The Watchdog

Keeping citizens in the loop

OPEN LETTER/OIA REQUEST TO AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL CEO DAVID RANKIN RE: THE LAWFULNESS OF MAYOR JOHN BANKS DECISION TO DENY ME SPEAKING RIGHTS ON 27 MAY 2010

27 May 2010

AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL

CEO

DAVID RANKIN:

OPEN LETTER/OIA REQUEST:

Dear David,

I was denied speaking rights by Mayor John Banks for the third consecutive month at the Auckland City Council meeting, on Thursday 27 May 2010.

You watched as I was again dragged out of the Auckland Town Hall by security guards.

The reasons given for Mayor John Bank’s (unlawful) denial of speaking rights were:

__________________________________________________________________________________________________
Dear Penny

Thank you for your email requesting a deputation to speak at the 27 May 2010 Council meeting.

The Mayor has declined your deputation request for the following reasons pursuant to standing orders 2.13 and 2.13.2:

The subject matter is considered to be repetitive and not urgent in nature.

Regards

Lee Manaia
Democracy Advisor
Auckland City Council
Ph: +64 9 307 7576
Mobile: 027 273 9538
Location: Level 14, Civic Building,
1 Greys Ave, Auckland
http://www.aucklandcity.govt.nz

___________________________________________________________________________________________________

A) RE: ‘URGENCY’ OF THE SUBJECT MATTER:

1) Please note that the ‘National Day of Action Against Water Privatisation’ is Saturday 12 June 2010.

(The Auckland City ‘action’ being a rally outside the Auckland Town Hall from 12 noon till 2pm.)

2) Please note that the attempt to (unlawfully) sell the Iosefa family home(s) over a disputed Metrowater accounts is set down for 9 June 2010.

There is no other Auckland City Council meeting that I could address before these dates.

So – how is this therefore not ‘urgent’?

B) RE: ‘REPETITIVE’ SUBJECT MATTER:

PLEASE PROVIDE THE INFORMATION WHICH CONFIRMS THAT I HAVE PREVIOUSLY ADDRESSED AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL ON EACH OF THE FOLLOWING MATTERS:

1) Latest developments from Parliament on Petition 2008/60

Petition 2008/60 of Penelope Mary Bright and 171 others, presented by Su’a William Sio, on 9 December 2009 – referred to the Local Government and Environment Select Committee.

“Requesting that the House of Representatives do not implement any legislative changes to the Local Government Act 2002 which would make it easier to privatise water services via changes to ‘contracting out’, and ‘Public Private Partnership’ (PPP) provisions, until a full and thorough independent investigation of the pricing practices of private water company United Water’s seven contracts in New Zealand has been undertaken.”

Evidence I have submitted in support of this Petition is now available on the Parliamentary website:

http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/PB/SC/Documents/Evidence/5/a/f/49SCLGE_EVI_49DBHOH_PET2996_1_A47173-Penny-Bright.htm

____________________________________________________________

2) NATIONAL DAY OF ACTION AGAINST WATER PRIVATISATION:

Saturday 12 June 2010, has been called all over New Zealand to oppose proposed changes to the Local Government Act 2002 to make it easier to privatise water services.

The mechanism for so doing is through s. 31of the Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill which provides that a local government organisation may enter into contracts for the provision of water services for a period of up to 35 years instead of 15 years; and

s.3 2‘where a local government organisation enters into a joint arrangement for the provision of water services it must continue to be responsible for providing the water services:

“However, the local government organisation no longer has to retain control over the management of the water services or ownership of all of the infrastructure associated with the water services throughout the joint arrangement.”

[Bills Digest Local Government Act 2002 Amendment Bill]

a) On Saturday 12 June 2010, there will be a rally outside the Auckland Town Hall from
12 noon till 2pm.

b) An invitation is hereby extended to the Mayor and all Auckland City Councillors who oppose the privatisation of water services, to attend this rally.

