LETTERS: Give us a vote

In your reply to John Sinclair, you state: "They weren't 'selected for their opposition' [they were] a pen-portrait of .... Aucklanders compelled to take protest action..."'
Therefore, surely the population you queried was already opposed to the super city; so to suggest they represented the opinion of all Auckland is at best, disingenuous. They surely only represented the opinion of Aucklanders whom you must have known were already opposed to the super city.
For the record, I also support the idea of the super city. It's high time that all our silly little parochial groupings got subsumed into one effective organisation.
By the way, do you ever wonder why all the other people who support the proposal don't bother writing to you?
Geoff Bourke
Takapuna
I am so pleased to see someone in your position is willing to bring this out in the open,  where it should have been from the start.
No doubt you have noticed that this shambolic state of affairs was started by the Labour Government and continued by the so-called National Government now. This must tell people that it is being organised by big business and Wellington wanting to take control of Auckland by whichever means possible.
The only way this can, and must, be stopped is by the people of the region.
You may remember that a few years ago we had a "revolt" against the Auckland Regional Council because of their uncaring, huge rates increase.
I started that, and at one stage we had tens of thousands of ratepayers refusing to pay their rates.
As a consequence of our action, the Labour Government gave in and allocated $1.5 billion to Auckland for roading, thereby reducing the rates take required by the regional council.
What I am getting to is that the ratepayers of the greater Auckland province have enormous powers and, organised properly, could cause the Government to reconsider the path they are going down with the "social credit" little man in charge, and give the people of greater Auckland a binding referendum to allow us to somehow have a say in our future - which at this time is looking very very grim, and going to lead to a disaster, both for us, the ratepayers, and John Key, our Prime Minister.
John Drury
Orewa
I am shocked at the deviousness and underhandedness in the proposals by the Government in regard to Aucklanders and their assets. I desperately hope that the editorial spotlight you have directed at the Government and Rodney Hide will bring about a reconsideration, but, on current evidence this appears to be wishful thinking.
JH Young
Your February 25 Cover Story appeared to be rants by people selected for their opposition to the super-city. To suggest they represent the opinion of all Auckland is at best, disingenuous.
There are many (and I am one) who support the proposal. Sure, it may not be absolutely right - after all, with all the mayors, councillors and staff clambering (sic) to keep their status and jobs, it would be surprising if it was! But for those who have suffered from the actions (or inactions) of questionable competence in many of our existing councils, anything must be an improvement.
And the talk of democracy, responding to the voice of the people, or losing out to other areas, is hollow rhetoric. At least the new system holds out promise of higher levels of competence, and hopefully a more supportive attitude in the provision of services. We might even persuade people of the appropriate calibre to seek political office - we certainly need it!
So I say - get on with it. There will, no doubt, be problems - but we have them now, and unless we start they will never be addressed. At least in the new order there will be an opportunity to'fine tune' the structure over time.
John Sinclair
The Editor responds: They weren't "selected for their opposition": the feature was clearly presented as a pen-portrait of everyday Aucklanders compelled to take protest action for their first time. However - congratulations! In almost a year, and thousands of letters, emails and phone calls, you're the first and only reader to support the idea.
I want to congratulate Ewan McDonald for delivering his submission with such relevance and conciseness to the issues for Aucklanders on the process of the Local Government (Auckland Law Reform) Bill. This was the first written piece of information that clarified the unrest I felt by explaining how the changes would affect my ability to have a voice and be heard on what happens in my community.
The abolishment of the Local Government Act, unelected representatives and lack of transparency by the decision-makers does not bode well for a process that allows me to express my hopes and aspirations for the community I live in. Something that other New Zealanders have the privilege of doing. Clearly, decisions by a group who receive my share of rates are too far removed to be interested in my views on what and where my rates should be spent.
Where will the lack of democracy stop - when they've shut down The Aucklander? God forbid!
Emma Frost
Ranui
Keep up the good work and please don't forget the large number of "ethnic community members" who read The Aucklander who need your support to champion our cause.
