“Why won’t Mark Ford explain why he picked known water privatisers as Watercare Executive staff?” asks Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright.

8 September 2010

“Why won’t Mark Ford explain why, on HIS watch, he picked known water privatisers as key Watercare Executive staff, and openly answer questions about United Water and Veolia contracts?” asks Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright.

“I, for one, based on Mark Ford’s track record, have NO confidence in his empty ‘weasel words’ words about ‘transparency’.

Water privatisation is a HUGE issue in this Auckland ‘$UPERCITY’ election. The voting public have a right to know the answers to questions I publicly asked Mark Ford over two months ago.”

www.nzherald.co.nz/news/print.cfm?objectid=10671594

“Mark Ford, who will chair the mega-Auckland Transport CCO responsible for spending about $1.4 billion a year of ratepayers’ and taxpayers’ money, was relaxed at the possibility of public meetings being part of the statement of corporate intent between the council and the CCO.

“We have got to win over the confidence of the public.

There are various mechanisms – performance service, transparency and a whole series of things,” he said. ”

………………………………………………..
“Mr Hawkins said he had not been aware of any disquiet about anything Watercare had done over its long history, saying it was an example of how a CCO could work efficiently along commercial lines to deliver a public service.”

“Upon which planet has the Chair of Watercare Services – businessman Graeme Hawkins – been living?” asks Auckland Mayoral candidate Penny Bright.

Perhaps Mr Hawkins just leads a VERY sheltered life – and has somehow been shielded from the following matters, which show considerable ‘disquiet’ exists about Watercare operations and management.

But if Mr Hawkins is so ‘out-of-touch’ about concerns that have been publicly raised about the company he chairs – then – perhaps his ‘fitness for duty’, as Chair of the Board for Water Services is arguably questionable?

WATERCARE’S PAST AND CURRENT ACTIONS AND PRACTICES WHICH CAUSE ME, AS A JUDICIALLY RECOGNISED ‘PUBLIC WATCHDOG’ ON METROWATER, WATER AND AUCKLAND REGIONAL GOVERNANCE MATTERS –
CONSIDERABLE ‘DISQUIET’.

A) TRANSPARENCY:

1) Why aren’t the minutes of meetings of Watercare Services Ltd governing body – the Watercare Shareholders’ Group (SRG) publicly available on Watercare’s website? Where’s the ‘transparency’?

2) Who has really been in charge of Watercare Services Ltd?
The elected representatives who make up Watercare Shareholders’ Group (SRG) – or unelected Watercare Executive staff and CEO?

3)Why hasn’t former Watercare CEO, Mark Ford, replied to the following questions arising from his appointment of key water privatisers, namely – David Hawkins and Graham Wood, to strategic positions as ‘Executive’ Watercare staff members?

4) Does the Chair of Watercare Services – businessman Graeme Hawkins know the answers to these following questions?
If not – WHY NOT?
If he knows – why don’t the public?

________________________________________

2 July 2010

Executive Chair
Auckland Transition Agency (ATA)
Mark Ford

Dear Mark,

I am very sorry that you have declined to accept the invitation to attend the Public Meeting to be held on Monday 5 July 2010, from 7.30 – 9.30pm at the Freemans Bay Community Centre, calling for an investigation of the 7 United Water New Zealand contracts.

On Fri, Jul 2, 2010 at 4:06 PM, info@ata wrote:

“Thank you for your invitation which is declined.”

Mark, you may recall that I requested that if you were unable for any reason, to accept the invitation to attend the Public Meeting to be held on Monday 5 July 2010, from 7.30 – 9.30pm
at the Freemans Bay Community Centre, calling for an investigation of the 7 United Water New Zealand contracts, could you please provide the following information by 5pm Friday 2 July 2010: (which, to date, at 5.30pm 2 July 2010, you have not.)

As I would still like to have this information in writing, in order to make it available to the public and media at the above-mentioned Public Meeting, can you please confirm that you will have this OIA request completed by 12 noon Monday 5 July 2010.

