”

• Comments are now closed

1. principessa 1

   22 May 2009 at 3:26 pm

   Hey hey, ho ho, Rodney Hide has got to go…
2. The Sprout 2

   22 May 2009 at 3:30 pm

   if there’s one thing you can rely on National MPs for it’s self-interest.
   once a few more like Hutchison wake up to the fact that this government is going to end an awful lot of their parliamentary careers on a VERY sour note, all hell’s going to break loose.
   best wishes Mr Key.
   • Daveski 2.1

     22 May 2009 at 4:46 pm

     I agree. Labour MP’s are always much more interested in their constituents, like that nice man Taito Philip Field.

     Funnily enough, as has been pointed out, Labour got hammered for the last major changes to local govt in Auckland but there’s never been a groundswell wanting to go back to the way it was.
     • The Sprout 2.1.1

       22 May 2009 at 4:50 pm

       there also wasn’t a bloody great protest march in response either.
3. John Dalley 3

   22 May 2009 at 3:35 pm

   While i am in principle a supporter of a Super City, my distrust of Rodney Hide and therefore National is such that i would not trust a deathbed confession if it was made by Rodney.
   The haste in which an alternative plan was decided on suggest to me that Rodney& John Key already had the plan they wanted and where just waiting for the commissions report to be tabled to get it out of the cupboard
   The people of Auckland have a right to know the finer details of how the city of “Greater Auckland” will be micro-managed. As they say, the devil is in the detail.
   Trust Rodney, Yeah Right!
4. Zaphod Beeblebrox 4

   22 May 2009 at 3:37 pm

   Its going to be very difficult to include them against their will. If Labour promised to give them a referendum if they were elected to government, National would be under immense pressure to match them.
   A way out may be to leave them out initially with a view to including them when they are ready.
5. Rich 5

   22 May 2009 at 3:39 pm

   Those rural areas won’t get out of it. They’ve been hauled in to up the number of NACT votes and ensure the chosen mayoral candidate wins.
6. The Sprout 6

   22 May 2009 at 4:37 pm

   may they burn brightly
   • Macro 6.1

     22 May 2009 at 8:03 pm

     Hey sprout I’m one of those rural voters in Rodney! Key’s electorate to be precise! I want none of the super city! It has NOTHING to offer me. No transport, No water, No sewage, I can’t subdivide even If I wanted to, because Aucklanders want to drive past my place in the weekends and see green fields. For this I am being offered the chance to pay another bunch of money on top of every other charge to set up a cartel of “grey suits” who will have no affinity to my needs. As for the residents at the beach in Matheson Bay.. What does belonging to the Super City have to offer them?? Its madness. I’m not sure there will be many in Rodney that would be happy with the “Super City!
     Key didn’t get my vote in the last election – and he sure as hell won’t get it next time round either! !”
     • the sprout 6.1.1

       22 May 2009 at 8:43 pm

       having to put up with Rodney Council and John Key as your MP, you’ve really struck the governance jackpot there Macro. My condolences. Having said that and despite the woes of RCC, I can appreciate why being subsumed by the Supershity would seem pretty pointless.
       • Macro 6.1.1.1

         22 May 2009 at 10:40 pm

         And to add insult to injury! they add John Law as one of the Cartel! How mean is that! A failed RCC mayor to “oversee” the Shity! What sort of credentials is that!
7. Anthony Karinski 7

   22 May 2009 at 6:27 pm

   There’s an interesting parallel to this in Britain. Labour, according to some opinion polls, are now neck and neck with the Liberal Democrats. The upcoming election may see them relegated to third party status. With Britain’s undemocratic electoral system that may be the final nail in the coffin for the old giant.

   What took Blair and Brown more than a decade to accomplish, Key, with the help of Hide may do in one term. The rollback to the 80’s blitzkrieg modus operandi of ramming through policy without popular mandate is not going to fare well. Remember it was only back in the 2002 election when National got less than 21% of the votes. NZ First looked like a real centre-right threat then and together with ACT and UF formed a bigger block in parliament than the “official” opposition. If a new Winston Peters steps forward, possibly someone from within National, and forms a rabble rousing populist party around his or her personality the “Labour+ National” party may fade into third party status. Whether that’s a good thing I don’t know, but people are waking up to the fact that Key and Douglas seem to favour the same undemocratic approach to governing.
8. Cossack 8

   22 May 2009 at 6:48 pm

   If Paul Hutchison believes what he is saying he should cross the floor and vote against the Government, or he should resign.
9. Dan 9

   22 May 2009 at 6:49 pm

   So it was time for a change, and the steady hand of Clark and Cullen has been replaced by steel fist of Rodney and Roger hiding behind the cheerful and likeable face of Key. They worried about Nanny state telling us what to do on the small things. Now we have a monster-mash that removes any semblance of democracy at a local level in Auckland.
   The Nats are Act in drag. No wonder Brash is still worried about how the emails got out. It might happen again!
   Time for a change people!
10. jarbury 10

    22 May 2009 at 9:16 pm

    What is particularly fascinating is that the “rural Rodney” and “rural Franklin” areas are probably some of the strongest National voting corners of the entire country. I know that John Key took around 70% of the vote in Helensville, the highest to any candidate in any electorate. National’s margins in Hunua and Port Waikato were right up there with Helensville.

    National realises that there are a LOT of voters they could lose by not playing this right. I think we could expect the boundaries of the super-city to be pulled right into the current metropolitan urban limits.

