Displaying
331 - 340 of
438
| Number | Name | Submission | Change type | View |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| S02-007 | Miss Sarah Boulton (and Mr Chris Lowe) | Objection | Boundary | |
Miss Sarah Boulton (and Mr Chris Lowe)Objection
West Coast-Tasman
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Miss Sarah Boulton (and Mr Chris Lowe)I do not want to change from Nelson to Tasman-Westcoast, I do not live on the coast.Suggested solutionKeep the current boundary. |
||||
| S02-008 | John Hutton | Objection | Boundary | |
John HuttonObjection
West Coast-Tasman
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
John HuttonNot an objection, per se, more of an observation for future consideration. I live in the Tasman/West Coast electorate and it is an amazing long difficult to traverse area.Suggested solutionIt seems that the logic behind drawing boundaries relates to mountain ranges, but I would note that in any case, going over the Takaka hill to get to Golden Bay will inevitably involve crossing a mountain, no matter which electorate it's in.My point is that past considerations to making West Coast/Tasman a long, difficult to traverse electorate seems to ignore the 'ready' access via the passes (Arthurs, Lewis, and Haast). The district has been based on a longitudinal consideration given to the mountains, when, if you are a resident in the electorate, your general contact with others (tourists, business, friends, etc.) is either in your own immediate area, or those which are accessible via your closest pass. I think there is merit to considering 'horizontal' cuts of the south island, rather than longitudinal cuts; these cuts to be based on the passes. I draw your attention to the work being done by the Ministry of Health and the current review of the health system, and particularly, how the Canterbury DHB manages its patient base and nearby patient bases -- these, i believe are looking at horizontal cuts because they know that's is how people travel. If such an approach was taken, then there would be three or four cuts for the current West Coast/Tasman electorate, with the 'cut out' piece being added to the area immediately east, accessible via the nearest pass. taking this approach also gives more attention to the Top of the South/Te Tau Ihu which is gaining traction among local residents (Maori and Pakeha) because in the past, there was more of a horizontal thinking applied to who shared common interests. In this type of approach, Nelson would likely be split into two or three electorates, each reaching east and/or west towards Blenheim and Takaka. |
||||
| S02-009 | Elizabeth Kitson | Objection | Boundary | |
Elizabeth KitsonObjection
West Coast-Tasman
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Elizabeth KitsonTasman and the westcoast have far differing requirements from government. It is difficult to ascertain the needs of such a broad area based solely on population. I understand this is a difficult area to split but it is very very diverse and the current MPs are unable to service the whole area. The demands from the public vary and being sparsely populated it means no one gets the time, effort and funding they require.Suggested solutionSplit by are then by population across the country. It may mean more MP's in some areas but at least they could actually do something worthwhile in more areas rather than doing nothing in most. Damien O'Connor is my local MP and also has a large portfolio. Our next MP 'down' Maureen Pugh is not even a list MP. Inaction is killing rural NZ. Damien O'Connor is supposedly the minister for rural communities but he (and the government in general - left or right) are failing a lot of people. |
||||
| S02-010 | Mrs Jackie Farrelly | Objection | Boundary | |
Mrs Jackie FarrellyObjection
West Coast-Tasman
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mrs Jackie FarrellyI am yet to understand a realistic reason for Tasman to be included with the West Coast as an electorate. Population numbers is not a practical reason for the geographical size of this electorate. Tasman has very little real relationship with the West Coast, the two areas also have very different needs with the difference in weather, geography and occupation.Suggested solutionEither separate the two into two electorates or have a Nelson-Tasman inclusion or allocation of electorates. North of Hope Saddle with Nelson-Tasman. Murchison and south as West Coast. |
||||
| S02-011 | Neil Read | Objection | Boundary | |
Neil ReadObjection
West Coast-Tasman
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Neil Readgetting sick of the Tasman part of the electorate dictating the welfare of the west coast when they have no involvement in the unique life style businesses and employment here but due to there overwhelming ratio Tasman to West-coaster think they can bulldoze there choice on us.Suggested solutionDrop Tasman out and align us with southland Clutha where we have more in common in life style, topography and businesses. As Milford sounds, Queenstown area have more in common. At the moment it is like expecting the people of Stewart Island to be a part of the Helensville electorate. Not very democratic more communistic. |
||||
| S02-012 | Mrs Elisabeth Harper | Objection | Boundary, name | |
Mrs Elisabeth HarperObjection
West Coast-Tasman
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change
Mrs Elisabeth HarperHi, I live in Mapua which is in the Tasman district but only a short drive to Nelson. My objection is that Nelson sits on its on and Mapua gets placed with the entire West Coast! It’s nuts... What affects Mapua affects Nelson..Mapua is part known as Nelson Bays! I strongly suggest that there is a focus placed on creating a voting boundary that includes Nelson, Richmond, Mapua, Redwood Valley etc. We live as one community believe me. Motueka might be ok in with the West Coast.Suggested solutionAs above |
||||
| S03-001 | Ms Karen Murray | Objection | Boundary | |
Ms Karen MurrayObjection
Kaikōura
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Ms Karen MurrayMy objection is to the actual boundary- we live 5 minutes from Rangiora - have absolutely nothing to do with Kaikoura yet our representation is from there - we need to be with RangioraSuggested solutionMove us to Rangiora |
||||
| S03-002 | Sherrill and Jim Carswell | Objection | Boundary | |
Sherrill and Jim CarswellObjection
Kaikōura
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Sherrill and Jim CarswellWe live in Loburn, North Canterbury, and for some years have been put into the Kaikoura electorate.We live in the Waimakariri district, and for the life of me I don’t see the point of being in an electorate where we have no communication or knowledge of the one MP who is there. It would be really great if you would consider changing the boundary from North of the Ashley bridge to maybe North of the Hurunui, or some where in between. If we needed to speak to our MP we would need to travel to Kaikoura, when Rangiora is a 15 minute drive from here, and we have been here for 30 years! I know I speak for a lot of people, and many if not most would not bother to write and make this request, so PLEASE would you consider making this change. |
||||
| S05-001 | New Zealand Labour Party | Objection | Boundary | |
New Zealand Labour PartyObjection
Christchurch East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
New Zealand Labour PartyWe oppose any change to the southern boundary of Christchurch East. There appears to be no nessesity to make any changes to the Christchurch East electorate. The electorate is projected to grow by several thousand people, and fall only 692 people shy of remaining within the 5% quota by 2023.The Commission’s reasoning for this change, that it will put the electorate more ‘comfortably’ within quota,we do not find to be compelling enough to disrupt the representation of these people and strike a line down the middle of this community. The proposal is at odds with the Commission’s stated desire to seek minimal change –at most the Commission should be seeking simply to achieve the 5% quota by 2023. We note that the Commission has chosen not to pursue the same approach for other electorates close to the 5% quota limit (e.g. Rongotai, which is projected to be further under it’s quota by 2023). Accordingly, we encourage the Commission to take a consistent approach. If the Commission prefers to ensure that the projected population for Christchurch East remains within the 5% quota in 2023, we suggest instead that a much smaller and less disruptive change could be made. The small area around Mairehau School on the boundary of Christchurch Central could be moved into Christchurch East. The new boundary between the electorates would run along Dudley creek as it passes through Walter Park – a much more natural boundary than the existing one. This would be significantly less disruptive than the proposed division of Bromley, as it does not sever a cohesive community in two. It also relocates less people, just enough to bring Christchurch East within quota on 2023 projections, and much more in line with the aim to create minimal changes. Suggested solution• We oppose any change to the southern boundary of the Christchurch East electorate.• We recommend the entirety of Christchurch East remain unaltered. - Failing this, we recommend instead the small area around Mairehau School, bounded by Dudley Creek, be moved into the Christchurch East electorate. See attachment for map |
||||
| S05-002 | Woolston Community Association (122 signatories) | Objection | Boundary | |
Woolston Community Association (122 signatories)Objection
Christchurch East
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Woolston Community Association (122 signatories)Petition opposing the removal of the Linwood/Bromley area from the Port Hills/Banks Peninsula electorate.We ask the Representation Commission to retain this area in the current electorate. You will see that there is a wide range of residents from this entire area represented on the petition. All these residents have connections with schools, churches or clubs in the area on the other side of Linwood Avenue. The area is one community and the proposed boundary change will divide it with an artificial barrier. Suggested solutionLeave the existing boundary in place. |
||||