View submissions

Objection

---

Daniel Mantell

The change would separate Panmure politically not only from its own railway station but also a significant part of its community. The Tamaki Regeneration process foresees a significant population increase in Panmure, Glen Innes and Point England coming decades. This is likely to force a reversal of this proposal by the Electoral Commission in years to come.ity in the Mountain Road area, along with businesses to the west of the railway line and Jellicoe Road.

Objection

---

Amy Carls

Removal from remainder of panmure to instead be put in new boundary that has no relation to my community/ location
Impact of dividing my town (panmure) in half

Objection

---

Mrs Gaynor Salie

My objection is that I can see no reason why our section of Auckland should be placed with south Auckland. There is no explanation as to how these proposals will benefit the people of Tamaki. It takes a diverse neighborhood and places it into a very homogeneous population. It doesn't explain how it impacts local council. It appears to place a large number of low economic areas into 1 area. There is also no proposal for what will happen when all the new homes get built.

Objection

---

Alicia Gimelfarb

The Manukau East proposed boundary catchment is based on socioeconomic commonalities rather than actual physical location. The eastern suburbs are far from Manukau and ought to be grouped into Maungakiekie or Eastern suburbs. The merging of the Eastern poor suburbs of Panmure into the Labour stronghold of Manukau and the proposal of Flat Bush creates a new National party stronghold. The boundaries really need to be grouped around physical location not what party the households are likely to vote for.

Objection

---

Mrs Tracy Bilger

I would like Point England to remain in Maungakiekie as we have no shared community of interest with Manukau whatsoever. We have no shared history or geographical connection.
This whole exercise seems like a complete waste of time and money and I cannot see any advantages at all. We will be so disjointed from Manuakau. Leave things as they are.

Objection

---

Raelene Farrell (and S Swasbrook, G Ogilvie and N Calladine)

I object to moving Panmure, Point England and parts of Glen Innes into the Manukau East electorate, because:
- Panmure, Point England, Glen Innes and Wai o Taiki are communities with longstanding strong links - and this boundary change proposal smashes the community apart. This contradicts the statement made on page 3 of your Boundary Review document, which states: The splitting of small communities has been avoided where possible and the Commission has endeavoured to place communities in the same electorate as the adjoining area with which they have the most interaction.
- Panmure, Point England, Glen Innes and Wai o Taiki are communities with common interests, common social structure, common issues.
- Panmure and Point England are Auckland Central suburbs, not South Auckland suburbs.
- Panmure and Point England are water-based suburbs with nothing in common with the more land-locked suburbs of Otahuhu, Otara and Papatoetoe.
- Panmure and Point England have a strong multi-cultural community, but there is far less diversity in the South Auckland surburbs of Otara and Papatoetoe.
In summary, you are proposing to split suburbs of commonalities, to align them with suburbs with which they have no connection. As per page 2 of your Boundary Review, this is not giving due consideration to communities of interest, as is required by the Commission.

Objection

---

J Harvey

I write as a long time resident of Panmure in EAST Auckland.
At no time has been associated with Manukau until it was recognised that due to the inept Manukau city council under the previous mayors {Brown included] the unrestrained developments of the area had caused the problem of trapping their residents in Howick & Pakuranga.Since that time Panmure has been used as an escape route causing all sorts of problems.
As one of the original settlements of Auckland Panmure has a wealth of history behind it & it beggars belief that we should have anything in common with Otara etc.
Panmure will be split in two with no access to the station & with a significant part of the community.
Has no one recognised that ther is to be a considerable increas in the population in this area so it must be expected another change very soon.
How is it that all the surrounding ares have no changes? Suspicious is it not?
We also know of the numerous problems at Middlemore hospital & the difficulties in the transport to same.
This whole idea of abandoning Panmure to benefitting others is not acceptable.

Objection

---

Mrs Sandra Gordon

The change will mean a change to an already overloaded Middlemore Hospital. Why change at all.

Objection

---

Panmure Historical Society

If the Boundary Change that has been outlined happens it will rip Panmure apart. As Panmure is just celebrated its 170 years and is a Heritage Precinct, these boundary changes will upset the balance of Panmure.
Historically we have held these boundaries for 170 years, and feel that Panmure will lose it's historical background .
The changes would see much of Panmure, Glen Inness and Point England as well as Mount Wellington carved of the Maungakiekie electorate and being added to Manukau East with Papatoetoe and Otara. We are opposed to these changes.