Uzra Balouch
Urban Consultant

Our submission on the Government's third supercity bill outlines the issues with the current legislation. These issues include:
1. The undefined powers of the local boards. The government promised real local democracy, but is refusing to actually say what the local boards will do. We are advocating for them to have real powers over local issues, and appropriate funding.
2. The way in which our water company and port company seem to be getting prepared for privatisation. Why have Aucklanders lost the right to a referendum before the port is sold?
3. The undemocratic Council Controlled Organisations (CCO's). CCO's will control over 75 per cent of the money that ratepayers give to council, yet will be unaccountable to the public. Our elected representatives will be completely divorced from many key functions of the city. The initial CCO boards will be handpicked by Rodney Hide.
People in Avondale Roskill have a hard enough time getting a fair hearing within the current Auckland City structure. Under the government's supercity proposal, it will be even worse. Our basic right to have local representation is being taken away.
Michael Wood
Chairperson
Avondale Roskill Residents Association
I too would like to congratulate your paper on its stand over the super city.
It is interesting to note that in many of our papers - whether it be yours, the Herald or one of the Suburban newspapers - it is mainly the mayors or Councillors and business leaders that are quoted as to whether they support or not the changes to Auckland's governance structures.
You are right to say that the changes are not about creating a super city, what it is about is a change from a three tier local government structure to a two tier.
I serve on a community board, yet not much has been heard from the boards.
In your west Auckland issue however, many of the stories you run are about local issues and, generally speaking, features comments from the community board and local people. This is how it should be. Local government is about local people and the ability for local people and local communities to have a say in what happens in the area.
In my view, and where I for example part company with some people, is that you need more local boards than less, with the ability to make decisions.
In Waitakere the idea of a giant size local board is the idea of a number of organisations and a few councillors who want to preserve Waitakere City Council.
The city council has not reflected what local people want, and often it is an officer of council that is leading the debate on what should be happening. In our people should be able to decide where the local park should be, what facilities is in the park and so on, not an organisation.
The decisions should be arrived at democratically and publically not behind a closed door.
Our newspapers should be recording those debates, and closely monitoring the opinions of our civic leaders (politicians) and enable people to understand the democratic process. A number of years ago the media used to send reporters to council and community board meetings. That does not seem to happen nowdays, yet it is an important function.
Your paper however does go some way in reporting what is happening locally and should be congratulated.
Our councils have for too long strengthened the "PR" department, and our communities having been populations of 200,000 and organisations, rather than the local school, or street. Result has been a rise in anti social behaviour that all of us are finding hard to combat and a disengagement with the community combined with a "me" mentality and its all about "I" rather than a recognition that "We" are important, and a tidy street is something to be proud of.
While much critical comment has been leveled at Rodney Hide over the super city, he does genuinely believe in democracy and would like to see more local boards, to reflect local communities, and I believe it is time to move back to more local communities and think about our parents and grandparents who served in two world wars, started businesses, brought up families, joined the school PTA, helped their neighbour's and friends lay a concrete driveway, coached a rugby team, played tennis, without any handout or thanks and by using our own resources and not that of the local council.
It is the bureaucrats we need to blame for the drafting of the third local government bill and the draft local board boundaries, not Mr Hide and the National Party.
It is pleasing to seeing your paper helping to bring the community together by discussing local issues and raising awareness in local government and the impact it has on our everyday lives.
John G Riddell
Chairman
Massey Community Board
I was interested in your article about Everyday People, although I have a different perspective.
I have always respected the views of Bill Townson, who speaks for the northern area of Rodney. But I do wish that the rural folk and the news writers would please remember that half the population of Rodney lives in the truly urban area of the Hibiscus Coast.
Our views and interests are completely different.
Rodney councillors elected for the Hibiscus Coast ward way back in the 1990's were in favour of being part of North Shore City even then. It has just taken a long time for the government and others to realise that we ratepayers are urban not rural, and we shop, work and associate with North Shore, not Wellsford and Helensville.
Originally the government decided that the northern areas of Rodney should be part of Kaipara, but then our mayorfrom the rural north objected, completely ignored residents of the coast and shouted loud and clear everywhere that Rodney should not be part of the new city (protecting her own position). Later she stated it had to be all in or all out!
