Kiwiblog

The Local Government Commission (chaired by former Labour Councillor Sue Piper) has announced the final boundaries for the Auckland Council.

Major changes:

• An increase from 12 to 13 wards, with Orakei-Maungakiekie Ward splitting into separate Orakei and Maungakiekie wards.
• An increase in the number of local boards from 19 to 21, with the Hibiscus-Albany-East Coast Bays Local Board now
  a Hibiscus and Bays Local Board and Upper Harbour Local Board and the Waitakere Local Board now a Henderson-Massey Local
  Board and a Waitakere Ranges Local Board
• No change to northern boundary, but some minor changes to the southern boundary

So the overall situation is:

Wards

1. Rodney – 1 Councillor
2. Albany – 2 Councillors
3. North Shore – 2 Councillors
4. Waitakere – 2 Councillors
5. Whau – 1 Councillor
6. Albert-Eden-Roskill 2 Councillors
7. Waitemata and Gulf – 1 Councillor
8. Orakei – 1 Councillor
9. Maungakiekie-Tamaki – 1 Councillor
10. Te Irirangi – 2 Councillors
11. Manukau – 2 Councillors
12. Manurewa-Papkura – 2 Councillors
13. Franklin – 1 Councillor

The ward boundaries have been adjusted to be closer in terms of population per Councillor. 11 out of the 13 wards have a deviation of less than 11%. Rodney does “best” getting a Councillor for only 54,100 residents and “worst” is Oraeki who get a Councillor for 81,100 residents.

Local Boards

1. Rodney – 9 members from 4 sub-divisions
2. Hibiscus and Bays – 8 members from 2 sub-divisions
3. Upper Harbour – 6 members
4. Kaipatiki – 8 members
5. Devonport-Takapuna – 6 members
6. Henderson-Massey 8 members
7. Waitakere Ranges – 6 members
8. Whau – 7 members
9. Albert-Eden – 8 members from 2 sub-divisions
10. Puketapapa – 6 members
11. Waitemata – 7 members
12. Waiheke – 5 members
13. Great Barrier – 5 members
14. Orakei – 7 members
15. Maungakiekie-Tamaki 7 members from 2 sub-divisions
16. Mangere-Otahuhu – 7 members
17. Otara-Papatoetoe – 7 members from 2 sub-divisions
18. Te Irirangi – 9 members from 3 -sub-divisions
19. Manurewa – 8 members
20. Papakura – 6 members
21. Franklin – 9 members from 3 -sub-divisions

So in total we have:

• 1 Mayor
• 20 Councillors
• 149 Local Board Members
• 13 Wards
• 21 Local Boards
• 32 electoral divisions for boards

Alex Swney and Greg McKeown write in the Herald:

The commissioners have suggested that communities are better represented by two councillors rather than one, so they have gone for huge wards, more than twice the size of general electorates, with two councillors each.

If that is such a good idea, why don’t we double the size of general electorates and have two MPs per electorate? At the centre of this is a debate about parochialism – somehow two councillors will be less parochial than one. Strong local representation at all levels of local government, including the new Auckland Council, is healthy and required.

I tend to favour smaller wards with just one Councillor each. I think you get better informed decision making when voters have to select just one representative than multiple.

There’s a lot of talk about representation for communities of interest. But under the commissioners’ draft plan, the people of Paritai Drive, Orakei, and Princes St, Otahuhu, have been lumped together in a ward with 161,400 voters and two councillors.

How awful for the good people of Otahuhu.

Several on the left has expressed outrage that the Local Government Commission boundaries for the new Auckland Council has the two rural areas with a smaller population per Councillor, than the urban areas.

They blame this on Rodney Hide and the Government. But in fact what has happened is very common, as I will show.

As Parliament is the supreme legislative boday, the law is inflexible and all electorates must be within 5% of the average population or quota. That means boundaries often will cut through existing suburbs or communities of interest, to fit the 5% tolerance.

The law has always allowed more flexibility for local bodies, in recognition they are not actually always contested by party tickets (in fact few are), and that if you want to have rural areas with a dedicated Councillor, sometimes you have to exceed the 10% tolerance target. The Local Government Commission has this power, and has always had it – this is not new.