If not – why not?

Thank you in anticipation of your prompt reply to this request.

Yours sincerely,

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

Auckland Mayoral Candidate.

PH (09) 846 9825

021 211 4 127

https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

_______________________________________

25 June 2010

Executive Chair
Auckland Transition Agency (ATA)
Mark Ford

OPEN LETTER/OIA REQUEST TO MARK FORD, EXECUTIVE CHAIR OF THE AUCKLAND TRANSITION AUTHORITY (ATA)

Dear Mark,

Just in case you are unable for any reason to accept the invitation to attend the Public Meeting to be held on Monday 5 July 2010, from 7.30 – 9.30pm at the Freemans Bay Community Centre, calling for an investigation of the 7 United Water New Zealand contracts, can you please provide the following information by 5pm Friday 2 July 2010:

A) Information which explains why you, when CEO of Watercare Services Ltd, appointed known water privatiser, ex-Mayor of Papakura, David Hawkins, to the position of Corporate Liaison Manager for Watercare Services in 2000.

B) Information which confirms that you were aware of the Report of the Office of the Auditor General (OAG), in 1998, which was critical of a number of key aspects of the ‘Papakura franchise’, signed by David Hawkins as Mayor of Papakura in April 1997:

(These shortcomings were referred to in this recent ‘Regulatory Impact Statement’

www.dia.govt.nz/Pubforms.nsf/URL/Water_RIS…/Water_RIS_2010.doc

“REMOVING BARRIERS TO WATER INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT IN THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2002 – REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT:

34. A potential risk is that councils lack expertise in the area of PPPs and other concession arrangements, and that developing such arrangements requires specialist skills. This was suggested in reports by the Auditor-General on the Papakura franchise agreement and the Wellington DBMO arrangement.[1]

35. In Papakura, for example, the Auditor-General noted that:

·the Council relied on limited internal and local expertise when setting up the agreement and it was not reviewed by an external expert;

·the franchise agreement inadequately documents the franchisee’s obligations to release particular information to the Council;

·the franchise agreement focused on performance indicators relating to price and quality, but indicators for customer service and asset management and development were not well defined; and

·there was a lack of agreement between the parties about how the condition of the infrastructure would be measured over the duration of the franchise – no baseline was established and an asset management plan was not undertaken.

[1] Controller and Auditor-General – 2006 report, as above; plus Report on Papakura District Council:

Water and Wastewater franchise, April 1998. ”

______________________________

C) Information which explains why you, when CEO of Watercare Services Ltd, appointed Graham Wood, to the position of General Manager Operations of Watercare Services,(in or about 2007), and what steps you took to:

1) Inform all elected representatives that made up the Watercare Shareholders Representative Group (SRG), of Graham Wood’s former position as the former Managing Director of United Water South Australia,

2) Inform the public of Graham Wood’s former position as the former Managing Director of United Water South Australia.

D) Information which explains the role played by David Hawkins and/or Graham Wood (if any) whilst working for Watercare in the securing of any NZ United Water contracts.

E) Information which explains why, on the Watercare Services Ltd website, when you were CEO, there was no section which covered the Watercare Shareholders Group, to make the following information publicly available: SRG meeting minutes; SRG reports ; information about which elected representatives were actually members of the SRG, and the like.

F) Disclosure of all / any interests (if any) you had or may have, either pecuniary or non-pecuniary with:

1) United Water;
2) Veolia Water,
3) Past or current members of the World Bank, including, but not limited to David Shand, the Head of the Rates Inquiry and one of the three Commissioners on the Royal commission of Inquiry into Auckland Regional Governance

G) Disclosure of all / any interests (if any) you had or may have, either pecuniary or non-pecuniary with Veolia Transport, who have the contract with ARTA (of which you were Chair since 2007) to operate train services on the Auckland Passenger Rail Network.

www.nzcid.org.nz/veoliatransport.html

VEOLIA TRANSPORT AUCKLAND

www.veoliatransport.co.nz

In 2004 Veolia Transport Auckland Limited was contracted to the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (ARTA) to operate train services on the Auckland Passenger Rail Network. The contract has subsequently been extended through to 2014.

