Skip to main content Skip to navigation within this section

View objections and counter-objections

Objections and counter-objections to the proposed electorates and boundaries are listed below.

Submissions may have been edited to remove contact information or other personal details, or to remove objectionable material. Submissions which only address issues the Representation Commission cannot consider have not been published.

Select filters to view submissions

Displaying 331 - 360 of 717
Number Name Submission Change type View
N32018 Mrs Janet Pixie McNeill Objection Boundary

Mrs Janet Pixie McNeill

Objection

Rotorua
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Janet Pixie McNeill

Under the new electoral boundaries I will move from Western Bay (Tauranga) to Rotorua. This will effectively mean I do not get local representation as these two areas are extremely disparate and a distance apart. The Rotorua candidates will have no interest in the area of Western Bay so you are effectively cancelling my ability to vote for a local voice. You have tried to sell these changes by saying they are fairer. This is far from true.

Suggested solution

Since we pay rates to Western Bay Council, NOT Rotorua, and effectively live twenty minutes from Tauranga City central, it would be much better to incoporate us into Tauranga and move the other side, Katikati into Waihi.
N32019 Mrs Carla Melville Objection Boundary

Mrs Carla Melville

Objection

Rotorua
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Carla Melville

McLaren Falls is not anywhere Rotorua we are 15mins from Tauranga city. How can we be classed as Rotorua? We don't want to vote on what goes on over there. We want to vote what is been done here on our doorstep not a hour away.

Suggested solution

Leave Kaimai electrol alone or include in Tauranga.
N32020 Dairne Fitzpatrick Objection Boundary

Dairne Fitzpatrick

Objection

Rotorua
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Dairne Fitzpatrick

I live in [street name] (a dead end road, near Tauriko) and we were previously in the Bay of Plenty electorate. While I can understand the need to balance electorates, the proposed changes effectively cut off the top part of [street name] and put us in the Rotorua electorate. We cannot get to Rotorua without having to come back into and around through the Tauranga electorate to get there.
We are isolated and cut-off from Rotorua. The MP for Rotorua would need to come through Tauranga to visit any of us - this seems incredibly ineffective, inefficient and senseless. We have no impact on Rotorua and their impact on us in our everyday life is virtually nil. We aren't associated with Rotorua in any way. We pay our rates to the Western BOP district. We live, play, gather socially and work in Tauranga. We support Tauranga businesses and outlets, we work with Tauranga citizens.

Suggested solution

Relook at these boundary changes to include all of [street name] in the Tauranga electorate, as well as those others in the Lower Kaimais also affected by the proposals eg Omanawa Road, Ruahihi Road, McLaren Falls Road, Thorn Road, etc.
These are all roads that need to be included in the Tauranga electorate - particularly [street name]!
N32021 Mrs Molly Powell Objection Boundary

Mrs Molly Powell

Objection

Rotorua
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Molly Powell

Rotorua Electorate
I wish to object to the Lower Kaimai and Omanawa region of the Western Bay electorate, from upper Belk Road to the Kaimais, being moved into the Rotorua electorate.

This area has no geographic link at all to Rotorua, being separated by a gorge and the Kaimai-Mamaku forest park. Rotorua can only be reached by travelling through the new Tauranga electorate.

The Lower Kaimai area associates strongly with Tauranga on many levels, geographically, politically, and with local governance, recreationally, and for all our sporting, business , medical, schooling and shopping needs. There is no connection or association at all with the Rotorua region. It therefore makes sense to remain connected to our locality with a local MP, who understands our issues, and not become an outlier in the Rotorua electorate, where our concerns are in danger of being swamped by the Rotorua area.

There are significant proposed future roading and infrastructure issues with SH29, the major highway that bisects the Kaimai area. A local MP is needed who is acutely aware of these issues and can lobby for our case, and can progress the proposed developments.