Here’s some examples.

1. The 2010 Christchurch City Council wards have an average population per Councillor of 26,803 but rural Banks Peninsula has only 8,166 while Riccarton-Wigram has 29,310
2. The 2007 Auckland City Council wards have an average population per Councillor of 22,390 but Hauraki Gulf Islands have 9,470 and Hobson 24,367. Were the Greens complaining that Waiheke had three times the voting power of Hobson No.
3. The 2007 Auckland Regional Council wards range from 85,300 for Papakura-Franklin to 110,967 for Manukau – so even existing ARC boundaies have Papakura-Franklin with 25% more Councillors per population than Manukau.

Here is what the LGC said in setting the 2007 boundaries:

compliance with statutory requirements would require including at least 7,500 and 5,000 more people in the current Papakura-Franklin and Rodney Constituencies respectively, and this would expand the already large geographic areas the representatives for these constituencies have to cover, requiring longer travel times and restraining their ability to provide effective representation to these communities.

The LGC waives the 10% target, when they think it may leave rural areas without effective representation. Take for example Banks Peninsula – if that ward was expanded to include some of urban Christchurch, then the BP community would be a minority in their own ward and be without “effective representation”

Now you can agree or disagree with the LGC, but the point I am making is that this is nothing new.It is not some gerrymander designed just for the Auckland Council. It is in fact pretty much the status quo. In fact going from 13 to 20 Councillors in the Auckland Region has provided more flexibility.

The Local Government Commission has proposed 12 wards and 19 local boards for Auckland, plus it ahs tweaked the southern boundary.

The proposed wards are:

1. a Rodney Ward, electing one councillor, covering most of the present Rodney District but excluding the Hibiscus Coast and an area south of Muriwai Beach which will be included in the Waitakere Ward (in order to keep the Waitakere Ranges heritage area in one ward)
2. a Hibiscus-Albany-East Coast Bays Ward electing two councillors
3. a North Shore Ward, electing two councillors, covering Glenfield,
   Birkenhead, Takapuna and Devonport
4. a Waitakere Ward, electing two councillors, covering all of the existing Waitakere City excluding New Lynn, Green Bay and Kelston plus a small area of Rodney District
5. a Whau Ward (New Lynn-Avondale), electing one councillor, covering New Lynn, Green Bay, Kelston, Avondale, Rosebank, Waterview, Blockhouse Bay
6. a Mt Albert-Mt Roskill Ward, electing two councillors
7. a Maungawhau-Hauraki Gulf Ward (Auckland Central), electing one
   councillor, covering the central/CBD area and the Hauraki Gulf islands
8. an Orakei-Maungakiekie Ward, electing two councillors
9. a Franklin Ward, electing one councillor, comprising all the area of
   Franklin District remaining in Auckland together with the Clevedon
   community and the majority of the rural area of Papakura District
10. a Papakura-Manurewa Ward electing two councillors
11. a Howick-Pakuranga-Botany Ward electing two councillors
12. a Manukau Ward, electing two councillors, covering Mangere,
    Papatoetoe and Otara

The wards are meant to have approximately the same amount of population per councillor as each other. The average is 70,810 pop per Councillor and the extremes are Rodney with only 53,590 pop for 1 Cr and Maungawhau-Hauraki Gulf (Auckland Central) with 88,000 for 1 Cr.

The 19 proposed local boards are:

1. Rodney (7 members)
2. Hibiscus-Albany-East Coast Bays (9)
3. Glenfield-Birkenhead (6)
4. Takapuna-Devonport (5)
5. Waitakere (9)
6. Whau (7)
7. Mt Albert (7)
8. Mt Roskill (6)
9. Maungawhau (5)
10. Waiheke (5)
11. Great Barrier (5)
12. Orakei (7)
13. Maungakiekie-Tamaki (6)
14. Mangere (5)
15. Otara-Papatoetoe (7)
16. Howick-Pakuranga-Botany (9)
17. Papakura (5)
18. Manurewa (7)
19. Franklin (9)

Submissions are open until mid December. From my outside perspective the proposals look pretty sound, but I defer to local knowledge.