View submissions

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

S15-002, S15-003, S15-004, S15-008, S15-010, S15-013, S15-014, S15-016

---

Mr Richard Soper

I oppose the creation of a "Southern Lakes" electorate.
Whilst superficially the creation of such an electorate may seem to have some points in its favour, there are reasons not to.
The principal one is the nature of the other electorate to be created if it was done. To have sufficient population a Southern Lakes electorate would include the Te Anau Basin, a small part of Northern Southland, the Queenstown-Lakes District, Clyde and Alexandra, Cromwell to Hawea and the Mackenzie Basin. The resulting Waitaki-Southland electorate would have about 4,500 people in Central Otago, with two-thirds of the rest being in North Otago and inland South Canterbury, and a third in Southland and West Otago. Apart from being able to be very generally described as rural, this electorate would have very little in common. A vast area from Geraldine to the Southland Plains would include parts of three regions, and given that the concentrations of population would be at both ends of it, would be very difficult for an MP to effectively service.
One of the arguments put in favour of it is that at present the MPs are serving areas where the tourist industry is important in some placas and agriculture in others. However many MPs have electorates where a number of industries are important, and they are able to deal with issues relating different ones without any significant problem.

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

S15-002, S15-003, S15-004, S15-005 , S15-006, S15-007, S15-008, S15-009 , S15-010

---

Margot Hishon

These objections have been raised with narrow, somewhat selfish views in mind, that of combining areas that are perceived as 'special'.
There is no doubt these areas are tourist towns, of varying degrees, but there is also no doubt that these towns are important service towns for the rural sectors that surround them.
These towns provide essential services to the rural communities and their families, the suggestions that the rural community cannot live in harmony with the tourist industry is verging on farcical, who do these people think they are?
Throughout New Zealand, there are a wide range of industries, spread across all electorates and communities, to want to single out one sector defies belief, if, as it suggests, it comes down to the Member of Parliament not representing their needs to the extent they wish, that is a matter between the industry and the MP, certainly not a reason to isolate a sector of their community.
Not one of the submissions I refer to acknowledges the population numbers required for electorates, the various communities of interest, services or facilities important to every community or in fact the need to support their communities, regardless of their industry, interests or beliefs.
I strongly oppose any changes to the proposed boundaries to appease any particular sector in isolation.

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

S15-015

---

Miss Cathryn Lancaster

While I agree that the Southern Lakes Region has commonalities in terms of what drives its economies and it shares similar social challenges, unless wholesale change is achieved through these boundary changes, the proposed boundary changes make sense. The communities of Wanaka and Cromwell share more similarities than Wanaka and Queenstown. Wanaka also shares more commonalities with the wider Waitaki electorate than it does with rural Southland.

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

S15-002, S15-003, S15-004, S15-010, S15-013, S15-014, S15-016

---

Mark Wilson

By going away from the proposed boundaries and splitting Queenstown off and including it in an electorate with Wanaka the there are several more challenging issues created elsewhere. Depending on how things could be cobbled together due to low population density there would be an electorate created larger than Clutha-Southland is currently which would be highly difficult to service. The electorate while being predominantly rural in nature would span even more councils and a far more diverse area than Clutha-Southland does now. This is problematic to a far higher degree than keeping Queenstown within the Clutha-Southland electorate. Furthermore Wanaka and Queenstown themselves are as distinctive communities as the likes of Te Anau and Queenstown, with some commonality but huge areas of individual difference and community identity that is unique. While having a Central Lakes electorate sounds appealing for now the reality is the challenges for other electorates it creates are not counter weighted by any gain by creating it.

Objection

---

Mrs Jillian Purvis

For general election we have Invercargill but for local government we are Southland and it is confusing. I'm ruled by Southland so I should have a say in who is elected!

Objection

---

Mr Richard Soper

- I object to the area in Central Southland (including Winton and Browns) north of the present electoral boundary being shifted into the Invercargill eelectorate.
- Central Southland is very much one community of interest centred on Winton. Nearly all important facilities are based in Winton (including Central Southland College and the maternity hospital). This means that issues that impact on Winton alson have a major effect on areas like Drummond and Centre Bush.
- The proposed boundary splits the Central Southland community in two, even leaving Winton and its racecourse in different electorates.

Objection

---

Councillor Darren Frazer

including an area like Winton with the Invercargill seat is grouping a very different groups of people and needs together, Winton will miss out as a small part of a city seat, as opposed to how it sits how in a rural area made of mostly rural people, strong connections and similar issues across the seat, which won’t be the case when combining with the city.

Objection

---

Stewart Thomson

I am writing this email as a concerned member of the clutha Southland electrote as were I live In this electrote i will be put into the invercargill electrote I am sadden by this as I'm proud of this electrote as it has produced 2 deputy prime ministers and the later going on to be prime minister aka bill English. Our current mp hamish Walker is doing a fantastic job representing his electrote and I would be disappointed if the boundries were changed and he would no longer represent myself and other concerned voters. IF IT AIN'T BROKE DON'T FIX IT wake up there is more to worry about than electrote boundries

Objection

---

Mrs Virginia Gray

I object to Winton in the Clutha-Southland electorate being transfered to Invercargill
(1) From Wallace to Clutha-Southland, Winton and surrounding areas have been part of the electorate since 1859
(2) Previous M.P.s from Adam Hamilton 1919-25-28-31-35-38-43, Tom MacDonald 1946-49-51-54, Sir Brian Talboys 1963-66-69-72-75-78, Derek Angus 1981-84-87 have all lived in Winton.

Objection

---

Mrs Ngaire Broad

Protecting community of interests is an enormous concern when it comes to electorate boundaries. Your proposal to divide one of Southland's major community of interest i.e. Central Southland; it defies logic.
Winton is a major supportive town of it's outlying communities. Splitting Winton from the likes of Drummond, Oreti, Limehills, South Hillend, Dipton etc would create a dissaccoiate of business, families + community groups.

Objection

---

Mr Jim Halford

I object to the area in Central Southland north of electoral boundry being put in Invercargill electorate
Central Southland is one big community with Winton as its base with all facilities etc sports service clubs etc

Objection

---

Mrs Lyndsay McDonald

Winton is a service town for farming, and has a large number of retired farmers, and sits better in the Clutha-Southland electorate. We do not have a community of interest with Invercargill, and our needs in terms of services will be very much subordinated to Invercargill and Bluff, whose needs are quite different. Some of the support services we now have, could be lost or merged "for the greater good".

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

S16-003

---

Mr Thomas Wayne Harpur

I agree with the objector not wanting Winton to be included in the Invercargill electorate but I disagree with the suggested solution.

Counter-Objection

Relates to objections

S16-003

---

Raymond Paul Searancke

I strongly support the objection of Margot Hishon and object to the area of Central Southland, including Winton and Browns, north of the current Invercargill electorate boundary, being included within the Invercargill electorate.
If this proposal was to go ahead you would be splitting a significant community of interest into a community of no interest.
The proposed new boundaries are clumsy and make no sense.
Winton provides virtually all of the major facilities to the vast Central Southland area, including Central Southland College, the maternity hospital, the district nurses base and the Central Southland Community support service.
The long standing daily bus service between Winton and Invercargill has recently ceased, another example of a distinct lack of being, 'communities of interest'.