Suggested solution

The Coromandel electorate boundary could move further east of Omokoroa to incorporate Te Puna and Minden. This would allow the Lower Kaimai area to be moved into the Tauranga electorate.
N32601 Delwyn Denize Counter-Objection Boundary

Delwyn Denize

Counter-Objection

Rotorua

Relates to objections

This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Delwyn Denize

I have been a resident of Omanawa ([street name]) for 30 years. I have always associated myself with the Bay of Plenty and Tauranga, never Rotorua. We never travel there; we never shop there; we have not direct route to Rotorua. We use Tauranga and Western Bay facilities including the airport. Most properties in the Omanawa and McLaren Falls area are lifestyle properties, with a strong connection to the Bay of Plenty and Tauranga City. Many residents work in Tauranga. Children/School zoning/bus routes are linked to Tauranga and Lower Kamai. McLaren Falls Park is owned and managed by Tauranga City Council. Omanawa Falls is managed by Tauranga City Council. These assets and the people clearly associate itself with the Western Bay of Plenty and Tauranga City. It is incredulous to think that you would consider re-zoning residents from one electorate to another that has absolutely no connection, who’s elected MP would not have no understanding, and no ability to address our needs, or concerns which at a local level would always be in relation to Tauranga and Bay of Plenty. The elected MP is there to represent the people your area. Rotorua is NOT our area, and as such the people of Omanawa and McLaren Falls will effectively be left with no representation, disassociating them from the electoral system, and taking away a meaningful reason to vote.

Suggested solution

There must be another way to make more meaningful and logical electoral boundary changes. Being part of the Rotorua ward would be more harmful that beneficial to residents like us who are more aligned and should represented by our local area eg. Tauranga/Bay of Plenty wards. We have no association with Rotorua and Rotorua would not adequately represent us.
N33001 Stephen Prendergast Objection Boundary

Stephen Prendergast

Objection

Taranaki-King Country
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Stephen Prendergast

The Taranaki KC northern boundary encroaches significantly into Waikato District residences. The focus of this electorate is susbtantially furter south and has been extended into Taumaranui and the central plateau region. In the commentary on this proposed ammendment no mention of the northern aspects occurrs - thus misdescribing the elctorate as a southern Waikato area.
Retaining the current boundary is failure to adequately consider the impact of such a large geographical catchment and the disparity between local government elctorates and general election electorates. These residents are strongly attached to central and north Waikato issues and have a substantial ratepayer and community attachment to the region, its social and business communities as well as the surrounding townships of Ngaruawahia, Huntly, Te Kauwhata, Te Kowhai and Taupiri.
The current population based boundaries are arbitrary and without sufficient merit. They fail to consider those cohesive community attachments I have previously identified. Additionally there is a complete lack of attchment and cohesion between the northern and southern areas of Taranaki King Country. According to the publicly availble data there are circa 1500 people in this catchment who are poorly represented byb the existing boundaries.
Turnout by SA2 indicates that 738 voters are enrolled in the Ngaruawahia and Horotiu catchments with larger numbers in Te Kowhai and Whatawhata.
The exclusion of rural lifestyle from urban electorates is no longer fit for purpose, given the ongoing growth centered around urban centres, particulalry major centres who have direct day to day representation at local government level much more appropriately aligned.
This has led to ineffective representation, very little engagement from the electorate MP, and the focusing on issues which have little, or in many cases no direct, connection to our lives.
The Waikato is a substantial and important part of New Zealand. It is essential the cohorts are represented appropriately and cohesively based on both national and regional issues informed by local contexts.
This is currently wildly diluted by the insistence that a numerical equivalence will represent an equivlance of representation.The more appropriate measure would consider overall electorate size in area, clustering of communities with bordering locations, and the continuing development of the urban fringe population who are largely urban in their behaviours.

Suggested solution

The boundary could be simply redrawn to exclude communities from Glen Massey, or thereabouts, eastward through to Whatawhata - ensuring the surrounding communities vote in an electorate that is fundamentally more aligned to their geographical and societal communities. It would also increase their opportunity to make electoral submissions directly to their MP who would also be located in their approximate community.
N33002 Joshua Hitchcock Objection Boundary

Joshua Hitchcock

Objection

Taranaki-King Country
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Joshua Hitchcock

Under this proposal, Taranaki continues to be separated into three general electorates, two of which includes significant areas out of the region that have no connection to the region. Taranaki is a distinct region, with a strong regional identity and the Taranaki-King Country seat is no longer representative of the region with only a small portion of the region existing within the electorate.

