Displaying
151 - 160 of
438
Number | Name | Submission | Change type | View |
---|---|---|---|---|
N20-041 | Mrs Alfreda Gibson | Objection | Boundary | |
Mrs Alfreda GibsonObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mrs Alfreda GibsonI object to the proposal to break the Panmure Community from Mt Wellington. At present both are in Tamaki Maungakiekie.My reasons are: 1.Panmure has a long history and no connection to the Manukau East electorate. we will become a forgotten community in the Manukau Electorate. 2.Voters in Panmure and Glen Innes will definitely feel disconnected from the larger Manukau East electoral area and possibly view future election campaigns will be centred on South Auckland issues. 3. The boundary change appears entirely arbitrary and follows no logical administrative pattern. Panmure now sits within the Central Auckland Council and historically has always sat within that electoral boundary. From 1848, Panmure became central to the political administration of the local area through different highway districts. This proposed change ignores all of this area’s 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. Other surrounding electorates e.g. Tamaki, Epsom, Maungakiekie, Mangere, Manurewa, Botany and Pakuranga,- retain their identity and sense of cohesion under the changes, but Panmure, along with Glen Innes, Point England, parts of Mount Wellington and Otahuhu, will lose theirs. 6. The Tamaki Regeneration process foresees a significant population increase in Panmure, Glen Innes and Point England in coming decades. This is likely to force a reversal of this proposal by the Electoral Commission in years to come, which would then make this an unnecessary change to make at this point of time. 7. Our community has gone through an amazing amount of upheavel/change in the last couple of years and is unfair to disconnect and push us away from our Mountain/River (Maungakiekie/Tamaki). Most of our Maori familys have moved or been removed out of this area, due to the high prices of the new housing subdivision or not securing social housing, and will eventually fill with other ethnicities that would fall under General Roles? Suggested solutionSuggest/Solution/AlternativesIf there is to be an amalgamation of districts, Leave the proposed sectioning of Panmure and Glen Innes as it is, under the Central Auckland City Council banner, and/or align it with the Mt Wellington area - which is a closer district - and quite removed from others currently aligned with Manukau, Mt Roskill is closer to Manukau/Mangere than either Panmure and Glen Innes. A new electorate encompassing Glen Innes, Panmure, Mount Wellington and Ellerslie as far south as Westfield/Panama Road - with the western boundary at the main trunk line/southern motorway/Great South Road? It would be roughly equal in size to either Tamaki or Epsom, and would follow entirely natural boundaries. Or “leave as is” due to the massive development within this area, with housing more people, we can become a new electorate? called “Maungarei” As mentioned in Reason *6, foresees a significant population increase in Mt Wellington, Panmure, Glen Innes and Point England in coming decades. Increased people numbers as properties are going up, not out. |
||||
N20-042 | Mary Jacobs | Objection | Boundary | |
Mary JacobsObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mary JacobsThe Panmure boundary should remain the same. I see no sense my place a middle line through it.Suggested solutionDon't do it. |
||||
N20-043 | Roshan Robinson | Objection | Boundary | |
Roshan RobinsonObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Roshan RobinsonPanmure has no history or community of interest with the Manukau East electorate. The people of Panmure have a lot more in common and a lot more shared interest in their community with Mt Wellington as opposed to Papatoetoe. Papatoetoe is at best 12 kilometres away from Panmure - Mt Wellington is next door....this makes no logical sense what-so-ever.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. 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. 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. 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. 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. Suggested solutionLeave Mt Wellington and Panmure together as they are now and as they should be. |
||||
N20-044 | Mrs Ashton Ewing | Objection | Boundary | |
Mrs Ashton EwingObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mrs Ashton EwingI do not want to go to Middlemore zone and be under the Manukau electric. Auckland Hospital has ALL our information for our family and if we were to change we would have to travel more to get medical care for our childrenSuggested solutionKeep the electric as it is DO NOT CHANGE |
||||
N20-045 | Mr Robert Ewing | Objection | Boundary | |
Mr Robert EwingObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mr Robert EwingI am opposed to Panmure being removed from the Maungakiekie electorate. It is important to me that Panmure is part of Central Auckland, particularly to ensure that we continue to fall under Auckland City Hospital. I am worried that the boundary change is going to mean a future shift of Panmure into South Auckland and that this will mean we are required to go to Middlemore hospital which is far removed from where we are.The proposed electorate boundaries are not aligned with our location within Central Auckland and groups Panmure together with a collection of other suburbs that are geographically and socially removed from our area. This will leave Panmure isolated from the area that it has always been a part of. I also object for the following reasons: 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. Suggested solutionKeep Panmure in the Maungakiekie electorate. |
||||
N20-046 | Mr Cameron Sims | Objection | Boundary | |
Mr Cameron SimsObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mr Cameron Sims1. Waipuna and Panmure has no history or community of interest with the Manukau East electorate.2. Bad for democracy. Voters in Waipuna, 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, Waipuna and 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 and Waipuna 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 Waipuna, 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. Suggested solutionKeep Waipuna, Panmure and surrounding areas in the Maungakiekie electorate.Use Waipuna road or South Eastern Highway as the boundary line and the natural boundaries to keep Waipuna in Maungakiekie. |
