View submissions

Objection

---

New Zealand Labour Party

We commend the Commission on its decision to draw a new electorate focussed on Auckland’s southern growth area. Some people who will vote in this electorate at the upcoming election will do so living in houses yet to be built. Inevitably their proximity as well as shared experiences in moving to these areas seeking new opportunities will mean they will face and overcome their challenges together –this is how strong communities are formed. Other communities in the proposed Flat Bush electorate, though older, share this history of opportunity presented by new suburban growth.
We question the proposal to leave the boundary at the southern end of the Botany electorate unchanged. The underlying areas have changed significantly since the electorate was originally drawn, and the inclusions and exclusions no longer make sense.
Electorates often have interesting shapes that reflect the quirks of geography and community that underpin them. However where an electoral boundary is oddly shaped without it being required by either geography or community, it invites questions at best and mistrust of our processes at worst.
Mere historic precedent should not be relied upon to dispell these concerns. This area should be redrawn to reflect the links between communitites now within it.

• Labour-Party-Submission-to-Representation-Commission-Dec-2019-N24-001.pdf (pdf 613 KB)

Objection

---

Liz Otter

I object to Hill Park Manurewa East being excluded from the proposed Flat Bush electorate. Hill Park Manurewa East are similar in comparison to the Gardens/Wattle Downs suburbs. A Hill Park residents group are currently collecting residents support & signatures to make a submission to officially recognise Hill Park as a suburb in its own right. This submission may have already been made. The Gardens/Wattle Downs suburbs are currently in the Papakura suburb - they are now included in the proposed Flat Bush electorate boundary. I believe Hill Park is currently, correctly viewed in as positive light as the Gardens. To be excluded from the new electorate that are proposed for the Gardens & Wattle Downs I believe will have a marked negative impact on our area and property values.

Objection

---

Daniel Newman

NAME OF THE PROPOSED FLAT BUSH ELECTORATE
I wish to make an objection to the name of the proposed Flat Bush electorate. I also wish to comment of the proposed boundaries of the Flat Bush electorate and adjacent electorates.
The Flat Bush electorate consists of communities that come from Hunua, Manurewa and Papakura. The largest concentration of population (32,800) is moved from Papakura to Flat Bush, but this coupled with 6,400 around Greenmeadows means 59 per cent of the proposed population of the new seat is broadly aligned with the south of the new electorate.
While the proposed boundary change is accepted, the Commission may wish to consider changing the name of the new electorate to better reflect the balance of communities.
It is recommended that the new seat be named: “Flat Bush-Takaanini” to reflect communities of interest.
The boundaries of the new electorate mean an electoral population that is 2.2 per cent at variance with the North Island general electorate population quota, but this is projected to increase to 8.1 per cent by 2023.
Some of the fastest growing areas of the new electorate are based on Takaanini and Flat Bush. Further growth is also occurring in Wattle Downs, which reflects the fast-changing nature of outer suburban Auckland. On balance, the proposed boundary is appropriate but a further and significant consequential change is likely to be required following the 2023 election.
PAPAKURA
The Commission has proposed that 32,800 people be moved from Papakura to Flat Bush. This is a significant change, which is offset with moving 20,200 people from Hunua to Papakura. This is a substantial change.
No further changes to the proposed Papakura boundary should be made west of the existing boundary line. Karaka, Te Hihi and Kingseat align with Papakura and the proposed boundary ensures continuity.
The Commission appears to have moved 20,200 people from Hunua to Papakura to broadly reflect the Wairoa subdivision of the Franklin Local Board (which generally reflects Whitford, Beachlands, Maraetai, Clevedon, Kawakawa Bay, Orere Point, Hunua, Paparimu, Ararimu and Bombay). This generally reflects a community of interest and ensures that Papakura is within the population quota set for the North Island.
The Commission appears to accept that the Census Area Units around Ramarama and Pukekohe East align with Drury, and this is appropriate noting communities of interest couple with projected residential and industrial development within the vicinity (Drury South) in accordance with Auckland Council’s structure plan for that area.
The Commission proposes moving 32,800 people from Papakura to Flat Bush. This means the decoupling of Wattle Downs, Takaanini. Randwick Park and The Gardens (which have a long relationship with Papakura) as well as Redoubt. While the Commission has proposed an adjustment that offends longstanding communities of interest arguments, the primary requirement is to ensure one vote-one value. It is therefore necessary to accept the proposed boundary change.
PORT WAIKATO
The Commission is to be congratulated on changes that ensure the realignment of Aka Aka, Tuakau, Port Waikato and Onewhero with Pukekohe and Franklin. This is appropriate and strongly reflects existing as well as historic communities of interest.
The Commission has proposed a boundary for Port Waikato that allows for more headroom (-4.5 per cent from quota with a 1.7 per cent projected variation to quota in 2023). Future growth in Pukekohe, Paerata, Tuakau, Pokeno and Waiuku may result in a higher variation, so the proposed boundary is prudent under the circumstances.
The Commission is right to generally base the adjacent of the population movement from Waikato to Port Waikato on the Waikato District Council’s ward boundaries (Onewhero-Te Akau, Whangamarino, and Awaroa ki Tuakau). This is appropriate and strongly reflects existing as well as historic communities of interest.