Suggested solution

Instead of pushing Whanganui north, it should expand West to take on the Taranaki portion of Taranaki-King Country and balance this by moving the northern part of Whanganui into the Taranaki King Country electorate. This would then create two electorates in Taranaki with a more regional focus (New Plymouth and a new Taranaki-Whanganui electorate). This is a better alignment for the region and with strong iwi connections between South Taranaki and Whanganui would be enhanced. Additionally, it would unite the King Country into its own distinct seat which better reflects that regional population.
N33003 Mr Ryan Maguire Objection Boundary

Mr Ryan Maguire

Objection

Taranaki-King Country
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Ryan Maguire

To the Electorate Boundary Review Committee,

I believe that the residents of Waitara, specifically those living on Armstrong Avenue (or off a branch street) should shift from the Taranaki-King Country electorate into the New Plymouth electorate. As far as Stats NZ's public electoral map records go back (2002), this area of Waitara has always been arbitrarily placed into the Taranaki-King Country electorate, despite being geographically very close to the town centre, and closer to the town centre than residents of Waitara on Princess Street (or off a branching street), who do reside in the New Plymouth electorate. While my proposed change would only affect at the most a few hundred people (as judged by a Google Maps sattelite image of houses in the affected area), I believe it is nonetheless important to keep the Waitara township community under a unified electorate voice, and that now is the right time to propose changes like these to correct overlooked past boundary irregularities.

Thank you.

Suggested solution

Shift Armstrong Avenue (and its branching streets) from the Taranaki-King Country electorate into the New Plymouth electorate by redrawing the electorate boundary line along Main North Road between the Waitara River Bridge and the roundabout intersection with Princess Street (image attached, with proposed changed boundary drawn in red).
N33004 Ms Veronica Hoeberechts Objection Boundary

Ms Veronica Hoeberechts

Objection

Taranaki-King Country
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Ms Veronica Hoeberechts

[See attached letter]
N33005 John Waldmann Objection Boundary

John Waldmann

Objection

Taranaki-King Country
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

John Waldmann

Taranaki -King Country electorate still makes zero representative sense. It spans two mountain ranges, and several watersheds, and two very distinct regions, and is far too many dispersed as populations to make representation meaningful.

Suggested solution

It would make far more sense to split this electorate to associate the remaining halves with other nearby populations in the Waikato and Taranaki regions.
N33601 Raglan Community Board Counter-Objection Boundary

Raglan Community Board

Counter-Objection

Taranaki-King Country

Relates to objections

N33001, N33002, N33004, N33005
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Raglan Community Board

It is clear from these submissions that there is a massive discontent between the many communities located within the Boundaries of the Taranaki - King Country electorate, and there needs to be substantive re-consideration of this electorate and how and where its Boundaries are placed in this review.

As one of the largest geographical electorates Taranaki - King Country now has a portion of its population coming from Northern Waikato towns, Like Raglan, Whatawhata, Te Kowhai & Horotiu. There are a magnitude of geographical features like rivers, lakes, mountains and harbor mouths to cross before you get anywhere close to the rest of the electorate that lies with in the King Country & Taranaki regions.

The reality is that the northern part of the Taranaki - King Country electorate has had close to zero true representation in Parliament for many years now, and we are totally disconnected from the rest of the electorate not only physically but also culturally and environmentally.

If the aim of this Boundary review process is actually focused on providing people with true representation that reflects their community and those around them then you must review the northern portion of the Taranaki - King country electorate, rather than just leaving North Western Waikato towns lumped in to make up the numbers for what is the Taranaki - King Country electorate ! We are not part of either Taranaki or King Country.

Suggested solution

Remove the northern section of Taranaki - King country from the electorate, including Raglan, Te uku & Waitetuna, going west to Whatawhata and north.

Then consider dividing the removed area between Waikato and Port Waikato electorates, coastal towns such as Raglan should go to the Port Waikato electorate while more in land towns like Whatawhata and Horotiu should go to the Waikato electorate.

To make the numbers work for Port Waikato you may need to slightly re consider the boundary with the Papakura Electorate but there is definitely a way to balance the boundaries of both Waikato and Port Waikato electorates to offer effective representation in Parliment for the towns of North West Waikato that are forced to be in an Electorate focused on Taranaki - King Country.

There are many possible solutions to slightly change other boundaries of the Taranaki - King country electorate to create realistic representation and form a cohesive electorate. For example including more of the actual King Country area surrounding Taumaranui, as there is large area of Northern Whanganui that very obviously more King Country.

