View objections

Objection

---

Dr Peter Cameron

My name is Peter Cameron. I have lived in [street name] since 2000.
My children have gone to school in local schools and I have considered myself part of the local community, contributing to neighbourhood watch and the Cornwall Park leaseholders association over years.
I should like to register my opposition to the proposed changes in electoral boundaries in the area for the following reasons.
1. The Maungakiekie MP, the Honourable Greg Fleming is very conversant with the issues faced by Maungakiekie residents in general and I want the honourable Mr. Fleming to continue to represent my interests, as I am sure many other local residents do.
Mr. Fleming has the background of having researched to the level of understanding local issues. For example he is conversant with local concern regarding the Cornwall Park Trust Board manoeuvring approximately 100 Cornwall park leaseholders from their properties. This is due to to unaffordable annual leaseholds demanded according to the present Cornwall Park Glasgow lease structure (eg $300k per year) which are well beyond economic sense and ability for leaseholders to pay. I want Mr. Fleming to continue to represent the local community on this issue, and others.
2. Sir John Logan Campbell donated much of the land in the area to be used as recreational land for the people of NZ and to derive income from local properties for the support of this venture. I think he would be incensed to be told that the representation of the people in the Maungakiekie area would revert to a member whose focus was diluted by national and regional concerns out of the Maungakiekie area.
3. This section of Greenlane has always been in the Maungakiekie electorate.
4. It is unacceptable that Maungakiekie Avenue (electorate’s namesake) is no longer in the electorate. Cornwall Park/Maungakiekie (One Tree Hill) is in the electorate by name only, as all streets surrounding the maunga are now in Epsom.
5. The proposed area for zone change is home to leasehold land owned by Cornwall Park Trust, as is Campbell Road which remains in Maungakiekie. It makes sense to keep the connection of this community to ensure effective representation for all leaseholders and, on the other hand, the Trust.
Please take these concerns into consideration.
Yours sinicerely,
Peter Cameron.

Objection

---

Dr Mary Hedges

I object to the reinstating of the previous Panmure and Pt England areas back into the Maungakiekie electorate.
The reasoning is the same as that I used to support the change in the last boundary review where these areas were removed from Maungakiekie. The natural transit, shopping and service hub of these areas are frequented by both ends of their current electorate. If they need to move they have more in common with Pakuranga than Maungakiekie in terms of transport transit lines, retail, employment and services hubs.
Similarly the extension down into Otahuhu does not fit any normal locus of services or social hubs.
Both of these issues would be solved by not extending the electorate this far South but retaining the Northern reaches (a secondary proposal made under Epsom) but all are based on the natural social loci of the residents in these areas which enhances social cohesion and interaction.

Objection

---

Mr Ryan Maguire

To the Electorate Boundary Review Committee,

In reviewing the significant boundary changes to the Maungakiekie electorate, I believe that some amendments should be made to better reflect the community makeup of the electorate. This submission will be separated into a preamble, and six sections, listed by numbers 1-6. I would like the opportunity to also present my objection to the Representation Commission in person.

Preamble:
It is important for the committee to consider the time that the census was taken for the Maungakiekie electorate. At the time that the Census was taken in March 2023, many intensified housing blocks and apartments had been demolished, but had yet to have been completed their renovations for many more new residents to move in. Examples of this include Jordan Avenue's apartments in Onehunga, new high-rise apartment-style buildings in Oranga on State Avenue, the new Resido buy-to-rent apartment complex next to Sylvia Park etc., but also many expected intensified housing developments such as the current Fabric housing development on Spring Street, which looks like it will have the same residential capacity as the Fabric apartment complex on Victoria Street in Onehunga. The point of raising this preamble is to say that the Census data collected in 2023 will not accurately reflect the true population size of Maungakiekie, as many residents who were not residing in the electorate at the time of the census will be returning, along with many new residents. This will significantly increase the population of the Maungakiekie electorate over the next few years, so much so that I believe that the size of the electorate will once again need to decrease (possibly to similar boundaries to the 2020 boundaries) because of this expected rapid growth in intensified housing developments.