Objection

---

Gemma Gasson

My address where I have chosen to invest in Auckland with my husband and young family was selected due to its proximity and connection to Mt Wellington and surrounds where we work, live and spend money. We have absolutely no connection to the proposed boundary connections to Glen Innes and Otara and this causes me significant distress and concern to be re classified in this electorate. We worked extremely hard to buy in this suburb with its current alignment and it is disturbing to think we have invested as a young family in a proposed complete different area with different needs. Why on earth would you cut off an electorate currently connected within the AMETI project to Panmure train station. How can the needs of Panmure including this new transport hub be split in half.

Objection

---

Mark Sims

Changing Tamaki Panmure region to east manukau does not reflect similar communities or histories, the changing area of Mt Wellington and Panmure, Tamaki is not aligned to manukau

Objection

---

Tonia Still

Mount Wellington next to the Tamaki Estuary has always been part of Auckland City Council and rates reflect that. To change the boundary Negatively impacts on residents who currently benefit from Auckland Hospital care which is superior to that offered by Middlemore let alone being more accessible. The new boundaries do not make sense from any logical point of view

Objection

---

Natasha Macpherson

Panmure has no connection to become part of the Manukau East zone. This is unfair and undemocratic.

Objection

---

Dr Oliver Mudford

Panmure, along with Glen Innes, and Point England are to be removed from Maungakiekie electorate and put into Manukau East. I object.
These three suburbs were always part of Auckland, which Maungakiekie is, but Manukau East was not. We (Panmure) and others are on the eastern boundary of M'kie as it runs through the middle of Tamaki estuary/river. It seems silly to eliminate a natural boundary, like a river. We are not South Auckland.
We have access to Greenlane Clinical Cenre and Auckland City Hospital that those of us who have had to use hospital services will be very sorry to lose. However people less than a kilometre from me and still in Panmure will be able to continue with hospital services that they are familiar with AND access by frequent public transport (buses) running from Panmure to Auckland, but not Middlemore.

Objection

---

Claire Ashley

1. Panmure has no history or community of interest with the Manukau East electorate.
2. Bad for democracy. Voters in Panmure and Glen Innes will feel disconnected and alienated from the larger Manukau East electoral area and will probably see all future election campaigns centred on South Auckland issues debated by South Auckland-based politicians. This is likely to undermine and discourage participation in democracy in our areas.
3. The boundary change appears entirely arbitrary and follows no logical historic or administrative pattern. Historically, Panmure has always sat within the former Auckland City Council and Mount Wellington Borough Council adminstrative areas. From 1848, Panmure became central to the political administration of this area through such bodies as the Panmure/Mount Wellington Highway Districts, the Borough of Mount Wellington and even the short-lived Tamaki City Council. This proposed change ignores all of that history.
4. The change would separate Panmure politically not only from its own railway station but also a significant part of its community in the Mountain Road area, along with businesses to the west of the railway line and Jellicoe Road.
5. All surrounding electorates - Tamaki, Epsom, Maungakiekie, Mangere, Manurewa, Botany and Pakuranga - are allowed to maintain their identity and sense of cohesion under the changes, but Panmure, along with Glen Innes, Point England, and parts of Mount Wellington and Otahuhu, will be forced to lose theirs.
6. The Tamaki Regeneration process foresees a significant population increase in Panmure, Glen Innes and Point England coming decades. This is likely to force a reversal of this proposal by the Electoral Commission in years to come.
7. Panmure is Auckland City and not Manukau and should not be in an electorate named Manukau East.
8. I do not want Panmure to ever come under Counties Manukau DHB / Middlemore.
Panmure being Auckland City is Auckland DHB therefore Auckland Hospital and must stay this way.
9. There has been next to zero publicity for this change for the residents of Panmure. Nothing in the local paper. No flyer drop, no addressed mail. The local elected Councillors have remained silent on it and despite being asked to hold a public meeting, failed to do so. A majority of Panmure residents would be unaware of this planned change. It is being done with minimal publicity with a close off right before Christmas to ensure there is limited opposition.