Please Consider that the people of Raglan, Whatawhata & the north western towns of the Waikato do not have fair or effective representation of our communities in Parliament while we remain within the Taranaki - King Country electorate and we ask that you strive to fix this during this process.
N34001 Ms Sam Wanoa Objection Boundary

Ms Sam Wanoa

Objection

East Coast
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Ms Sam Wanoa

Waipaoa, Te Karaka, Manatuke, Motu are Gisborne area local small communities linked to the Tairawhiti region. People from these places work and send their kids to schools in Gisborne and is way closer to Gosborne than it is to Napier. It is absurd to change the Eastcoast boundry to accommodate our neighbors in Napier/Hastings. Whoever thinks this is a good idea have lost their minds completely. I was born in Te Puia Springs, whanau originate from Te Araroa East Cape, raised in Gizzy and have live 24 of my 55 years in Napier travelling back to see whanau in Gizzy. I do not support or agree with this idea at all and never will.

Suggested solution

Don't change the boundary of the Eastcoast electorate period.
N34002 Mr Kevin Allan Objection Boundary, name

Mr Kevin Allan

Objection

East Coast
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change

Mr Kevin Allan

[See separate attachments for objections on boundary and name for East Coast]
N34003 East Coast electorate of the NZ National Party Objection Boundary

East Coast electorate of the NZ National Party

Objection

East Coast
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

East Coast electorate of the NZ National Party

East Coast wish to retain the town ships of Matawai Te Karaka , Patutahi and Manutuke and surrounding rural area and retain Motu

Suggested solution

see attachment
N34004 Mr Tom Newman Objection Boundary

Mr Tom Newman

Objection

East Coast
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Tom Newman

"I believe electorates should be based on regional boundaries, not arbitrary lines. Our electorate should correspond to the region we pay rates to, not a different one."

Suggested solution

Keep our electorate where it is!
N34005 Mrs Catharina Brosnahan Objection Boundary

Mrs Catharina Brosnahan

Objection

East Coast
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Catharina Brosnahan
N34601 Mr John Wells Counter-Objection Boundary, name

Mr John Wells

Counter-Objection

East Coast

Relates to objections

This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change

Mr John Wells

I was unaware of the now passed opportunity to submit objections to the boundary changes proposed by the Representation Commission so this submission is in support of the submissions made by the East Coast Branch of the National Party and others opposing extension of the Napier electorate further into the East Coast electorate which would only rub salt into the wound created by the previous incursion from the 2023 changes.

Extending the Napier electorate north past the Mahia Peninsular/Wharerata Ranges natural geological divide makes no sense at all and does not meet any of the 5 objectives touted by the Representation Commission. If the need is to gain numbers for the Napier electorate, the focus should be South and West of Napier, not North. Napier people have no interest in the Coast (SH2) North of the Esk Valley in general and certainly not North of Mahia. (Reference the total lack of interest from Napier in improvements (apart from the inescapable Cyclone Gabrielle reinstatement) to SH2 North of the Esk Valley - all the money goes into SH2 South of Napier, the freeway between Napier and Hastings and SH5 North to Taupo. Equally Bay of Plenty people have little interest in the Gisborne/East Coast/East Cape area, and to an extent, vice-versa. That part of the East Coast (Cape) electorate West of Opotiki should go back to Bay of Plenty electorates.

Suggested solution

As suggested above and by the East Coast Branch of the National Party and others (Brosnahan & Allen) the East Coast electorate should be renamed East Cape as it is much wider (West of the Raukumara Ranges) than the East Coast.

The part of the East Coast (Cape) electorate West of Opotiki should be moved into Rotorua and/or other Bay of Plenty electorates.

The Napier electorate North boundary/East Coast (Cape) electorate South boundary should be moved South to match the Gisborne District Council/Wairoa District Council boundary along the Wharerata Ranges.
The Napier electorate South boundary should be expanded Southwards to include Clive to regain numbers lost to thr North, and the Tukituki electorate South boundary should be adjusted Southwards as necessary to balance numbers.

To reiterate, including areas North of the Wharerata Ranges in the Napier electorate COMPLIES WITH NONE OF THE FIVE CRITERIA STATED BY THE REPRESENTATION COMMISSION. Likewise including areas North of the Raukumara Ranges and West of Opotiki in the East Coast (Cape) electorate complies with none of those five criteria.

Please - listen to the people who are affected.
N34602 NZ Labour Party Counter-Objection Boundary

NZ Labour Party

Counter-Objection

East Coast

Relates to objections

This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

NZ Labour Party

East Coast - Whakatane District Council

The National party’s East Coast electorate committee proposes moving several towns such as Murupara and Minginui from East Coast to Rotorua. We counter-object, because those towns form part of the Whakatane District Council and as a result share communities of interest on governance issues with Whakatane (which is in the East Coast electorate) more than with Rotorua. Splitting the district council between two electorates is not necessary and may harm the quality of representation these towns receive.