1. Retain Greenlane within the Maungakiekie electorate
Since the inception of the Maungakiekie electorate when MMP came into force in 1996, the area of Greenlane proposed to move into the Epsom electorate (containing around 2,200 people) has never once left the Maungakiekie electorate. This firstly shows that the area has longstanding ties to the communities of Maungakiekie. The area contains many attributes that would better link it to the Maungakiekie electorate rather than the Epsom electorate, such as the adjacent Maungakiekie Avenue, Campbell Road (named after John Logan Campbell who gifted Cornwall Park to Auckland -- which is proposed to become the new boundary between Maungakiekie and Epsom), and the fact that the Cornwall Park Trust lease houses in this Greenlane section. This area therefore demonstrates its strong ties to the history and current status of Maungakiekie, and thus should be retained within the electorate. If these areas were removed from Maungakiekie, that would render the name more obsolete to the area that it represents: we would be called Maungakiekie more in name only than the residents that live around the electorate, with the north, western, and now proposed eastern corners of the mountain proposed to be contained within the Epsom electorate.

Furthermore, there is a corridor of industrial activity in the greater Penrose/Southdown/Otahuhu/Greenlane area that begins near the intersection of Green Lane East and Green Lane West and Great South Road. Maintaining this commercial corridor under one eletorate ensures that the MP can effectively advocate for the interests of the all of the businesses within this wider industrial area that is should be entirely contained within the Maungakiekie electorate.

Moreover, the Green Lane East and Green Lane West boundary serves as a natural boundary line than the proposed boundary, given that the road is between four and six lanes, with no parking on either side. Given this clear boundary, it would make sense to retain it.

Finally, this area is within the school zones for Sant Mary's, Michael's Park and One Tree Hill College, which are all located within the Maungakiekie electorate. Removing this area of Greenlane from the Maungakiekie electorate will serve to split the school zones.

2. Compensate Epsom's population by providing it with Tamaki's Remuera panhandle
I acknowledge that if Greenlane were retained within Maungakiekie's boundaries that Epsom would need to be recompensated with at least 2,200 to ensure it stays within the quota tolerance. Therefore, in exchange for Maungakiekie keeping Greenlane, I proposed that instead Epsom takes the area of Remuera within the Tamaki electorate along Peach Parade, Ladies Mile, Abbotts Way, and up Koraha Street, which contains around 3,294 residents, along with the houses on the southern side of Peach Parade (shown on the map in the file "Peach Parade change"). This would be a better fit for Epsom to expand, as it reunites the suburb of Remuera into the electorate where its town centre already existed. I believe it would be in the committee's interest to reunite Remuera as a community of interest along these boundaries instead of the area of Greenlane surrounding Cornwall Park.

3. Expand Tamaki further down into the Point England/Panmure area
Given that Tamaki would lose population and likely fall under the quota tolerance with its loss of Remuera, I believe Tamaki would do well to reclaim what was historically in its electorate from the 1996 to 2005 elections, which includes a suburban area called 'Tamaki'. I recommend that the northeastern boundary of the Maungakiekie electorate should follow Morrin Road south, then go up Jellicoe Road to the north, and then follow Pilkington Road south, and finally follow Lagoon Drive southeast until the border with the Pakuranga electorate. This boundary closely resembles the previous boundary between the Maungakiekie and Tamaki electorates between 1996 and 2005, with the exception that the boundary then instead ran down Jellicoe Road (map attached; see https://datafinder.stats.govt.nz/layer/99645-general-electoral-district-2002/). This is important as the committee has certified this as a valid boundary before, recognising that Panmure has a closer community connection to Glen Innes and Point England than communities in Maungakiekie.

This change would keep both Maungakiekie and Tamaki within the quota tolerance levels required of electorates. But more importantly, the Panmure, Point England and Glen Innes communities are more closely connected to each other than to Mount Wellington (due to its separation by the Panmure Lagoon and other industrial areas), or any other communities within Maungakiekie. One example of this tight-knit community connection is with the circulation of the 'Mai Tamaki' magazine, which is explicitly circulated to residents in Glen Innes, Point England and Panmure.

Furthermore, residents of these areas are more likely to use services within the Tamaki electorate rather than Maungakiekie, such as Pak'n'save Glen Innes over Pak'n'save Royal Oak or Sylvia Park given the proximity of these facilities to the area. At a local representation level, placing Panmure in the Tamaki electorate aligns it with the Tamaki subdivision of the Maungakiekie-Tamaki Local Board. This avoids confusion for residents of the area, and aligns it better with already existing local boundaries.

Finally, it's important for the Panmure community to finally have an home electorate after three (and soon to be four) different electoral boundary shifts since 1996 (Tamaki 1996-2008; Maungakiekie 2008-2020; Panmure-Otahuhu 2020-2026). Panmure deserves stable and consistent representation from an electorate it knows will represent it in the long-term, and with similar communities to itself.

4. Adjust Peach Parade boundary to ensure neighbours are located in the same electorate, not isolated from each other.
While this has already been briefly mentioned, I believe that it is important that residents living on the south side of Peach Parade are situated in the same electorate as their north side Peach Parade and Ladies Mile neighbours. For many years, this isolated section of houses has existed in the Maungakiekie electorate by virture of bordering the Ellerslie Racecourse. I believe that in the past the Electorate Boundary Review Committee has failed to consider the distance between this area of the electorate, and the closest house to that section of the electorate being 300 metres away, with no footpath on the western side of Ladies Mile to connect it. I think that it is long overdue that this area of Peach Parade be placed within the same electorate as their neighbours in that area of Remuera because it is a clear community of interest to keep these neighbours together, and would avoid any confusion as to why, as residents who reside the closest to the area of Remuera than any other area of Maungakiekie, reside in the Maungakiekie electorate, when they will feel more closely aligned to the Remuera community than the Ellerslie community.

5. Place Mt Richmond into the Otahuhu electorate
I believe that given the separation of Mount Richmond by the industrial area in Maungakiekie, and its proximity and frequent use by residents surrounding the mountain who reside in the Otahuhu electorate, that the mountain should be contained within the Otahuhu electorate so that the residents can advocate for action for the mountain without the argument that the mountain actually sits in the Maungakiekie electorate, and therefore the residents have to go to the MP for Maungakiekie to advocate for issues and concerns regarding the mountain. While this is a small change, I believe that it is a significant one for the residents who live and frequently interact with Mt Richmond, who are proposed to not live in the same electorate as it.

6. Smaller changes to the current proposed electorate boundary
Here are some other boundary changes that the committee might like to tidy up to ensure that the boundary is as smooth and clear to understand by residents as possible:
- Intersection between Tangaroa Street and Riverside Avenue should be amended to ensure the area facing Tangaroa Street is in the Tamaki electorate given its geographic separation from Maungakiekie by the Boundary East Reserve. (assuming the current proposed boundaries become the final boundaries)

- #7 and #7A Wairakei Street are the only houses on Wairakei Street in Maungakiekie. The rest of Wairakei Street is in Epsom. It could be argued that these two houses should instead be placed in the Epsom electorate, like the rest of Wairakei Street. (assuming the current proposed boundaries become the final boundaries)

- Waitapu Road, Greenlane being split in half: It could be argued that the rest of Waitapu Road should go into the Epsom electorate if half of it already is (communities of interest). (assuming the current proposed boundaries become the final boundaries)

- Motorway panhandle between Walpole Street and Mitchelson Street: This panhandle is an irregular shape, containing no houses. I believe that this should be changed to a straight line for a smooth boundary (see Motorway Panhandle map for better idea of where the boundary should be drawn, depicted by a red line). (assuming the current proposed boundaries become the final boundaries)

• Maungakiekie Electorate Boundary 1996 2005 election (jpg 54 KB)
• Motorway Panhandle change (jpg 55 KB)
• Mount Richmond change (jpg 43 KB)
• Peach Parade change (jpg 76 KB)
• Ryan Maguire snapshot 1745742867 0 (png 210 KB)
• Ryan Maguire snapshot 1745742867 1 (png 154 KB)
• Ryan Maguire snapshot 1745742867 2 (png 240 KB)
• Ryan Maguire snapshot 1745742868 3 (png 265 KB)
• Ryan Maguire snapshot 1745742868 4 (png 159 KB)
• Ryan Maguire snapshot 1745742868 5 (png 147 KB)
• Tamaki Panhandle (jpg 38 KB)

Objection

---

Damian Light

The name of the electorate Pakuranga originates from the name Te Pakūranga Rā Hihi which means ‘The Battle of the Sun's Rays’.

Objection

---

Samitha Jayamaha

The electorate should be either renamed as either Manukau East or Papatoetoe.

My reasons are as follows:

1) The proposed electorate contains approximately half of Papatoetoe and it includes SA2 areas of Grange, Papatoetoe North, Dingwall, Papatoetoe Central West, Papatoetoe Central East, Papatoetoe North East and Papatoetoe East. According to the 2023 census, the combined population of these SA2 is 22,377. This is higher than Otara (21,711) and Otahuhu (14,778). As you can see the population contribution from Otahuhu is tiny. Furthermore, the population in Papatoetoe has grown significantly since the 2023 census. So the centre of mass in terms of population is in Papatoetoe and to a lesser extent in Otara. So i think Manukau East or Papatoetoe is a more apt name.

2) Most of the candidates for the legacy electorate is from papatoteoe. If you look at the last two National candidates (Navtej Randhewa and Kanwaljit Singh Bakshi) had their base in papatoetoe. Prior to this, Ross Robertson from Labour held the legacy seat for a considerable period of time. Ross Robertson hailed from Papatoetoe.

3) The suggested name of Otahuhu will result in less participation from biggest areas of the electorate (Papatoetoe). Most Papatoetoe residents are pretty angry at the balkanisation of Papatoetoe. They feel as though there is no proper representation for the suburb. This is the biggest suburb in NZ. For the life of me i can't see why NZ biggest suburb don't have an electorate named after it. At least with renaming the electorate to Manukau East or Papatoetoe will reinvigorate voter enthusiasm.

3) The electorate boundaries resemble old Manukau East.

Objection

---

Barry Livingstone

Otahuhu is a small suburb and to have an electorate named after it is crazy when the proposed electorate has much bigger suburbs. Name it as Manukau East.

Objection

---

Tyler Oroanu

I object to the renaming of the Panmure-Ōtāhuhu electorate to just 'Ōtāhuhu'. This name does not recognise the significant portions of the suburb of Ōtara that is proposed as part of the new electorate's boundaries. Solely naming the electorate Ōtāhuhu will create significant confusion for many constituents residing within the electorate but outside the suburb of Ōtāhuhu.

Objection

---

Elaine Bartolome

Just stay in Botany. Otahuhu is far from us

Objection

---

Mr Ankit Singh

Takanini is already quite a huge electorate. Flat bush doesn’t get enough services for the money that the ratepayers pay in terms of taxes. Can we please at least provide the services that Flat bush deserves before we change the boundary to increase the area in the electorate.

• Ankit Singh snapshot 1745623876 0 (png 841 KB)

Objection

---

Damian Light

I object to moving 700 from Takanini around Barry Curtis Park to Ōtāhuhu -

This divides Flat Bush into three electorates (already divided into two), unnecessarily splitting this community of interest.

The proposed boundaries will mean that the Ormiston Town Centre (built to serve as the centre of Flat Bush) will be on the border of three electorates. This does not comply with section 35 3ii of the Electoral Act 1993 "in forming the several General electoral districts, due consideration shall be given to community of interest".

This proposal moves further away from the Local Government boundaries, namely the Howick Ward/Local Board boundary.

• Damian Light snapshot 1745717233 0 (png 549 KB)
• Proposed Electorate Changes 2025 6 alternative (png 672 KB)

Objection

---

Dr Lee Mathias

• Submission Electoral Commission re Takanini Mathias 260425 (docx 53 KB)

Objection

---

Josh Beddell

I am writing to respectfully object to the proposed boundary change that would transfer the area of Mission Heights from the Takanini electorate into the Botany electorate. I encourage the Commission to reconsider this change and retain Mission Heights within the Takanini electorate, on the basis of preserving established communities of interest, shared infrastructure, and natural geographic cohesion.

Mission Heights forms a tightly connected community with the wider Flat Bush and Ormiston areas. My family’s experience is reflective of the broader local pattern: my niece has attended Mission Heights Junior College and subsequently Ormiston Senior College — a well-trodden educational pathway for many families in Mission Heights. My nephew attends Mission Heights Primary and will follow the same pathway to Ormiston Senior College.
As per Mission Heights Junior College’s website, students “have right of enrolment at the Senior College.” This relationship was further recognised when Mission Heights Junior College collaborated with Ormiston Junior College and Ormiston Senior College to enter the 2025 ASB Polyfest competition. The integrated nature of our local schooling network merits consistent and effective representation under a single electorate.

Additionally, the residents of Mission Heights heavily utilise key community facilities such as Barry Curtis Park and Ormiston Town Centre. Barry Curtis Park, in particular, is a defining local landmark within Flat Bush, and serves as a social and recreational hub for Mission Heights families. Splitting Barry Curtis Park between Botany and Ōtāhuhu would fracture this important community connection and dilute effective representation for local infrastructure and development issues.

In contrast, the community patterns of Mission Heights do not strongly align with those of the existing Botany electorate. Residents make little use of Botany Town Centre or Botany Downs Secondary College compared to the facilities within the Flat Bush-Ormiston area.

Geographically, Mission Heights is intrinsically connected to the Ormiston Bridge, a landmark that symbolically and physically unites Mission Heights and Ormiston across the Flat Bush area. This bridge is a defining feature of our local landscape and serves as a critical infrastructure link across the community. The bridge, along with the surrounding road networks, ties Mission Heights more closely to Flat Bush and Ormiston than to Botany. Moving Mission Heights into a different electorate would ignore these topographical and infrastructural realities.

Included in the attachments are examples of local businesses, community organisations and social media groups who use the Ormiston Bridge in their visuals as identifiers of the community they serve. These groups and businesses serve the communities of Mission Heights, alongside the Ormiston area.

In conclusion, the proposed shift of Mission Heights into Botany would undermine existing community ties, disrupt shared use of critical infrastructure, and sever residents from their natural, educational, and recreational connections. Retaining Mission Heights within the Takanini electorate ensures consistent and coherent representation that reflects the lived realities of the community.

• Flat Bush Community FB Page (jpg 57 KB)
• Ormiston Cafe (jpg 13 KB)
• Ormiston Community FB Page (jpg 61 KB)
• Ormiston Football Club (jpg 35 KB)
• Ormiston Hospital (jpg 42 KB)

Objection

---

Takanini Village Limited / Takanini Town Centre

It is proposed that the Papakura electorates boundaries are being changed to facilitate and allow for population growth in areas such as Drury, yet at the same time the proposed Papakura boundary is to extend into the Takanini area to take in part of the Addison Development, Kauri Flats residential developments and Bruce Pulman Park.

All these areas are area identified by the communities of Takanini as "Takanini". The Addison community is exactly that a community with a residences association which operates and integrates with other business and community and residence groups in the Takanini area such as The Takanini Business Association, Conifer Grove Residence Association and Takanini Residence Assocation. The proposed changes would dissect the residence on the eastern side of the rail corridor and the affected residence of Addison and Kauri Flats would lose their Takanini identity.

Walters Road is a natural southern boundary for the Takanini Electorate. It has always been considered by those living in Takanini as the divide between Papakura and Takanini. Bruce Pulman Park is a large part of Takanini and is identified with the area. It does not sit in Papakura; it is part of Takanini as is the area to the north running through to Popes Road. To take away these areas out of Takanini and put them into Papakura would be to take away a big part of Takanini, a developing area and Town Centre, it would take away Takanini's identity.

Historically Takanini has been considered as the area between the Papakura Stream north of Popes Road, the Takanini Industrial Area, through to State highway 1, the Conifer Grove residential area and the Takanini Commercial Retail areas of the Takanini Town Centre and Southgate, Walters Road as the southern boundary.

My family has lived and worked in Takanini since 1932, we have been actively involved in its development through various entities. We have developed and own the Takanini Town Centre, predevelopment owned much of the Addison areas, developed Kauri Flats and Kauri Landing.

The proposed boundary changes will take away Takanini's sense of identity, dissect its communities, take away its Park. If the proposed changes for the Papakura are being made to allow for population growth in the areas such as Drury, then it makes no sense to take populations currently included in Takanini and put them back into Papakura, the biproduct of which would be to dissects
Takanini and split its residential community, take away the connection that we all have with the areas that we know as Takanini.

Objection

---

Danielle Parshotam

I am writing as a resident of Ormiston to oppose the proposed boundary change that would split Barry Curtis Park and surrounding streets between the Takanini and Ōtāhuhu electorates. I ask the Commission to reconsider and retain the entirety of Barry Curtis Park, Donegal Park, and the surrounding Ormiston community within the one electorate, the Takanini electorate.

Importance of Barry Curtis Park to Community Identity:
Barry Curtis Park is a major recreational space and a defining feature of the Flat Bush and Ormiston community identity. Under the proposal, none of the park would remain in Takanini — the northern section is in Botany, and the southern section moves Ōtāhuhu. As an Ormiston resident, this is saddening. Barry Curtis Park is a landmark by which we define our community. It is the park I and many others use daily — for walking dogs, exercising, and attending community events — and it is central to our local life. Severing the park and surrounding streets would weaken the cohesion and identity of our community. This concern mirrors that raised about the Ormiston Road Bridge, another vital piece of infrastructure that physically and symbolically connects Ormiston.

Community Services and Facilities Ties:
My day-to-day life is tied to services located within or adjacent to the current Takanini electorate. I shop at Ormiston Town Centre, am a patient at Ormiston Medical (which the proposal shifts out of the electorate), and rely on Ormiston Hospital for additional healthcare services. My niece attends Ormiston Senior College. These facilities form a clear community of interest that should be kept together.

Educational Pathways and Generational Links:
Families in Donegal Park — another area proposed to move to Ōtāhuhu — send their children to Ormiston Senior College. This educational pathway demonstrates the strong social ties between Donegal Park and Ormiston. Similarly, it is Ormiston and Flat Bush residents — not those from Otahuhu, Otara, or Clover Park — who transition into Summerset By The Park, the local retirement village beside Barry Curtis Park, further underscoring generational links.

Alignment with Local Authority Boundaries:
The proposed boundary also creates confusion by ignoring local government boundaries. The Howick Local Board boundary extends to Te Irirangi Drive, encompassing all of Barry Curtis Park and Donegal Park. Aligning the electorate boundary with the local authority boundary would ensure clarity and better reflect existing community structures.

Objection

---

Mr Colin Foster

Papakura should not lose Whitford, Beachlands and Maraetai and should not gain houses around Bruce Pulman Park.

• Colin Foster snapshot 1742898055 0 (png 621 KB)
• Colin Foster snapshot 1742898056 1 (png 383 KB)