There will be a ‘roll call’, during this rally, so that the voting public can be informed, of those elected representatives from Auckland City Council who are prepared to ‘stand up and be counted’ in opposition to these proposed legislative changes to make it easier to privatise water services.

c) Please note that last night, (Wednesday 26 May 2010), North Shore City Council resolved to support the rally that will be held outside the North Shore City Council Chambers from
12 noon – 2pm on Saturday 12 June 2010, to oppose proposed changes to the Local Government Act 2002 to make it easier to privatise water services.
________________________________________________________________________

3) METROWATER ARE ATTEMPTING (AGAIN) TO SELL THE FAMILY HOME(S) OF THE IOSEFA FAMILY:

According to a Barfoot and Thompson advertisement in the ‘Weekend Herald’ Saturday 15 May 2010, “Mortgagee Sales”:

“An estate in fee simple being 89A Canal Road Avondale referred to in CT NA 136B/742 Nth Auckland Registry is offered for sale by H B Bowles, Deputy Sheriff at Auckland acting on behalf of Metrowarter Ltd who on 8/12/09 & 1/4/10 obtained judgments in the High Court at Auckland.

The Iosefa family are NOT behind in their mortgage payments.

This is another (unlawful) attempt being made to sell the family home(s) of the Iosefa family from Canal Rd, Avondale, in clear breach of both Metrowater’s ‘Statement of Intent’, and the Human Rights Amendment Act.

Please be advised that I will be taking key documents to the Human Rights Commission tomorrow, (who have expressed concern over this matter): which prove the (unlawful) discrimination and persecution that this Samoan family are facing – FOR THE SECOND TIME.

The stress faced by this victimised family, is potentially heart attack material.

Please be advised that on top of the matter of treating the Iosefa family differently to other Metrowater ‘customers’ regarding debt management processes – it appears that due diligence has not been carried out regarding property titles, water metering, and billing.

(Please be reminded that Metrowater gave assurances last time that everything had been done properly, but it hadn’t, and the High Court stopped the sale.
(Then Metrowater sacked their lawyer Michael Tolhurst).

I respectfully suggest that you show some strong, ‘socially responsible’ civic leadership Mayor John Banks, and instruct Metrowater to comply with their lawful statutory duties and their Statement of Intent, and get this property sale STOPPED FORTHWITH.

1) METROWATER’S STATUTORY DUTIES AS A COUNCIL-CONTROLLED ORGANISATION UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2002 INCLUDING:

” 59 Principal objective of council-controlled organisation

(1) The principal objective of a council-controlled organisation is to—

(a) achieve the objectives of its shareholders, both commercial and non-commercial, as specified in the statement of intent; and

(c) exhibit a sense of social and environmental responsibility by having regard to the interests of the community in which it operates and by endeavouring to accommodate or encourage these when able to do so; “

2) METROWATER STATEMENT OF INTENT 2009 ( Pg 7)

“THE NATURE OF OUR BUSINESS

1. Commercial Reliability

…..

Maintain a robust customer debt management process that is fair and reasonable and audited on an annual basis. “

______________________________________________________________________

Human Rights Act 1993 No 82 (as at 01 October 2008), Public Act
Discrimination in provision of goods and services
44 Provision of goods and services

(1) It shall be unlawful for any person who supplies goods, facilities, or services to the public or to any section of the public—

(a) To refuse or fail on demand to provide any other person with those goods, facilities, or services; or

(b) To treat any other person less favourably in connection with the provision of those goods, facilities, or services than would otherwise be the case,—

by reason of any of the prohibited grounds of discrimination.

Human Rights Amendment Act 2001

Part 1A
Discrimination by Government, related persons and bodies, or persons or bodies acting with legal authority

* Part 1A (sections 20I to 20L) was inserted, as from 1 January 2002, by section 6 Human Rights Amendment Act 2001 (2001 No 96).

21 Prohibited grounds of discrimination

· (1) For the purposes of this Act, the prohibited grounds of discrimination are—

(j) Political opinion, which includes the lack of a particular political opinion or any political opinion:”

It is my considered opinion that the Iosefa family are being (unlawfully) discriminated against because they are members of the Water Pressure Group.

B) Please provide the information which confirms you, as Auckland City Council CEO:

1) Ensured that Mayor John Banks was provided with competent and professional legal advice upon which he relied in his above-mentioned decision to decline me speaking rights.

2) The names and positions of those who provided the above-mentioned competent and professional legal advice upon which Mayor John Banks relied in his above-mentioned decision to decline me speaking rights.

Yours sincerely,
Penny Bright
Media Spokesperson
Water Pressure Group
Judicially recognised Public Watchdog’ on Metrowater, water, and Auckland regional governance matters.
“Anti-corruption campaigner”

https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

Ph (09) 846 9825
021 211 4 127

Advertisements

May 27, 2010 - Posted by | Fighting water privatisation in NZ, Human rights, Stop the $uper City

No comments yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: