Displaying
91 - 100 of
438
| Number | Name | Submission | Change type | View |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| N11-602 | Pam Nuttall | Counter-Objection | Name | |
Pam NuttallCounter-Objection
New Lynn
Relates to objectionsN11-002
This objection does not relate to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change
Pam NuttallMy counter-objection is to suggestions that the New Lynn electorate should be renamed Waitakere. While the proposed new boundaries include much of the Waitakere Ranges, about 75% of voters in the electorate live within the previous New Lynn electorate boundaries. For most people the electorate name should remain the same (ie New Lynn) to avoid confusion. The bulk of the population in the electorate would not consider themselves to be in the Waitakeres and the Electoral Commission would need an expensive publicity campaign to ensure that the name Waitakere was seen as applying to the majority of voters.The old Waitakere City was based in Henderson and includes a much larger area of West Auckland than the Waitakere Ranges area itself. New Lynn township remains the centre of the electorate and for the majority of voters remains the logical appellation for the area they vote in. Suggested solutionRetain the name New Lynn as the name of the electorate. |
||||
| N11-603 | Mr Josh Kirwan | Counter-Objection | Name | |
Mr Josh KirwanCounter-Objection
New Lynn
Relates to objectionsN11-001, N11-002
This objection does not relate to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change
Mr Josh KirwanI strongly oppose the name of the electorate being changed from New Lynn to Waitakere. For starters, 75% of the existing population within New Lynn will remain in the electorate, meaning the despite the large physical change supposedly warranting a re-naming of the electorate, there has been little population shift overall. Furthermore, the Electoral Commission would have to put in a lot of unnecessary work educating voters about the new electorate name, as there would be great confusion. Adding on to this point, residents in Avondale and Blockhouse Bay, who still comprise a significant portion of the electorate, have never been associated with "Waitakere" at either a political (central or local government) or community level, which seems unfair to such a significant community group. The suburb of New Lynn also remains central to the electorate on the new boundaries, for those living either west or east of it. Finally, the next boundary re-draw will likely result in the creation of a new north-west electorate, meaning the boundary in New Lynn will shift east again, rendering the name "Waitakere" difficult to justify and possibly rendering another re-naming.Suggested solutionRetain the name "New Lynn" for the new electorate boundary. |
||||
| N11-604 | Associate Professor Daniel Exeter | Counter-Objection | Name | |
Associate Professor Daniel ExeterCounter-Objection
New Lynn
Relates to objectionsN11-001, N11-002
This objection does not relate to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change
Associate Professor Daniel ExeterI object to the proposed renaming of New Lynn to Waitakere.Given that around 75% of voters remain within the old New Lynn boundaries, the name-change is unnecessary. While there has been a substantial shift in the configuration of the boundaries and an increase in its spatial extent, the majority of the population would identify more closely with New Lynn than Waitakere. In addition, the Electoral Commission would have to do a lot of unnecessary work educating voters about the new electorate name. This seems to be an inefficient use of tax-payer money, especially when the New Lynn suburb remains central to the electorate. Suggested solutionRetain the New Lynn electorate name |
||||
| N14-001 | John Nutter | Objection | Boundary | |
John NutterObjection
Auckland Central
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
John NutterAny increase in the number of electorates will generate a similar increase in the number of MPs in the house.There are already too many - all of whom cost too much for too little benefit. Any committee with too many on it is inefficient - the bigger it is, the more inefficient. A good example is our current parliament, another is the British House of Commons Suggested solutionReduce a fixed size eg 100. |
||||
| N15-001 | Ainslie and Michael Rice | Objection | Boundary | |
Ainslie and Michael RiceObjection
Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Ainslie and Michael RiceWhy change our electorate when it almost fits perfectly the 2 large state secondary schools it has natural boundaries eg. Hobson bay, Orakei basin Cornwall Park, Auckland domain and major arterial routesOur current electorate is very adept at strategic voting for our desired candidate Suggested solutionLEAVE EPSOM ELECTORATE AS IT IS !!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
||||
| N15-002 | ACT New Zealand | Objection | Boundary | |
ACT New ZealandObjection
Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
ACT New ZealandI write on behalf of the ACT Party in response to the Commission’s proposed Electoral Boundaries released on 20 November.In my earlier letter dated 7 October, I argued for the boundaries of the Epsom Electorate to remain the same. I won’t rehearse the reasons given in that letter, but continue to stand by them. On behalf of ACT, I’d like to express strong support for the Commission’s proposal to retain the Electorate’s current boundaries. We will continue to argue for this decision if it is contested in the first round of submissions. ACT does not currently wish to express a view on other boundary decisions for other electorates. |
||||
| N15-003 | Liberal Democrats NZ | Objection | Boundary | |
Liberal Democrats NZObjection
Epsom
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Liberal Democrats NZEpsom is 4.2% below the quota, near the lower limit. Population projections forecast that Epsom will have to gain territory from Auckland Central, which is expected to grow well beyond the upper limit by the next census. The area proposed to move to Epsom has a small population and has Epsom to its north, east and south, so already has most community links to Epsom.Suggested solutionInclude Auckland Domain and Grafton in Epsom, by moving the boundary with Auckland Central to Grafton Rd, Stanley St and Parnell Rd. This area must move into Epsom at the next Boundary Review, and would result in a much shorter and straighter boundary, separated from Auckland Central by Grafton Gully. |
||||
| N15-601 | Ian Campbell | Counter-Objection | Boundary | |
Ian CampbellCounter-Objection
Epsom
Relates to objectionsN15-003
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Ian CampbellI disagree with the Liberal Democrats NZ objection since Grafton, Auckland Hospital and Carlaw Park have better connections with Auckland Central. Accordingly, the current boundary should remain unchanged.Suggested solutionEpsom electorate boundary remains unchanged. |
||||
| N16-001 | Liberal Democrats NZ | Objection | Boundary | |
Liberal Democrats NZObjection
Tāmaki
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Liberal Democrats NZPoint England has been included in Manukau East, with which it has absolutely no community of interest. Most of its community facilities are shared with Glen Innes immediately to its north, and other sports and shopping facilities with the Merton Rd area to its west. It is on Tamaki River. Tamaki electorate is only 88 above the lower limit, and Point England is an integral part of the Glen Innes area.Suggested solutionMove Point England from Manukau East to Tamaki electorate, bringing the latter much closer to the quota mid-point. The southern boundary should become Boundary Reserve, which is a clear community boundary because it was the local body boundary for a century (and remains the limit of the Mt Wellington Licensing Trust. (Note that this objection stands on it own, independent of our objection to Manukau East boundary, but may also be considered as complementary to that objection). |
||||
| N16-002 | Mr Gregory Gray | Objection | Boundary | |
Mr Gregory GrayObjection
Tāmaki
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change
Mr Gregory GrayThe northern boundary follows the Omaru Creek running through the Maybury Reserve. It cuts the Glen Innes, Pt England area in half.Suggested solutionThe boundary should be extended to West Tamaki Road. This would align the electorate boundary with the Local Board area and Tamaki redevelopment area. |
||||