Objection

---

David Hopkins

Firstly, I appreciate the importance of the work done by the Commission and its staff to create fair and legal electorates.
Wattle Downs has almost no community of interest with Flat Bush beyond that we are all part of Auckland and New Zealand. The proposal to create this long irregular shaped electorate is surely fair in numbers but one which is not readily comprehensible to residents. People have already the experience of being ‘moved’ from Manurewa electorate to Papakura electorate. That was disconcerting but at least these are geographically adjacent. The area proposed for the new Flat Bush electorate is so spread out and not connected. The name Flat Bush is also inappropriate as it relates to another part of Auckland, some distance away.
This proposed change would not assist in promoting voting or civic engagement as it would be seen as confusing and distancing.

Objection

---

Kevin Loasby

The name of a proposed electorate is Flat Bush which relates to one part of the zone and is exclusive.

Objection

---

Mr Leigh Auton

The Representation Commission has suggested the name Flatbush ‘reflects the geographic area of the electorate’. I don’t believe this to be the case. As a resident of The Gardens, in the current electorate of Papakura, and as a former Chief Executive of Manukau City Council, and with prior responsibility for much of the urban planning of Manukau City over a number of decades, I disagree with the Commission that the name reflects the new electorate. The Representation Commission notes that 12,400 people come from Flatbush (principally Mission Heights), while 53,900 come from Totara Heights, the Gardens, Randwick Park, Takanini, Conifer Grove, Wattle Downs and Greenmeadows. These latter communities, made up from the existing Manurewa and Papakura electorates have a community of interest with Papakura, Manurewa and Manukau. Mission Heights/Ormiston and Flatbush have a separate community of interest facing east towards Botany and Howick. Even on a purely geographic basis, it would seem a larger proportion of the proposed electorate is identifiably from the Papakura and Manurewa electorates.

Objection

---

Mr Dominic Tay

I object to the name of the new electorate and wonder if there is a Māori name that would be more appropriate.

• Dominic-Tay-submission-N24-013.pdf (pdf 790 KB)

Objection

---

Mr Raj Dawson

OBJECTIONS:
* Align suburb named 'Flat Bush’ with electorate named 'FLAT BUSH'
* Share common attributes with the new Flat Bush electorate than Botany
REASONS:
* Characteristics of the suburbs of south Botany are more in harmony with the new Flat Bush electorate than the Northern part of Botany.
* The local MP will be able to carry out their function in a more homogenous manner, rather than at cross purposes with distinct segments OF THE COMMUNITY THEY SERVE

• Boundary-change-FLAT-BUSH-.png (png 590 KB)

Objection

---

Mrs Rachel Hex

Wattle Downs should not be moved to the Flatbush electorate as the suburb is nowhere near Flatbush. Wattle Downs is in South Auckland not East Auckland.