If the Commission wants to increase Rotorua’s population and lower East Coast’s population, the more sensible place to do that is near Te Puke (for example Maketu, Rangiuru). These communities are part of the Western Bay of Plenty District Council, share communities of interest with Te Puke (which is inside Rotorua), and have little community of interest with Whakatane or the broader East Coast.
N36001 Mr Morgan Kemp Objection Name

Mr Morgan Kemp

Objection

Napier
This objection does not relate to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change

Mr Morgan Kemp

My objection stems from the recent boundary changes that moved me from the East Coast electorate into the Napier electorate. While the Napier electorate already included Wairoa, it has now expanded northward to incorporate rural communities previously part of the Gisborne region, specifically Patutahi, Manutuke, and Waituhi. The 'Napier' name alone fails to accurately represent this expanded electorate, causing a loss of regional identity and misrepresenting these newly included communities. I believe the name should be changed to reflect the broader geographical and communal makeup of the electorate.

Suggested solution

Rename the Napier electorate to a name that reflects the inclusion of Wairoa, and the newly added rural communities of Patutahi, Manutuke, and Waituhi. Options include "Napier-Wairoa-Gisborne Rural" or a similar name that acknowledges the broader geographical scope.
N36002 Mike Michaels Objection Boundary

Mike Michaels

Objection

Napier
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mike Michaels

Alternative Boundary available

Suggested solution

Bring the seat up to quota by moving the boundary south and making minor adjustments to boundaries of seats to the south.

This can be countebalanced by increasing slightly the amount being moved into Wairarapa from the western side of the Manawatu Gorge.

This means East Coast's boundaries won't change.
N36003 Mrs Sarah Gault Objection Boundary

Mrs Sarah Gault

Objection

Napier
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Sarah Gault

My objection is that Matawai is currently in the Napier electorate, and Motu and Te Karaka are also to be added to this electorate. Matawai is 270 kms from Napier but only 70 kms from Gisborne. Motu is 280 kms from Napier and 80 kms from Gisborne. Te Karaka is 230 kms from Napier but only 30 kms from Gisborne.
Before the last election no Napier MP visited Matawai, and no MP has visited since. MP, Katie Nimon, was booked to meet constituents in Matawai before the last election, but failed to turn up. If MPs are not interested in their constituents they should not be representing them. They all lost my vote.

Suggested solution

MP Dana Kirkpatrick (MP for Gisborne/East Coast) drives through Matawai to reach a part of her constituency in Bay of Plenty! Dana is from rural Gisborne so understands needs of rural constituents. Dana is proactive in her position as MP, meets with and works for her constituents. I suggest that the electoral boundaries are seriously reconsidered . They are currently a farce. We are not numbers, we are people.
N36004 Leonie Newman Objection Boundary

Leonie Newman

Objection

Napier
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Leonie Newman

The boundary move which includes Wharerata Muriwai Manutuke Ngatapa Hangaroa Tiniroto Otoko Rakuroa and Matawai to Napier is contrary to the stated criteria. Our families in Tiniroto and Motu have no community of interest, no easy access to Napier. Infrastructure links are poor. Connectivity has been demonstrated to be difficult. They have little interest in MPs from so far away where the economy is quite different, The East Coast Boundary should be southern Tairawhiti GDC jurisdiction.

Suggested solution

Re arranging Wairarapa, Tukituki, and Napier as detailed in other submissions accommodates these communities into East Coast. Western edge towns currently in East Coast can be nudged to Bay of Plenty. This would present a much more workable electorate for our MPs.
N36005 Amanda Newman Objection Boundary

Amanda Newman

Objection

Napier
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Amanda Newman

I don't agree with our electorate being changed from East coast to HB.
We live in quite a different economy to HB.
We don't visit HB very often so have limited knowledge of the region, let along any knowledge of the MP's in the HB region. Making communication difficult
Infrastructure links aren't great between the 2 regions

Suggested solution

Leave us in the East coast region.
Maybe add some of the western edge towns to bay of Plenty
N36006 Mr David Clark Objection Boundary

Mr David Clark

Objection

Napier
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr David Clark

It seems ridiculous that Manutuke is to become part of the Napier electorate - 3 hours away. Gisborne City is less than 15 minutes away. We never go south to Hawkes Bay so we have no relationship with Napier. Our local MP Dana Kirkpatrick is now in the Napier electorate (proposed).