The select committee decided to do as demanded and include all of Rodney. So now, if the rural residents don't like that, they know who to blame, but please don't include the urban areas when they talk of Rodney.
We coasters know how we have been ignored, paying high rates to help with the costs of unsealed rural roads, since the present council decided to put all the rate income into one account and not separate ward accounts as previously.
Not surprising really with a rural mayor and seven rural councillors to out-vote the five Hibiscus Coast ward councillors every time, and then even one of those is from the rural ward.
We shall be heard more with a local board and two councillors on the city council, than we are at present. Even the Rodney Auckland regional Council member is rural.
And as we are already the highest rated and most indebted council in New Zealand, then it can't be any worse,and we may find it better.
Jill Jeffs
Orewa
Just before the 2008 election, you stated in a bubble on the front of your magazine: "We told you so, Helen" about the lowering of the drinking age.
In fact, Helen Clark voted against the lowering of the drinking age and later on she voted for the raising of the drinking age.
You may therefore assume that your thoughtless action helped cause our current loss of democracy by this greedy government that only seeks to take over New Zealand's last remaining assets, sell them off and then rule us as a feudal fiefdom.
This Government was created with John Key and Rodney Hide fronting for Roger Douglas to quickly destroy any spirit in New Zealanders. Auckland is just the first.
I hope you are currently liaising with every other newspaper, throughout New Zealand, that calls itself a freedom paper, to prepare its readers for the same vicious experience we are now going through. "Divided we fall" has never been so true.
You are right about the Magna Carta. Coincidentally, I was just reading it this morning, after a recent trip to view it at Salisbury Cathedral.
I quote Lord Denning, Master of the Rolls 1965: "Magna Carta is the greatest constitutional document of all times - the foundation of the freedom of the individual against the arbitrary authority of the despot."
This Government believes that stupidity and greed is in all of us. Let us prove them wrong. You have certainly revived my faith in you with this submission to the Law Reform 3rd bill.
J Spencer
Pukekohe
The price of democracy and freedom. You tell me, did they die for nothing?
Excerpts from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia:
WWI. The total number of New Zealand troops and nurses to serve overseas in 1914-18, excluding those in British and other Dominion forces, was 103,000, from a population of just over a million. Forty-two percent of men of military age served in the NZEF. 16,697 New Zealanders were killed and 41,317 were wounded during the war - a 58 per cent casualty rate. Approximately a further thousand men died within five years of the war's end, as a result of injuries sustained, and 507 died whilst training in New Zealand between 1914 and 1918. New Zealand had the highest casualty and death rate per capita of any country involved in the war. The First World War saw Maori soldiers officially serve for the first time in a major conflict with the New Zealand Army. 2688 Maori and 346 Pacific islanders served with New Zealand forces in total.
WWII: At its peak in July 1942, New Zealand had 154,549 men and women under arms (excluding the Home Guard) and by the war's end a total of 194,000 men and 10,000 women had served in the armed forces at home and overseas. The costs for the country were high - 11,625 killed, a ratio of 6684 dead per million in the population which was the highest rate in the Commonwealth (Britain suffered 5123 and Australia 3232 per million population).
How can New Zealand's Ministers of Government attend our Anzac Day ceremonies to honour our soldiers, pay tribute to them and still not give us our democratic right to vote?
What is happening to Auckland will happen to all areas of New Zealand. No wonder we have lost our pride, New Zealand is no longer a democracy.
The last people to leave turn out the lights (if they will let you). The death of democracy. Next it will be the death our freedom.
Mark my words
I do not even want to think about the mess that this road is taking us.
As a community boardmember for 14 years, it has been hard enough to have a say and get the ratepayers and members of the public to understand the process even down to explaining that community board and councillors have different roles.
Being a mushroom and being left in the dark is only going to get worse.
We have gone from area offices to having to go to the city to pay bills and try to get any services. How can anyone see that this super city is going to be more democratic? Beats me.
Kathryn Davie
Member
Avondale Community Board