Objection

---

Mrs Sue Davis

I would Like WattleDowns to stay in the Papakura electorate under MP Judith Collins

Objection

---

Ms Linda Jordan

I live in Wattle Downs, a southern subdivision of Manurewa. We are currently part of Papakura electorate, which in itself is strange but this new idea is even stranger. Why take us out of our local area and put us with homes that are in a suburb that far away!

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

N24-001

---

Daniel Newman

I am an Auckland Councillor representing the Manurewa-Papakura Ward. My Ward covers the majority of the existing Manurewa and Papakura electorate, and is potentially going to cover the majority of the Flat Bush electorate depending on the outcome of the current Representation Review.
I wish to make the following counter-objection to objection N24-001 by the New Zealand Labour Party (“Labour Party”), which should be read alongside my objection to the Representation Commission.
WEYMOUTH
The Labour Party’s objection to the proposed Manurewa/Flat Bush boundary is based in erroneous statements and assumptions.
Contrary to the Labour Party’s objection, Weymouth has a long history as an established community within the wider Manurewa suburban area. In 1857 the district was surveyed into small holdings and town lots.
Weymouth is both intrinsically and practically linked to Manurewa, for example:
1. public transport routes link both Weymouth and Clendon to Manurewa;
2. Weymouth school children predominantly attend primary schools in Weymouth and Clendon before graduating to James Cook High School in Manurewa;
3. evidence from the Weymouth Residents and Ratepayers’ Association in response to Oranga Tamariki’s application to change to designation of Whakatapokai to accommodate Youth Justice young people point out that the communities of interest codified for a Social Impact Assessment (SIA) include both Clendon and Manurewa West as well as the Weymouth Peninsula.
The Labour Party’s objection recommends the inclusion of the Weymouth Peninsula into the Flat Bush electorate. As Weymouth is a community on a peninsula, the Labour Party’s recommendation would in effect require the Commission to establish an electorate based on communities living in semi-isolation connected by one road (Mahia Road) while ignoring established communities of interest. At no stage in its post-war history has Weymouth existed in a parliamentary electorate separate from Manurewa.
WATTLE DOWNS
Unlike Weymouth, the Wattle Downs Peninsula has remained relatively separate from Manurewa. Over the years, Wattle Downs has existed in various parliamentary electorates, and has been within the Papakura electorate boundary over the past four general elections. The Commission is correct to identify the Wattle Downs Peninsula comprising both Wattle Downs and Mahia Park as communities of interest distinct from the Weymouth Peninsula (which is separated by the Waimahia Inlet).
Wattle Downs has a community of interest that aligns with both Takanini and Manurewa South (as opposed to Weymouth, which aligns with Clendon and Manurewa West). Recent plan change applications, traffic and road planning, and greenways planning reflects greater integration between Wattle Downs and Waiata Shores in Conifer Grove.
GREENMEADOWS AND MANUREWA SOUTH
Both the Greenmeadows and Manurewa South are established residential neighbourhoods; but neither exist in splendid isolation. There are no topographical features or infrastructure links that separate either neighbourhood from other neighbourhoods within the proposed Flat Bush parliamentary electorate. By way of example:
1. active transport infrastructure to accommodate walking and cycling is being established to link Greenmeadows and Waiata Shores in Conifer Grove;
2. a plan change has been adopted by Auckland Council to enable the establishment of a new local shopping centre at Te Napi Drive to provide shopping options specifically to meet the consumer needs of residents in Manurewa South, Greenmeadows, Wattle Downs and Conifer Grove; and
3. Greenmeadows and Manurewa South residents have a long history of shared representation with neighbourhoods in Takanini and Papakura as well as Manurewa. Indeed, the local government ward boundary includes both Greenmeadows and Manurewa South in the Manurewa-Papakura Ward alongside other proposed Flat Bush neighbourhoods such as Wattle Downs, Conifer Grove, Takanini, Randwick Park, The Gardens and Totara Park (the ward boundaries have applied over the past four local government elections).