Suggested solution

Move the Napier and other electorates south - for the sake of a few people these boundary lines make no sense at all.
N36007 Gisborne Business & Professional Women Objection Boundary

Gisborne Business & Professional Women

Objection

Napier
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Gisborne Business & Professional Women

The proposal to extend the Napier Electorate to include constituents, whose centre for Health Services, Education,
Sport and recreation and other amenities is less than 20 minutes away makes no sense.
Napier is at least three hours away and it will make it impossible for some to be able to have a face to face meeting with their "Local" MP.

The current East Coast MP or her successor, will have to travel past many of these new Napier constituents gates to get to the rest of her East Coast constituents.The East Coast is already isolated. Never more so than during Cyclone
Gabrielle when the roading network was severly compromised.

A Napier MP would struggle to serve their constituents, equally, as the changes propose.

I appreciate the boundaries are based on numbers but surely there needs to be consideration for exceptions when
the changes actually impact on the MP's ability to adequately serve their constituents.

Suggested solution

As already stated I believe the Commission needs to forget the numbers game and address the suitability of making
this change. Also the added cost for an electorate of the MP having to travel these ridiculously increased miles into an
area where there is already an MP of the neighbouring electorate.
N36601 Vincent Jones Counter-Objection Name

Vincent Jones

Counter-Objection

Napier

Relates to objections

N36001
This objection does not relate to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change

Vincent Jones

My objection is to the proposed name change that the individual has put forward. Personally I believe that this name change is too specific for the area.

Suggested solution

My proposed solution would be to rename the Napier electorate to Northern Hawke's Bay as this covers the Napier region and includes Wairoa as well. Looking at the geographical boundaries of the region, this proposal does mean that the likes of Hastings, Havelock North, and Central Hawke's Bay would not be included in the name, but with the proposal of Northern Hawke's Bay it does recognise the region.
N36602 Mrs Leigh Anderson Counter-Objection Boundary

Mrs Leigh Anderson

Counter-Objection

Napier

Relates to objections

This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mrs Leigh Anderson

Patutahi, Waipaoa, Te Karaka, Manutuke and Motu are Gisborne area local small communities linked to the Tairawhiti region and are considered to live in Gisborne not Npaier or Hastings. People from these areas work and send their kids to schools in Gisborne not to Napier 2 1/2 hours away. It is absurd to change the East Coast boundry to includes these areas/suburbs in the Napier/Hastings electorate. They should be in the East Coast electorate.

Suggested solution

The electorate you are in should be based on where you pay your rates to ie. areas such as Patutahi, Waipaoa, Te Karaka, Manutuke and Motu pay rates to the Gisborne District Coucil and therefore should be included in the East Coast electorate.
N37001 Greg Stephens Objection Boundary

Greg Stephens

Objection

New Plymouth
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Greg Stephens

The area between the current New Plymouth and Taranaki-King Country border and SH3 has had urban growth in it from Waitara, and should now be moved from the Taranaki-King Country electorate to the New Plymouth electorate. This would mean all of Waitara town is in the same electorate.

Suggested solution

Move meshblocks 4013365, 4013366, 4013367 and 4013370 from Taranaki-King Country to New Plymouth
N38001 Mr Rhys Hurley Objection Boundary

Mr Rhys Hurley

Objection

Whanganui
This objection relates to a boundary change
This objection does not relate to a name change

Mr Rhys Hurley

I believe the addition of the Ruapehu district into the Whanganui electorate isn't justified. My reasoning is that communities of interest are not being meet here in the best way even with large rural electorates have different considerations due to sparse populations. There is multiple districts being rolled into one here that have less shared shared economic, cultural and historical shared points.

Suggested solution

The proposed Whanganui electorate has been shifted the wrong way. Instead of taking Ruapehu, it should shift to take more of the taranaki region. Add all of South Taranaki and the entire Stratford district. Give Inglewood to New Plymouth and expand north where needed. Taupo and Rangitikei boundary's would also be impacted but with whanganui being across two regions already why add a third.
N38002 Craig Spanhake Objection Name

Craig Spanhake

Objection

Whanganui
This objection does not relate to a boundary change
This objection relates to a name change

Craig Spanhake

Given the proposed expansion north of the boundaries, Whanganui is no longer an appropriate name for the whole electorate

Suggested solution

Could take the name from more centrally located landmarks such as Tongariro, Waimarino or Waitotara (all previous electorate names)
Back to top