||||
N20-047 | Mrs Barbara Cooper | Objection | Boundary | |
Mrs Barbara CooperObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mrs Barbara CooperAs a member of a family resident in Panmure for about 80 years I object strongly to the proposal to remove Panmure from the Maungakiekie electorate and to link it to Manukau East.Panmure and Mt Wellington have been historically linked under various governing local bodies for over 150 years. The demographics of our communities are quite different to those of Manukau East. Our maunga, Maungarei/Mt Wellington, would be severed from our community. Our wonderful new railway station and transport hub would no longer be in our community. The Tamaki River forms a natural and historic border to our area. I feel that the Panmure/Mt.Wellington/Glen Innes areas share links and interests that have little to do with Manukau East. Suggested solutionI suggest a shift of the electorate boundary to the west of the Great South Rd/ Southern Motorway and to include southern Onehunga and Mt.Smart area instead. |
||||
N20-048 | Mr Christian Pulley | Objection | Boundary | |
Mr Christian PulleyObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mr Christian PulleyNew boundary changes proposed by the Electoral Commission could see Panmure, along with parts of Glen Innes, Mount Wellington and Otahuhu, carved off the Maungakiekie Parliamentary electorate and stuck on to the Manukau East electorate with Papatoetoe and Otara in South Auckland.The new boundary would create a strange, elongated electorate stretching all the way from Maybury Reserve in Glen Innes to Puhinui Road at Clover Park - sticking together neighbourhoods and towns with no clear connections or community of interest. Some of the more bizarre consequences of the proposed boundary change would be: Panmure Town Centre goes to Manukau East electorate, while Panmure Railway Station and Mountain Road, Forge Way and Mountwell Crescent stay in Maungakiekie. Everything west of Jellicoe Road and the railway line remains in Maungakiekie, while everything to the west as far as the Tamaki River goes to Manukau East. Notably, in the overall list of proposals for boundary changes in Auckland, the more favoured electorates of Tamaki, Epsom, Auckland Central, Mt Albert, Pakuranga and Botany remain completely untouched, while Maungakiekie's reward for shedding Panmure, Glen Innes and parts of Mount Wellington and Otahuhu is to gain Royal Oak to the west. Likewise, Mt Roskill electorate gains more territory to its west to replace Royal Oak. In all of the above cases, the more favoured electorates will enjoy a largely consistent community of interest and territorial integrity. Only Panmure and its northern and southern neighbours are to be carved off and stuck to an entirely separate electorate - in what used to be another city completely - with which it has no history or community of interest. Suggested solutionLeave Mangakiekie as it is, the tamaki estuary should remain the southern boundary of Mangakiekie as this physically divides the two communities. |
||||
N20-049 | Alysia Sims | Objection | Boundary | |
Alysia SimsObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Alysia Sims1. Waipuna, Panmure has no history or community of interest with the Manukau East electorate.2. Bad for democracy. Voters in Waipuna, 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. Suggested solutionKeep Waipuna and Panumre in Manugakiekie electorate.Use Waipuna road or South Eastern Highway and natural water boundaries. |
||||
N20-050 | Mr Gary Feran | Objection | Boundary | |
Mr Gary FeranObjection
Manukau East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mr Gary FeranI would like to object to the proposed changes to the electoral boundaries to separate the Panmure Township and community from Mount Wellington. Currently both Mount Wellington and Panmure are both in the Tamaki Mangakiekie electorate.I am a current resident and have been living in Panmure for over 59 years. My reasons are: 1. Panmure has no community of interest and no history with the Manukau East electorate. Panmure’s community makeup is very different from that of Manuaku East. This is reflected in the demographics of the residents, the nationalities, the ethnicities, and the socio-economic composition. 2. For over 100 years, Panmure and Mount Wellington have been strongly connected. Firstly under the Mount Wellington Borough Council and latterly with Tamaki City. This proposal destroys this connection and it’s community and ignores all of this history. 3. The local government agencies are currently working to preserve the existing community despite the disruption of the rebuild presently taking place in Glenn Innes through to Panmure. The AMETI transportation initiative currently links Pakuranga with Panmure transport interchange. This proposed infrastructure setup focuses on Panmure/Pakuranga/Mount Wellington/Glenn Innes being intrinsically linked through the buses and the train system. Both of these initiatives focus and support the existing community structure that is Pakuranga/Panmure/Mount Wellington and Glenn Innes. The proposal does not recognise this ongoing association and linkage. 4. Panmure businesses will also be detrimentally impacted. A significant part of the business community along the west of the railway line and Jellicoe Road and parts of Mountain road will be separated from central Panmure. This will politically divide Panmure businesses and could hinder economic growth and political symmetry. 5. Due to the Tamaki Regeneration process, there is foreseeable significant increase in Panmure, Glen Innes and Point England populations in the next decade. This is likely to force a reversal of this proposal by the Electoral Commission in the future. Suggested solutionMy alternative to this proposal is to take some of the population from the Southern Onehunga/ Mount Smart area instead. For example, Mount Wellington Highway, Penrose Road, Church Street, Nelson Street, Onehunga. This would a more considered approach that takes into account communities of interest and historical connections.The proposed boundary change does not consider our historical volcanic cones that are Maungarei, Mutukaroa, and Van Dammes Lagoon Reserve. |