Some time ago he told me he was going to do something to stop councils like the Far North District Council.
They put ten iwi representatives, not elected by ratepayers, on a committee with six councillors who were elected, with full voting rights, thereby outnumbering the elected folk.
I sent him a text two weeks ago asking him when I should check back in with him to see what he was going to do.
He responded. Asked me to give him two weeks.
Two weeks ran out yesterday.
Yesterday is when he announced that he would be changing the law to take those voting rights away from unelected representatives on councils.
This has become something of a race relations issue because the greatest number of unelected members that get attention are Māori, iwi reps, and mana whenua reps.
But it’s actually more than that.
It also involves youth representatives, under 18's who haven’t even learned to live in their own houses and pay their own power bills, who are given permission by councils to vote on council issues without being elected.
And yes, it is about race relations and trying to stop the spread of this strangely fashionable idea that one ethnicity gets special treatment.
But it is also about a fundamental of democracy – you choose who governs you.
Ratepayers are being bled for money at rates none of us would’ve thought were possible ten years ago.
For our entire lives that has come with the right to then also vote for the people who we best trust to spend that money, even if that is a low bar.
Somehow in the last few years that has started to change, and councils have told us how much to pay and then also who will govern.
That needed to stop.
Yesterday’s decision is welcome. But I’d like it to go further.
I’d like all unelected representatives now removed from councils because, in many cases, they are a cost.
They are paid, sometimes, the same as elected representatives and they are unnecessary in an age where advice and input is easier to find than ever.
But given the likely kickback this will get from the handwringers, good on Simon Watts for making the right call.
And on deadline too.
Heather du Plessis-Allan is a journalist and radio broadcaster who hosts Newstalk ZB's weekday Drive-Time Show – where this article was sourced.
9 comments:
And why give these chances 6 mths to get themselves in order? Pass the law under urgency right now!
What happens in 6 months?
It’s November in 6 months- anything could happen
This is the best news ever! The next most important thing to do is disband the Waitangi Tribunal.
Back in April, minister Watts saw no need to intervene in the co-governance issue, preferring that his officials "engaged with" Far North District Council, which (he understood) was "discharging its functions under Local Government Act requirements." Typical ministerial brush-off.
What changed his mind, I wonder? The coming general election, perhaps?
To note: much of what has been done has been feeble (MSM) , can be easily repealed (MACA) or time will run out. (this LG law) This is what has disappointed about Luxon's leadership Back to square 1.
People have been asking Watts and Luxon for months to sort this - and we were ignored and fobbed off.
HdPA gives Watts a deadline and he complies !!!
Simply not good enough that it takes pressure in the public eye for him to do the right thing, and even then it's too little, too late.
Heather, please keep asking the National Cabinet some of these hard racial questions so perhaps we can get back the democracy we had for 150 years.
You are right Heather, Simon Watts was going in the right direction, but he did not go far enough. You say, “But it is also about a fundamental of democracy – you choose who governs you.” I believe that we should take the opportunity of the upcoming election to definitively resolve this issue.
There are three things by which We the people should have power to influence who governs us: 1) we should empower an institution(s) with the sovereignty to govern us; 2) we should vote for those who represent us in those institutions; and 3) we should occasionally have referenda on particular issues.
Another post on Breaking Views yesterday referred, not entirely approvingly, to the views of Lord Robin Cooke of Thorndon.
Lord Cooke seems to think that Parliament are not our representatives: “Also, as Edmund Burke pointed out, elected Members of Parliament are not delegates or agents of the electors.”
Lord Cooke apparently has no truck with referenda: “Facile appeals to the will of the people can invite uninformed and unthinking responses.”
Lord Cooke looks, but does not find, a source of sovereign power: “In the pattern of functional distribution of state power is there any room for real sovereignty? I am inclined to think not.”
Now, the ACT Party have claimed responsibility for initiating the recent promise by National to pass the legislation. So, on Monday, 1 June I sent an email to 18 ACT MPs and board members in which I explained the following:
“As a matter of fact, the necessary power of sovereignty may only come from the work of the people which is acknowledged by payment, and governments obtain their power by taxing the people. We pay tax because we need a body politic to organize and bound us, so we institute and empower a government and judiciary to fulfil that function for us. You are, or should be, the executive servants of the people.”
I wrote a fulsome proposal and suggested they use that as the central plank for the election. I feel sure it would win votes to assure voters how important they are.
The response so far is minimal, but I hope they will act on it because it excludes any other source of sovereign power, including the two mentioned in this article. We the people, who each have equal share of sovereignty, are the sovereign power of New Zealand. In reality, there is no other possible source of power.
Any pretenders are unlawful if not criminal. What I want to know is, where are the judiciary on this? What is the source of sovereign power in their view and what is the penalty for those who claim a position of such power without lawful, democratic authorization?
Reference
Lord Cooke of Thorndon, “The Myth of Sovereignty,” New Zealand Journal of Public and International Law, Volume 3, Number 1, p. 39, June 2005.
https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/public-law/publications/nz-journal-of-public-and-international-law/previous-issues/volume-3-issue-1-june-2005/cooke.pdf
Just what needs to be said for National to listen?????
We the voters were promised this would be dealt with, I fear the light touch currently suggested is not nearly enough, and of course nothing would have happened if it wasnt an election year.
Just not good enough!!!! We are SICK of it.
It wont be the result you are hoping for in November
Watts will now be hoping he fails to get elected in the coming election. Then he can pretend he wanted to do something, but circumstances got in the way.
If he is elected, judging by National's track record of broken promises,the will find a reason to change direction.
Watts jsnt taking it seriously, if he and National were they would lass it under urgency with immediate effect.. also they would make sure no one besides elected Councillors get paid anything..
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.