I consider that the Representation Commission must weigh a communities of interest argument against the prevailing need to ensure one vote-one value, and create electorates that have equal representation. To this extent, I continue to support the proposed Flat Bush electorate boundary and oppose the changes recommended by the Labour Party.
DAWSON ROAD
The Botany electorate has existed since a Representation Review in 2007, and was first contested in 2008. That electorate was established to accommodate rapid residential development in the early 2000s.
The area south of Dawson Road proposed by the Labour Party for inclusion in the Flat Bush electorate does not exist in splendid isolation vis-à-vis other communities within the Botany electorate. Nor does the inclusion of an existing community within its existing electorate invite “… questions at best and mistrust of our processes at worst”. I submit that this is one example where the changes recommended by the Labour Party would practically separate that community from important communities of interest, and for an outcome that is unnecessary in terms of equal representation and existing electorate boundaries.
MURPHY’S BUSH RESERVE AND ORIMISTON
The inclusion of Murphy’s Bush Reserve and Orimiston into the Botany electorate as recommended by the Labour Party is unnecessary in terms of equal representation and existing electorate boundaries.
The Botany electorate does not need to increase to comply with the quota for a North Island electorate. The communities around Murphy’s Bush and Ormiston are part of a new community that will continue to grow over the next decade (and this is already projected by the Representation Commission). At present, this area of Auckland is broadly divided by the electorate boundary dividing the existing Hunua and Papakura electorates.
I submit that a better approach would be to amalgamate those areas of Flat Bush within the existing Hunua electorate with the communities of Redoubt within the existing Papakura electorate, and combine them within the proposed Flat Bush electorate as proposed by the Representation Commission in its proposed boundary.
Inevitably, parliamentary electorate boundaries will need to be reviewed again following the next Census. However, the scale and timing of growth within an area of Auckland that is still to be developed makes further changes unnecessary and premature at this time.
GENERAL COMMENTS
In my objection (N24-005) I objected to the name of the Flat Bush electorate. I recommended changing the name of the electorate to “Flat Bush-Takaanini” to better reflect a sense of place.
I share the concerns of other submitters who have raised objections about the name of the Flat Bush electorate and will speak to this matter before the Commission when it convenes hearings. I believe the Representation Commission got the boundaries right in its initial proposal. However, the name of the Flat Bush electorate requires further consideration noting balance of population and local history that defines its geographic place within outer suburban South Auckland.

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

N24-006, N24-009, N24-010

---

Jan Robinson

I object to the suggestion names offered by N24-006, N24-009 and N24-010 for the Flatbush electorate.
Manukau South is vague and is not relevant to much of the area. Totara Park does not reflect the huge urban area of Flatbush.
Much of the current Flatbush area will not be in the proposed electorate therefore the name is not appropriate.

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

N24-012

---

Mr Geoff Hall

I can see why people object to the name 'Flat Bush' The electorate covers such a vast area, all with claims to a local name. However there can only be one name and it has to reflect a general Icon for the area. Totara or Totara Park are the only names that could be embraced by the many 'local' areas included in this change. The name Totara Park, could suggest a more acceptable name that could be adopted by many cultures. I'm sure the committee working on this project are doing their best to provide the best options for all. Hopefully they will take some indications from the majority of acceptances and/or objections.

Objection

---

Bryce Collin

I couldn’t find the electorate my objection was in because it’s called Hunua not Port Waikato. While port Waikato is a cool place it does not represent the electorate as a whole which stretches from one coast to the other. Franklin would have been a much much better name choice as it refers to the entire area. Please don’t name it Port Waikato, name it Franklin - Ka Pai