from Concerned Ratepayers Kapiti (CRK)

On Monday 10 August some committee members attended a Labour Party meeting where Kapiti electorate candidate Sophie Handford and Labour Party spokesperson for Local Government, Tangi Utikere, spoke about amalgamation.  We came away with some important questions — particularly for Kapiti.

🔹 Labour is not opposed to amalgamation. It opposes the Government’s current process and its speed, arguing the process should be slowed down — but not stopped.

🔹 Labour says it wants to “get this right”, particularly where there is no clear agreement on the way forward.

🔹 Labour is concerned that, in the rush to create new entities, important regional council functions could be lost or left behind.

But here is the key issue:

Labour was asked repeatedly whether it supports a residents’ referendum on amalgamation, and whether a future Labour Government would force an unwilling council into amalgamation it did not support.

There was no clear answer.

While Tangi Utikere referred to Labour’s longstanding position of not forcing amalgamation, he would not categorically commit that a future Labour-led Government would continue that position.  There was no commitment to a referendum.

This means that Kapiti cannot be assured that a future Labour-led government would not force Kapiti into a merger with Wellington, Hutt, Porirua and Wairarapa councils, even though KCDC strongly opposes that option. 

We spoke to Sophie Handford directly after the meeting ended.  If elected to Parliament, either as the local electorate MP or through the Labour Party list, she said that she would fight hard “from the inside” to stop a forced merger, if a Labour-led government went down that path.  But as a new backbench MP, it is an open question how much influence she would actually have.

We have sometimes wondered if KCDC’s approach to amalgamation has been based on the hope that a future Labour-led government will not force Kapiti into an amalgamation with Wellington. Based on what was said at this meeting, Kapiti has no such assurance. 

DISCLAIMER:  CRK is not aligned to any political party. Our focus is solely on how Central Government decisions affect local democracy, local government and the people of Kapiti.

We’ll be attending other party candidates’ meetings and will report back on their positions on amalgamation and other local government issues.

Kapiti deserves to know where every party stands.

Could this also be the reason KCDC is reluctant to disclose the ART / Iwi grants detail?

from RCR Bites

A leaked Auckland Council document has raised questions over the oversight of millions of dollars in ratepayer-funded grants, revealing a major review of the Council’s grants system that excludes a $150 million Maori Outcomes Fund.

The April 2026 document said an internal audit of the Council’s contestable grants system concluded it was unsatisfactory, triggering a full review of its Community Grants Policy. While $25.5 million was distributed through contestable grants in 2023/24, Council also approves about $200 million annually in non-contestable community grants not currently covered by the policy.

The audit identified a lack of processes to monitor impact and value for money, while some programmes developed since 2014 may be operating outside of Council’s approved grants policy settings. Council also acknowledged some funding decisions are being made by staff despite the existing policy stipulating elected-member decision-making, raising concerns about fairness and transparency”.

However, the $150 million Maori Outcomes Fund, allocated during two 10-year budget cycles, was expressly excluded from the review. Council said it was moving towards a partnership funding approach, targeted to mana whenua iwi, mataawaka and marae. The document did not explain why it was excluded, or what separate value-for-money or accountability mechanisms applied to the fund.

RCR is seeking the underlying May 2025 internal audit and will report further on its findings.

Why should Ratepayers subsidise this or any private business?

This loan was made in mid-2020 by the then council for unknown reasons, except that the then Mayor wanted the airline to serve Paraparaumu after he said Air NZ’s departure in 2018 was good riddance.

There have been big costs to Ratepayers:

First the interest cost. KCDC borrows a lot from the NZ Local Government Funding Agency and over the last 6 years the rate it has paid has varied between 3.78% and 5% currently. If the half-way point of these two interest rates — 4.39% — is taken as an average, then $500,000 x .0439 x 6 = $131,700 of interest cost to Ratepayers for the benefit of Air Chathams.

But that’s not all: Gemini AI says:

Since June 2018, the Kapiti Coast District Council (KCDC) has provided Air Chathams with roughly $1.3 million to $1.5 million in total financial support, consisting of destination marketing grants, a COVID-19 support grant, and a $500,000 interest-free loan. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Destination Marketing Grants: Eight distinct grants totaling about $759,000 intended to promote the Kāpiti-Auckland route and local tourism. [1, 2]
COVID-19 Support Grant: A one-off $20,000 relief grant given during the pandemic. [1]

What benefit has come from these extremely generous grants to Kapiti Ratepayers? It’s quite likely senior KCDC staffers have flown to Auckland and back to meet with their consultants; otherwise some business people in both places will have done the same — but how many tourists? Why would tourists want to fly from Auckland to Kapiti and back?

Tourists who visit Kapiti are most likely to that overland (car, campervan or train) as part of a longer trip taking in other parts of the North Island.

The 34/36-seat Saab 340 twin-engine turboprops that Air Chathams was using are much slower than the B-737 or A-320 jets that fly from Wellington to Auckland (maximum cruising speeds of 524 km/h verus 890 km/h respectively); how many would have preferred the former to the latter?

Air Chathams ceased its Auckland to Paraparaumu service on 31 July.

Alethophobia: a persistent fear or dislike of the truth. It describes an unwillingness to face real facts, often because those facts cause emotional pain or threaten a person’s current beliefs.

Leftists are particularly susceptible.

Ireland has spent €7 Billion on "Supporting Ukraine"

Meanwhile, entire streets in Irelands rural villages are abandoned, borded up, forgotten by the EU worshipping vassals in Dublin.

Imagine what that money, easily found for Ukraine, would do in these Irish villages? pic.twitter.com/x8ulXulbpa

— Chay Bowes (@BowesChay) August 13, 2026

by Russell Malcolm, Yellow Vest NZ

So while everyone is watching the National leadership circus, there’s another story that deserves a hell of a lot more attention.

On the same day Chris Penk was stripped of his ministerial portfolios and announced he won’t seek re-election, a judicial review was filed in the Wellington High Court challenging Government approvals for BlackSky satellite launches from New Zealand.

The same day.

And there’s a very direct connection to the people involved in today’s political drama.

Judith Collins, when she was Minister for Space, approved four BlackSky launches.

Chris Penk, after taking over the Space portfolio, approved another 26 in April.

Both are named in the legal challenge.

The plaintiffs say the satellites could provide imagery and intelligence capable of being used by Israel’s military in Gaza, and they are challenging whether the Government properly exercised its legal obligations when approving the launches.

And let’s be very clear about the gravity here.

This isn’t a dispute over some obscure bit of government paperwork.

The plaintiffs are alleging that New Zealand-approved satellite launches could contribute to military operations in Gaza, against the backdrop of genocide findings concerning Israel’s conduct in Gaza.

The UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry has found that Israel committed genocide in Gaza. The International Court of Justice has also found it plausible that Palestinians in Gaza hold rights under the Genocide Convention requiring protection from acts of genocide.

The High Court is now being asked to examine the Government’s decisions.

That’s serious. And yet on Wednesday, the political news cycle was almost entirely swallowed by:

LUXON SURVIVES.

PENK SACKED.

WHO TRIED TO ROLL HIM?

ERIKA? BISHOP? PENK?

WHO HAD THE NUMBERS?

Meanwhile, there is a legal challenge over Government decisions that potentially have consequences far beyond the walls of Parliament. I’m not saying those things are connected. I’m saying the timing is bloody interesting.

And whatever you think about Chris Penk’s role in the leadership drama, this legal challenge deserves attention in its own right.

Three New Zealand citizens have brought the case: engineer Yasser Abdulaal, IT professional Maher Nazzal and doctor Timoti Te Moke. They’re asking the High Court to examine Government decisions.

So while everyone is busy arguing about whether Penk tried to roll Luxon, maybe we should also be asking:

What exactly did the Government approve?

What did it know when it approved those launches?

What obligations did it have?

And was it lawful?

Because one political scandal might dominate the news cycle for a day.

But a legal challenge over whether New Zealand has allowed space infrastructure to potentially contribute to military operations in Gaza?

That deserves to be looked at. So let’s look at it.

Petition of Rhonda Fitzpatrick: Restore direct elections for the people who decide our compulsory water charges

https://petitions.parliament.nz/9460f0db-45e3-455f-2f30-08ded51c4a73?lang=en

FYI – Tiaki Wai has a Board of 4 (only 2 of them even live in Wellington) and they can set and compulsory charge for water services, yet those paying the bills can not vote them in or out!

There should be: No Taxation with without Representation.

NB: this Law change in the Local Government (Water Services) Act 2025, applies nationwide.

Fortunately, Kapiti hasn’t gone this way: water services are a ‘ring-fenced’ business unit of KCDC.