VEOLIA TRANSPORT (WORLDWIDE)

www.veolia.com/en/group/activities/transport-management.aspx

Veolia Transport, as a leading private operator of public transport, manage over 2.63 billion trips per year globally, thereby decreasing traffic congestion, combating climate change and avoiding over 4.1 million tons of Co2.

Veolia Transport is part of Veolia Environnement the world’s leading environmental services company.

www.beehive.govt.nz/release/mark+ford+lead+auckland+transition+agency

Mark Ford (Executive Chair)
CEO of Watercare Services Ltd since 1994 and Chairman of the Auckland Regional Transport Authority since 2007. Previous roles have included CEO of Auckland Regional Services Trust and CEO of NZ Forestry Corporation. )

______________________________

H) Information which confirms your position, as Executive Chair of the Auckland Transition Agency, on the request for a ‘full and thorough independent investigation of the pricing practices of private water company United Water’s seven contracts’ as requested in the following:

Petition 2008/60, presented by Su’a William Sio, on 9 December 2009:

“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.”

Of course, the preferred option would be for you, as Executive Chair of the Auckland Transition Agency (ATA) to front this public meeting in person, but just in case you are unable to do so, I would like to have this information in writing to make it available to the public and media.

Thanks.

Yours sincerely,

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

AUCKLAND MAYORAL CANDIDATE
PH (09) 846 9825

021 211 4 127

https://waterpressure.wordpress.com

www.pennybright4mayor.org.nz

______________________________

PS! There are a LOT more areas of ‘disquiet’ regarding Watercare Services actions, operations and management – which in my considered opinion, prove they, quite simply are NOT to be trusted.

This is just the start……..

RESPONSE FROM AUCKLAND MAYORAL CANDIDATE PENNY BRIGHT TO WAITAKERE HOUSING CALL TO ACTION

(Please note that I have discussed your questions with State Housing Advocate Sue Henry, whose knowledge and understanding arising from her untiring work over the years on housing and related issues, I have enormous respect.)

My replies are as follows:

INCREASED HOUSING PROVISION:

1) First – I believe we need to head off the proposed housing decrease through giving private sector organisations huge chunks of existing housing stock and to ban any sale of existing state housing stock.

I am opposed to ‘devolution’ of the provision of housing to ‘not-for-profit’ NGOs, as I believe it is still privatisation.

For example – care for the aged has devolved from the ‘not-for-profit’ church groups to ‘for profit’ multinational companies.

www.business.auckland.ac.nz/Portals/4/Research/General/Wokiring_Paper_07_1_.pdf (Pg 17)

“The CEO of Presbyterian Support noted that the charitable organisations “reluctantly” exited the market which was increasingly dominated by “large national and multinational providers” (Presbyterian Support East Coast, 2005).

2004 also saw the sale of facilities belonging to the Auckland Methodists and Hastings St John of God (Presbyterian Support East Coast, 2005).

Charitable providers seemed to find the government’s then $80 daily subsidy5 made their business unsustainable (“No budget money for providers of residential care”, 2005).

In contrast to the charitable providers, the large for-profit providers are expanding within the market.
The Macquarie Group recently purchased Eldercare NZ .”

I believe we need to retain Housing New Zealand (HNZ) as a ‘one stop shop’ entity.

Housing is a Government responsibility, and if all Council tenants came under the HNZ umbrella, they too would have more affordable rents at 25% of their net income.
(As happened when Auckland City Council pensioner housing was taken over by HNZ in 2004).

SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE PROVISION:

Currently the following ARC plan changes (growth centres in corridors) are detailed as follows:

www.arc.govt.nz/albany/fms/main/Documents/Plans/Regional%20Policy%20and%20Plans/ARPS/Proposed%20change%206/Housing%20Lobby%20Issues.pdf

AUCKLAND CITY COUNCIL Plan Change 175

RODNEY DISTRICT COUNCIL Plan Change 97

WAITAKERE CITY COUNCIL Plan Change 13

Plan Change 14
Plan Change 15
Plan Change 16
Plan Change 17
Plan Change 18

NORTH SHORE CITY COUNCIL Plan Change 12

MANUKAU CITY COUNCIL Plan Change 12

PAPAKURA DISTRICT COUNCIL Plan Change 10

FRANKLIN DISTRICT COUNCIL Plan Change 20

This process under these ‘District Plans’ are well underway, and immensely unpopular everywhere, as few people support a region full of potential slums and intensified housing compounds.

SOCIAL HOUSING:

There is a difference between ‘State’ housing and ‘social’ housing.
State housing is NOT temporary emergency housing – it is a separate entity.

“Vested interest groups need to start lobbying for all the social services to be reinstated – not piggy-back on State tenants” – Sue Henry Spokesperson for the Housing Lobby.

HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENTS:

This happens now or if a person’s circumstances change.
How do people know for how long they are going to be ‘poor’?

CHANGE CONSENT PROCESSES:

Shane Jones – now Rodney Hide have and are changing consent processes through the Resource Management Act.
It appears that the main beneficiaries of this change will be property developers and speculators.

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1991/0069/latest/DLM230265.html?search=ts_act_Resource+Management+Act_resel&p=1&sr=1

INCREASE UNITS FOR OLDER ADULTS:

The first step is not to force them out of existing dwellings, and to stop Government/ Council(s) and Landcorp
from selling off any remaining land.

INSULATION:

“Aucklanders have survived since the 1930s without insulation. Carpets are the most efficient way to stop draughts on bare wooden floors”, suggests Sue Henry Spokesperson for the Housing Lobby.

GIFT PORTIONS OF COUNCIL LAND FOR HOUSING:

What safeguards are in place to prevent the Auckland Council Property CCO from selling off such gifted land?

WARRANT OF FITNESS:

Does this apply to newer housing – as it arguably should – given that it is the newer houses that are problematic?

“Most older houses, particularly State houses are very structurally sound and there is nothing wrong with them”, Sue Henry Spokesperson for the Housing Lobby.

SECURITY OF TENURE:

I most definitely support ‘security of tenure’.
Having a stable base / affordable home is pivotal for most people – especially those with families.

“Returned servicemen, their wives and widows were told their house allocations were permanent (ie: for the rest of their lives). Many of us have been rallying for greedy politicians NOT to shift the goal posts. Every tenant should have the right to security of tenure and stability,” Sue Henry Spokesperson for the Housing Lobby.

Please be reminded that the ‘right’ to housing is a basic human right:

Article 25 (Universal Declaration of Human Rights 1948)

1. Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.

RECOMMENDATIONS:

A) An investigation into the possible financing of affordable housing for low-income New Zealanders in the Auckland region with the introduction of an Auckland regional capital gains tax, on owners of multiple properties.

(This would EXCLUDE a single retirement investment property, by ‘Mum and Dad’ investors.)

B) An independent investigation the amount of ‘social capital’ (central government tax) paid by companies operating in New Zealand, with a view to establishing taxation income which could be used to finance low-income affordable housing.

C) In support of the principles of ‘open, transparent and democratically accountable’ local government – the establishment of a ‘Register of Interests’ of elected representatives in the Auckland region (and their spouses); and unelected senior Council officers, (and their spouses); property developers, and those on the Boards of CCOs – to prevent ‘conflicts of interest’ and potentially corrupt practices.

Cheers!

Penny

Penny Bright

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

AUCKLAND MAYORAL CANDIDATE

waterpressure.wordpress.com

Ph (09) 846 9825
021 211 4 127