    Perhaps there should be a “Rural Auckland” council established for areas outside the urban part of Auckland but still within the current ARC boundaries? Hey if you did that you could even keep the ARC.

    Wow…. that’s exactly what my submission to the Royal Commission suggested.
    • Macro 10.1

      23 May 2009 at 8:42 pm

      Pulling the boundaries in is all well and good! – but that is also where the major population bases for these councils lie. Stripping Orewa/Whangaparoa/Kumeu/Huapai from Rodney would leave very few people to support a very large District. Just not feasible.
11. toad 11

    22 May 2009 at 9:44 pm

    Yep, Eddie, it looks like it’s Rodney v Rodney.
12. Zaphod Beeblebrox 12

    22 May 2009 at 11:03 pm

    If they screw them over now, every time they get their water and rates bills they will think of Hide and Key, even though they aren’t connected to Auckland’s water or sewers. They will NEVER vote National or ACT again. Maybe we should force them to stay in.
    • Macro 12.1

      23 May 2009 at 8:45 pm

      Umm rural voters don’t get water bills!! We have to rely on our own water collection – and our own sewage disposal, and stormwater. I do object to paying for regional transport tho! No bus near me!
13. ak 13

    22 May 2009 at 11:40 pm

    Yep, Toad, you’re edging onto it. This could be the tories’ S59.

    What they failed to realise is that local body politics is a whole different rhinoceros.

    To the voters’ eternal shame, the cosy incumbents are largely businessdorks, “celebrities” and cockies.

    Egotistical – but public-criticism-sensitive as all hell.

    When it comes to our local libraries, roads or halls, Massey’s Cossacks and Red Feds will unite with glee against City Hall or Wellington.

    The 1989 amalgamations were lost in the whirl of the times: but to a big demographic, 1988 is yesterday. As are our rates bills from then.

    Some young thing needs to graph our rates bills before and after the “efficiencies” of 1989. (*Important)

    And remember that graffiti, dog turd, greedy “developers”, neighbours from hades, parks, parking, paths, traffic, built environment, natural environment, mental itinerants, tinny trashcans, trashy can-can areas, canny cant-merchants, mercenary landlords, impoverished pensioners, pensioner housing, woeful widows, wastewater plants, water plants, when-can-I-water-my plants, water restrictions, restricted reserves, reserved domains, seldom-sanes, noxious weeds, protected trees, liquour laws, liquorice laws, liquorish louts, knicker-lickers, panty-sniffers, part-time council kickers, RMA, arbour day, have your say!, affected parties, party affiliations, consultation, remediation, mitigation, litigation, all-due consideration, masturbation, mayors, Laws, laws, by-laws, in-laws and all-fours, mayoral receptions, misconceptions, citizens awards, welcome new kiwis!, kiwi protection, image erection, Laws, referenda, gender agenda, mascara tempera, -aitch!, ward boundaries, impounded cattle, roaming dogs, unregistered dogs, unchipped dogs, chippies and hot-dogs, crowing cocks, cocky cockies, dogged individuals, potholes, poseurs, and hand-held hoses will be with us always.

    Memo to the Sunny-Bill govt: take away our cathartic outlet and community focus, and reap the whirlwind in 2011.
    • Lew 13.1

      24 May 2009 at 12:31 am

      Bravo, ak. Needs to be read aloud for full effect.

      L
      • charlie 13.1.1

        24 May 2009 at 8:44 am

        Bravo, ak. Needs to be read aloud for full effect

        Seconded Lew, read it out loud and made the SO lol, well done ak.

        captcha, outrages tories.
14. bilbo 14

    23 May 2009 at 8:15 am

    “Some young thing needs to graph our rates bills before and after the “efficiencies’ of 1989. (*Important)”

    Seconded ………. why the feck are all sides so muted on what effect this will have on Aucklanders rates bills through the next few decades.
15. randal 15

    23 May 2009 at 11:41 am

    time for the Maori party to step up and stop this nonsense now
16. randal 16

    23 May 2009 at 11:43 am

    it is time for the maori party to step up and stop this nonsense now.
    if they have any sense of tradition and due process and consultation then they will bring this ghastly land grab to a grinding halt right now.
    • Lew 16.1

      24 May 2009 at 12:34 am

      randal, how?

      Nat (58) plus ACT (5) plus United Future (1) = 64, that’s plenty.

      L
      • felix 16.1.1

        24 May 2009 at 12:52 pm

        Hmm, Act don’t actually vote as a party block any more though, do they?

        I wonder if there’s any chance of any of the “liberal” MPs from “the “liberal party” opposing their dear leader’s new love affair with Big Government…

        Nah, silly me. For a moment there I imagined that they actually believe all that tripe they spew.
17. Margaret 17

    23 May 2009 at 8:32 pm

    Yes it was the Nasty Nats and Rodney who started calling Labour Nanny State, now we have an authoritarian Daddy State,– trying to tell us”You will do as you are told till the rights to you are sold!”.
18. Dan 18

    23 May 2009 at 8:33 pm

    I love this promise of efficiency. The Nats privatised electricity for efficiency even when there was considerable doubt in their own ranks. If I remember, Bradford’s bill to privatise passed by one vote. Marlborough still blames Doug Kidd whose vote went the wrong way, and many present Nats might find the same sort of backlash with this nonsense.
    I have no problem with a super-city, but not Rodney’s version. The Royal Commission’s view should not have been put on the scrap heap.

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS