Agenda of Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel

Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel

03 September 2014

Election of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson

File No.: CP2014/19335

Purpose

1. To elect a chairperson and deputy chairperson for the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel.

Executive summary

2. In accordance with the Terms of Reference for demographic panels, the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel must, at its third meeting, elect a chairperson and a deputy chairperson.

3. The panel must decide whether the election will be conducted by open or closed ballot, and choose a voting system. Staff recommend that the Panel adopt one of the two voting systems outlined in the Local Government Act 2002.

4. Once the panel has made these choices, the Lead Officer Support will lead the process for the election of the chairperson. Once elected, the new chairperson will in turn lead the process for the election of the deputy chairperson.

Recommendation/s

That the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel:

a) decide whether the chairperson and deputy chairperson will be elected by open or closed ballot.

b) decide whether the chairperson and deputy chairperson will be elected using voting system A or voting system B (as described in Schedule 7, Clause 25 of the Local Government Act 2002).

c) elect a chairperson.

d) elect a deputy chairperson.

Comments

5. The Governing Body appointed the Ethnic Peoples, Pacific Peoples and Seniors Advisory Panels at its meeting of 1 May 2014 (Resolution no. GB/2014/42). The panels held their first meetings in June.

6. In accordance with the Terms of Reference for demographic panels, the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel must, at its third meeting, elect one member to the position of chairperson and one member to the position of deputy chairperson.

7. The panel at its second meeting, held on Wednesday 23 July 2014, was briefed on the requirement to elect a chairperson and deputy chairperson at the next meeting. As part of the briefing, the panel was advised that panel processes should, whenever possible, mirror committee processes. This included using the voting systems of local committees.

Open or closed ballot

8. At its meeting of Monday 11 August 2014, the Youth Advisory Panel elected their chairperson. Prior to the meeting, after some informal discussion, a poll was conducted with the youth panel members to determine whether they preferred an open or closed ballot. The youth panel chose a closed ballot process.

9. This fact is brought to the attention of the Ethnic Peoples Panel in case members want to consider running a closed ballot. Staff recommend following committee and local board practices and run an open voting process.

Voting System

10. The panel needs to decide what voting system it wants to use.

11. Staff recommend to undertake the election in accordance with Schedule 7, Clause 25 of the Local Government Act 2002, and to choose one of the two systems that can be used to elect chairpersons and deputy chairpersons of regional councils and other committees. The two systems are described below.

12. System A -

(a) requires that a person is elected or appointed if he or she receives the votes of a majority of the members of the local authority or committee present and voting; and

(b) has the following characteristics:

(i) there is a first round of voting for all candidates; and

(ii) if no candidate is successful in that round there is a second round of voting from which the candidate with the fewest votes in the first round is excluded; and

(iii) if no candidate is successful in the second round there is a third, and if necessary subsequent, round of voting from which, each time, the candidate with the fewest votes in the previous round is excluded; and

(iv) in any round of voting, if two or more candidates tie for the lowest number of votes, the person excluded from the next round is resolved by lot.

13. System B -

(a) requires that a person is elected or appointed if he or she receives more votes than any other candidate; and

(b) has the following characteristics:

(i) there is only one round of voting; and

(ii) if two or more candidates tie for the most votes, the tie is resolved by lot.

Voting procedure at the meeting

14. The meeting will proceed as follows:

(a) The interim chairperson will call the meeting to order and deal with apologies and the initial procedural items.

(b) The first item of substantive business will be the election of chairperson.

(c) The interim chairperson will vacate the chair and the meeting will be chaired by the lead officer support, assisted by the democracy advisor.

(d) The lead officer will call for a decision on whether the ballot will be open or closed. This will be by simple voice or show of hands vote.

(e) The lead officer will then call for a decision on the voting system. Once a member moves one of the systems, it will be put to the vote. Again a decision will be by voice or show of hands.

(f) The lead officer will call for nominations for chairperson. Each candidate must be nominated and seconded by a panel member who is present.

(g) If there is only one nomination that person will be declared elected and will assume the chair.

(h) If there is more than one candidate, an election will take place using the voting system agreed earlier.

(i) If it is closed voting, the democracy advisor will undertake the vote, scrutineered by the liaison councillor.

(j) Once elected, the successful candidate will assume the chair and call for nominations for deputy chairperson.

(k) The relevant parts of the process will be repeated for the election of the deputy chairperson.

(l) The meeting will then continue with the next item of business.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

15. There are no local board implications.

Māori impact statement

16. There are no items in this report which impact on matters of significance for Maori

Implementation

17. There are no significant implication issues.

Attachments

There are no attachments for this report.

Signatories

Authors

Bruce Thomas - Principal Advisor Panels

Authorisers

Marguerite Delbet - Manager Democracy Services

Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning

Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel

03 September 2014

Consultation on the draft Community Facilities Network Plan

File No.: CP2014/14708

Purpose

1. To provide feedback on the draft Community Facilities Network Plan.

Executive summary

2. The purpose of the Community Facilities Network Plan is to guide council’s provision of community facilities for the next 10 years and beyond. The key drivers are to:

· Optimise the use and efficiency of existing facilities

· Address gaps and needs for community facilities now and into the future

· Meet current and future demand arising from population growth and changing user expectations.

3. In March 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved the development and scope of the network plan (REG/2014/37) to address future provision of community centres, venues for hire, arts and cultural facilities, aquatic and leisure facilities.

4. A draft Community Facilities Network Plan (network plan) has been developed (Attachment A). There are three key components of the draft network plan:

· Strategic framework – specifies the outcomes council is seeking from its investment in community facilities aligned with the Auckland Plan, Local Board Plans and other strategic priorities; and articulates the council’s key objectives for future provision.

· Provision framework – guides council’s approach for the provision of community facilities in the future.

· Action Plan – over 50 recommended actions to investigate areas where potential gaps in provision have been identified and to investigate existing facilities where issues affecting their performance have been identified.

5. Most of the recommendations in the network plan will require detailed community or sector based investigation to determine the appropriate response. It is proposed that any future investment in community facilities will be determined following detailed investigation which provides clear evidence of need, options analysis and a robust business case.

6. The draft network plan is an aspirational plan with actions for implementation over the next 10 to 20 years. The ability and timeframe to implement these actions is dependent on the decisions made by council through the Long-term Plan 2015-2025 (LTP) on the budget available for investment in community facilities.

7. Engagement with local boards, advisory panels and key external stakeholder groups on the draft network plan is being undertaken in August and September. Feedback will be incorporated into the final plan which is scheduled to be reported to the governing body by December 2014.

Recommendation/s

That the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel:

a) provide feedback on the draft Community Facilities Network Plan which will guide Auckland Council’s provision of community facilities.

Comments

8. Community facilities contribute to building strong, healthy and vibrant communities by providing space for people to connect with each other, socialise, learn skills and participate in a range of social, cultural, art and recreational activities. Community facilities contribute to improved lifestyles and a sense of belonging, identity and pride among residents.

9. To realise Auckland’s vision to be world’s most liveable city, the network of community facilities will need to improve, evolve and increase to keep pace with Auckland’s growth and diverse population. The network plan has been developed to guide council’s provision and investment of community facilities to meet community needs, both now and into the future.

10. The draft network plan aligns with strategic directions and transformational shifts outlined in the Auckland Plan, and has been informed by local board plans and relevant strategic action plans, including the draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan, Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan, Thriving Communities Strategy and Children and Young People’s Strategic Action Plan.

11. The scope of the network plan includes community centres, venues for hire (community or rural halls), arts and culture facilities, aquatic and leisure facilities. The network includes facilities owned by council and facilities owned by third-parties which are supported by council and are available for community use.

12. There is a wider picture of community facility provision which also contributes to meeting community needs. Delivering a successful network of community facilities will involve identifying opportunities to work across all providers, looking for partnership opportunities and solutions to best meet community needs. While facilities like libraries, sport clubs, community leases, schools, churches and marae are not included in the recommendations of the network plan, these facilities will be considered fully in the localised and detailed assessments undertaken in the implementation of the network plan.

13. The first stage in developing the network plan was a review of the current state to identify what facilities we have, who uses them, how they are used, how they are operated and key issues associated with this provision. The key findings from the current state review are included in the draft network plan and have informed the proposed provision frameworks and actions. The full current state report is a companion document to the network plan and available on request.

14. Key challenges that the network plan seeks to address are:

· There are gaps and duplication in provision across the region which will require decisions on where new facilities should be developed and potentially where underperforming facilities which are no longer meeting community need could be divested or repurposed.

· Some facilities are not fit for purpose due to the quality, design or layout.

· There are a number of aging facilities that will require investment to remain operational or divested if they are no longer suitable to meet community needs.

· Across the board there is a need to improve the financial sustainability of community facilities to reduce the overall cost of provision.

· There are a variety of other providers of community facilities across Auckland which needs to be considered as part of future provision.

· There is a need for thorough and consistent planning to properly understand community needs and determine the most appropriate response to these needs. In some cases a facility response may be not the best solution and other options such as partnerships, programming or marketing may achieve the desired outcomes.

· Auckland is growing and becoming more diverse and the network of community facilities will need to be flexible enough to respond to changing community needs.

Draft Community Facilities Network Plan

15. The draft network plan sets out a strategic framework for community facilities to articulate why council invests in the provision of community facilities, the desired outcomes from this investment and the key objectives for future provision. The strategic framework is aligned with the Auckland Plan, local board plans and relevant strategic action plans.

16. Proposed common purpose for community facilities: Vibrant and welcoming places at the heart of where and how communities connect and participate.

17. The draft network plan sets out four proposed key objectives to guide and underpin the future provision of community facilities:

· Undertake robust and consistent planning to ensure future decisions on the provision of community facilities are based on clear evidence of needs and assessment of all options.

· Maintain, improve and make the best use out of existing community facilities where they continue to meet community needs and investigate the future of facilities that no longer meet community needs.

· Provide flexible and multi-purpose facilities that are co-located and/or integrated with other community infrastructure.

· Look for opportunities to leverage and support partnerships.

Future Provision Framework

18. The draft network plan proposes provision frameworks for each type of community facility to guide council’s approach to the provision of new facilities in the future.

Community Centres

19. The proposed provision approach for community centres is to continue to maintain and deliver community centres at the local level across the region, recognising the important role they play in meeting local community need for spaces to deliver a wide range of community, recreation, learning, events, and arts and culture activities.

20. It is proposed community centres will serve local catchments of up to 5 km (approximately 15 minutes travel time) with a minimum population size of 20,000 residents. This reflects the current levels of provision and is in keeping with international benchmarks. New community centres should be sized between 600-800 metre² to ensure they have the flexibility to accommodate a wide range of activities and need. In rural areas, where there is lower population size, existing halls could be activated with programming.

21. Based on this proposed provision framework, the following potential areas of need for new community centres have been identified for further investigation:

· Ormiston (Flatbush)

· North-West corridor (Westgate, Massey North, Hobsonville Point)

· North Pukekohe

· Manurewa (quality and level of existing provision is low)

· Papakura (Takanini, Hingaia)

Venues for hire

22. There are a wide range of providers of venues for hire and many existing venues have low utilisation and/or issues impacting on their performance. In order to optimise the overall community facility network, it is proposed the council does not invest in any more stand-alone venues for hire. Instead, it is proposed that bookable space is included in flexible multi-purpose community centres (new or existing/redeveloped), guided by community needs assessments. Other options should be explored including partnerships or encouraging other organisations (such as schools, sports clubs and churches) to make bookable spaces available for community use.

23. Venues for hire is an area of the community facility network where there is potential for divestment or repurposing for other activities. Repurposing could include introducing programming to create a community centre, arts and culture facility or youth facility, converting to a community lease, or transferring the asset to a community organisation.

Aquatic and Leisure Facilities

24. The proposed provision framework for aquatic and leisure facilities is through a hierarchy of local, destination and regional facilities to support participation in a range of sport and recreation activities from casual play through to competitive sport. The provision framework is supported by actual catchment analysis of council’s aquatic and leisure facilities.

25. At the local level, it is proposed facilities should serve catchments up to 5km in distance. Potential gaps for investigation are identified in areas outside the catchments of existing facilities, where overall participation is less than the Auckland average and where population density meets target thresholds as outlined in the plan. It is proposed to develop an affordable design model to reduce the design and build costs without compromising the quality or viability of new facilities.

26. Destination and regional facilities will serve larger catchments 10km plus and only a limited number of facilities are required to serve the region. These facilities should be assessed on a case by case basis where there is clear evidence of demand.

27. Based on the proposed provision framework the following potential areas of need for new aquatic and leisure facilities have been identified for further investigation:

· Western corridor from Mt Albert to Glen Eden – aquatic and leisure facility

· Ormiston (Flatbush) – aquatic and leisure facility

· North-west corridor (Westgate, Massey North, Hobsonville Point, Kumeu) - aquatic

· Central city area – investigate partnership opportunities for leisure facility

· Warkworth and surrounding area – aquatic and leisure facility (noting the small population size may impact on demand and type of facility required)

· Waiheke Island - aquatic facility (noting the small population size may impact on the demand and type of facility required)

· Indoor court facilities across the region to provide for indoor sports

· Regional aquatic and indoor sport facility.

Arts and Culture Facilities

28. It is proposed the future provision of arts and culture activity at the local level will focus on enabling local expression through programming rather than building dedicated arts facilities. Future provision will be included as part of flexible multi-purpose community centres (new or existing/redeveloped) guided by community needs assessment. Focus will be placed on integrating appropriate space and programming within the existing network, or partnering with others to provide suitable space.

29. For destination and regional facilities, it proposed that council supports a network of facilities to meet sector and audience demand. The future provision of both destination and regional facilities should be determined by robust investigation on a case-by-case basis. In particular, council should only intervene when the private sector does not and opportunities for partnerships with sector, private and government should be explored.

Action Plan and Implementation

30. The draft network plan includes over 50 recommended actions to undertake investigations for the future provision of community facilities. This includes actions related to existing facilities as well as potential new facilities.

31. All recommended actions will require detailed community or sector based investigation to determine the appropriate response. It is intended that any future investment in community facilities will be determined following detailed investigation which provides clear evidence of need, options analysis and development of a robust business case. Detailed process guidelines to ensure a consistent approach to these investigations have been developed (Appendix 2 of draft network plan: Community Facilities Development Guidelines).

32. For some existing facilities, investigation is required to understand in more detail how the facility is operating and meeting community needs and to determine the appropriate response. There are a variety of responses the investigation could identify:

· Changing the way the facility is managed or operated such as new programming, marketing or new management model.

· Identifying the facility is no longer required for the original activity and could be re-purposed for a new activity or function.

· Identifying the facility is no longer required and could be divested.

· Identifying the facility needs to be redeveloped or improved and should be considered for investment.

33. For potential areas for new facilities, a similar investigation process is required to understand needs, test the feasibility of different options and assess the business case for a facility. The outcome of this investigation may identify a non-asset solution is required such as a partnership or supporting a non-council facility.

34. The actions in the draft network plan have been ranked according to the urgency of completing the investigation, which is based on consideration of the following factors:

· Urgency to address condition issues with existing facilities.

· Need to respond to major catalysts impacting on existing facilities.

· Opportunities for rationalisation or partnerships.

· Identified as an existing gap in the network.

· Timing and scale of projected growth.

· Located in a spatial priority area.

35. Feedback from the governing body, local boards and stakeholders may change the ranking of actions in the final plan. The ability and timeframe to implement the actions is dependent on the level of budget available through the council’s LTP.

36. As council will not have the capacity to invest in all community facility projects, the draft network plan also provides prioritisation criteria to assist the governing body prioritise investment into community facilities once the investigation process has identified the appropriate response. The criteria will be used to assess the strategic benefits of the project, the importance of investing in a specific area and the project outcomes.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

37. Cluster workshops with local boards were undertaken in March and April to provide an overview of the network plan, present information on the current state and to seek feedback on key components of the network plan.

38. Workshops on the draft network plan will be undertaken with local boards and key stakeholders in August and September.

Maori impact statement

39. The provision of community facilities contributes to improving wellbeing among Maori communities by providing spaces to connect, socialise, learn skills and participate.

40. Community facility user surveys and catchment studies has collected a range of information from all types of users including Maori users, which has informed the network plan and proposed actions. The network plan has also been informed by submissions and feedback received on the strategic action plans for community development, arts and culture and sport and recreation. The consultation process for these strategic action plans included a number of hui with iwi, which has provided input on the provision of community facilities.

Implementation

41. The draft network plan is an aspirational plan for the next 10 to 20 years which outlines what needs to be investigated and undertaken to deliver a network of community facilities to meet community needs. The ability and timeframe to implement the actions is dependent on the level of budget available through the council’s LTP 2015-2025.

42. Through the LTP process, the governing body will consider the amount of funding available for investment in community facilities. To deliver the network plan this will need to include both operational funding to undertake the required investigation (needs assessment, feasibility and business case) and depending on the outcome of each investigation, capital funding or operational funding to implement the recommended response.

43. It is proposed that any capital funding for major upgrades or building new community facilities should be held in a regional investment fund and allocated to specific projects once a business case is approved.

44. The next steps for the network plan are engaging with local boards, advisory panels and key stakeholder groups (such as regional sport organisations) who have an interest in council’s community facilities. Given the context of the network plan and the information and feedback already received through the user surveys and strategic action plans, it is not proposed to undertake any specific engagement with facility users or the general public.

45. The engagement process will be completed by October. Depending on the level of feedback to be incorporated, the final plan will be reported to the council’s governing body in December 2014.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Draft Community Facilities Network Plan (Under Separate Cover)

Signatories

Authors

Anita Coy-Macken - Principal Policy Analyst – Central

David Shamy - Policy Analyst

Authorisers

Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning

Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel

03 September 2014

Draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (ACSAP) update

File No.: CP2014/18895

Purpose

1. To receive an update on the Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan (ACSAP) consultation and provide advice on issues particularly relevant to ethnic communities.

Executive summary

2. From the 23^rdJune - 24^th July the draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan was out for consultation.

3. There were a total of 440 submissions received. Of these approximately 50 were from organisations. 109 were received from children and young people that were collected via a specific worksheet. We did not collect data on the ethnicity of submitters.

4. Submitters endorsed the six goals and sixteen action areas in the Plan.

5. The draft is being revised in response to feedback, including defining Council’s role in delivering the plan, timelines and measures.

Recommendation/s

That the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel:

a) advise of any issues particularly relevant to ethnic communities that should be considered in the final draft ACSAP and in the development of the implementation plan.

b) advise of any ethnic organisations that should be included in further targeted consultation.

Comments

Significance for the Ethnic People’s Advisory Panel

Priority 1 of chapter 3 of the Auckland Plan is to “value and foster Auckland’s cultural diversity”. The draft ACSAP acknowledges that “with 40% of our population born overseas, we have an ever-increasing number of ethnicities and distinctive cultures”. Celebrating Auckland’s many cultures and showcasing and engaging with diverse audiences is a focus of the Plan.

Examples of relevant actions in the draft Plan are:

- Investigate an Arts Passport scheme that could include reducing the cost of travel to arts and culture facilities and events, and making empty seats available at reduced cost to targeted groups

- Use arts and culture activities to promote and celebrate Te Reo Māori, Pasifika languages and other non-English languages spoken in Auckland

- Promote the unique contribution of Māori, Pacific Island and Asian arts to our cultural richness through creative sector awards and community-specific awards

- Foster opportunities for the intergenerational sharing of culture

Consultation feedback

From the 23^rdJune - 24^th July the draft Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan went out for consultation. The draft ACSAP was distributed and publicised via various channels.

There were a total of 440 submissions received. Of these approximately 50 were from organisations; 109 were received from children and young people which were collected via a specific worksheet. We did not collect data on the ethnicity of submitters.

Attachment A contains the quantitative summary of the feedback received in response to the specific questions in the survey.

Submission Analysis

Submitters endorsed the six goals and sixteen action areas in the Plan.

The most important goals for submitters were:

1. All Aucklanders can access and participate in Arts and Culture

2. Auckland values and invests in Arts and Culture.

The actions areas identified as priorities were:

1. Better communicate what is on offer

2. Grow and deliver strategic investment in arts and culture

3. Support arts and culture organisations to engage with Auckland’s diverse population in innovative and inclusive ways

4. Engage more artists and Aucklanders in art in public places

5. Champion Auckland’s unique arts and culture

6. Foster a Robust Network of creative Industries

There were comments on a range of themes. Most comments were about funding of arts and culture and the affordability and accessibility for audiences and participants. The importance of honouring Maori culture and recognising the contribution of multiculturalism to Auckland’s identity is significant to both individuals and stakeholders. We also received many submissions from organisations and individuals wanting to partner with council in implementing and delivering the actions.

The qualitative analysis of the submissions identified overall support for:

· The six goals

· Intent of action areas

· Affordable public transport and Arts Passport scheme

· Better communicate what’s on offer – digital communication tools

· Public art and place-making

· More community focus-Local facilities, local artists to exhibit locally, lower fees for community halls, affordable exhibition spaces, and creative maker spaces.

· Auckland Artists to design our city

· Simplified funding and improved fairness and accessibility

· Multiculturalism

· More of a Asia Pacific emphasis/recognition

· Focused support for growing creative industries e.g. Film/TV

· Community arts and grassroots be given more status in the Plan

· An independent structure or body to represent stakeholders i.e. “Creative Auckland’. This organisation also needs a Pacific- and multicultural voice

Submitters identified new actions and gaps in the draft that will be addressed in the final document. Submitters proposed new actions such as:

· Art should be used as an engagement tool for consultation: a fun way for people to visualise proposals and contribute ideas.

· Undertake a creative and cultural asset inventory across Auckland

· Give autonomy to Community Facilities- self operated

· Communicate the value of arts and culture to children, i.e. interactive artist/children’s program to foster arts and culture between generations

· More opportunities to be recognised internationally and attract international arts and culture

· Information about public art located on site

· Revise graffiti policy and look at legitimising street art through “zones of tolerance”

The areas that submitters felt were missing from or needed more development in the Plan included:

· Disability access

· New Zealand Sign Language not acknowledged in the Plan

· Acknowledge and grow arts infrastructure at grass roots and community arts level

· Music and musicians

· Older persons’ voice

· More focus on youth

· Exhibition Space/ Platform for emerging 3D/sculpture/object artists and creatives

· Voice for East, West, North Auckland

· Detail on implementation

It is also clear that more work is needed on profiling the contribution of ethnic communities to Auckland’s cultural identity and arts and creative sectors. There is also work to be done on understanding how specific actions will impact on ethnic artists and their diverse ethnic communities. We need to ensure that the Plan is encompassing of all cultures, with greater reference to Auckland’s growing Asian population. The Panel is asked to advise on how this can be achieved within the Plan and through implementation.

Current work

The draft ACSAP is being revised in response to feedback, including defining Council’s role in delivering the plan and timelines and measures. Discussions are also taking place with stakeholders that expressed an interest in partnering to deliver some of these actions.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

6. There was a predominantly positive response to the Draft Plan from the boards who consider they can use it support their own arts and culture aspirations, and align Local Board Plan objectives to the ACSAP. Local Boards will continue to be engaged through the development of the final plan and implementation proposal phase.

Māori impact statement

7. Māori aspirations and outcomes are clearly identified and addressed in the draft Plan, with Māori actions woven through all the action areas. The draft Plan acknowledges and celebrates Māori culture as Auckland’s point of difference and Mana whenua as Treaty partners in a multicultural Auckland.

8. The Independent Māori Statutory Board is represented on the Steering Group.

9. Mana whenua and Mataawaka will continue to be engaged through the development of the final document and implementation proposal phase.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Consultation Summary	21

Signatories

Authors

Rebecca Kruse - Strategy Analyst

Maree Mills – Principal Strategy Analyst

Authorisers

Grant Barnes - Manager - Auckland Strategy and Research

Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning

Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel

03 September 2014

International Relations Unit Update

File No.: CP2014/18861

Purpose

1. To receive an overview of the role and current work programme of the Auckland Council’s International Relations Unit (IR), as well as an update on the IR unit’s renewed strategic direction to enhance Auckland’s global civic, business and people to people connections.

Executive summary

2. Over the past three years, the primary role of the International Relations (IR) unit has largely focused on managing Auckland’s sister-city relationships and programmes with 19 formal international partnerships (see attachment).

3. The associated work programme has tended to focus on supporting civic and cultural outcomes with our sister-city partners and relevant stakeholders in order to support Auckland’s goal of being “internationally connected and export driven”. A key priority of this work has been to coordinate and manage outbound Mayor-led trade missions to: China (July 2012); the Pacific region (July 2012); Republic of Korea & Taiwan (Oct 2012); Brisbane (May 2013) and Singapore (May 2014). In addition to this activity, the IR unit is also responsible for inbound diplomatic, official and trade-related visits to Auckland, as well as, international technical study visits to the council.

4. To deliver its services, the IR unit partners with other teams across council and key stakeholders e.g. Council Controlled Organisations (CCOs) including Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (ATTED) to identify and deliver economic outcomes for Auckland. The IR unit has developed and managed a portfolio of initiatives and events including: business exchanges, cultural events and supporting the council’s broader efforts to leverage the Rugby World Cup in 2011. The latter proved to be a successful opportunity to promote and celebrate Auckland’s ethnic communities.

5. Given the prominence and growing importance of Auckland’s ethnic population, the Mayor and the council are committed to promoting Auckland’s ethnic communities - a defining feature of Auckland – when the Mayor and the council engage with its international partners and networks.

6. The IR unit’s work is carried out in collaboration with a number of stakeholders including:

§ Partner countries and their associated stakeholders offshore;

§ NZ-based diplomatic network;

§ NZ Inc. e.g. Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade (MFAT), New Zealand Trade and Enterprise (NZTE) and other ministries/agencies e.g. Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs and Local Government New Zealand;

§ Auckland Inc. e.g. ATEED, Waterfront Auckland and other Auckland CCOs;

§ Education providers e.g. University of Auckland, AUT, Massey University & MIT;

§ Infrastructure & transport providers e.g. Ports of Auckland, Auckland International Airport and Air NZ

§ Business and industry e.g. the NZ-China Trade Association, Korea/Japan/ASEAN/Pacific-NZ business councils and American Chamber of Commerce etc.

§ Innovation Sector e.g. Grid AKL, Bizdojo & The Icehouse

7. As part of Auckland’s economic development strategy, Mayor Brown has signalled the need for a renewed focus on ensuring Auckland becomes an internationally competitive and prosperous economy that all Aucklanders can benefit from and participate in. The vision and objectives outlined in both ‘The Auckland Plan’ and Auckland’s ‘Economic Development Strategy’ are aligned with this objective, as is the current/future work programme of the IR unit.

8. In its commitment to supporting this goal, the IR unit will and deliver a proposed refreshed strategic direction for the council’s ‘global engagement’. This will be delivered to the Economic Development Committee and the governing body for approval and endorsement in September-October 2014.

9. As part of the Mayor and council’s global engagement activity (over the next 12-18 months) the IR unit is planning for a proposed Mayor-led focused mission to Japan and China accompanied by a targeted delegation to leverage specific sector opportunities. Meetings in Japan will likely focus on high-tech collaboration. In China (Guangzhou) the Mayor will sign the Tripartite Economic Alliance Agreement with the Mayors of both Guangzhou and Los Angeles. The Tripartite is a significant opportunity to enhance Auckland’s economic and trade relationship with two of Auckland’s most dynamic and vibrant sister cities. In June 2015, it is proposed that Mayor Brown also attend the World Cities Summit’s Mayors Forum in New York, aligning this with potential trade mission visits to San Francisco and Los Angeles (the latter as part of the agreed activity under the Tripartite). There is also the Asia Pacific Cities Summit (APCS) and Mayors’ Forum in Brisbane, Australia in July 2015.

10. From the council’s perspective, refocusing its global engagement efforts has the potential to bring greater economic opportunities to Auckland and its ethnic communities.

11. The IR unit is committed to engaging with all key stakeholders, and looks forward to developing further opportunities for engagement with the Advisory Panel and its members. There are various ways the Advisory Panel can engage with the IR unit; for example, facilitating the connections with the broader ethnic community across Auckland, especially ethnic business champions seeking to enhance their international connections. There is also scope for the Advisory Panel to help identify potential international connections that are aligned with the council’s global engagement efforts.

Recommendation/s

That the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel:

a) provide feedback to the International Relations unit.

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Auckland Council's International Partnerships (as at August 2014)	27

Signatories

Authors

Sanchia Jacobs - International Relations Specialist

Authorisers

Harvey Brookes - Manager Economic Development

Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning

Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel

03 September 2014

Local Approved Product Policy - psychoactive substances - preferred option report to EPAP

File No.: CP2014/18487

Purpose

1. To seek input from the Peoples Ethnic Panel on the proposed content of the draft Local Approved Product Policy (LAPP).

Executive summary

2. On 6 March 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved a work plan for the development of Auckland Council’s LAPP (REG/2014/34).

3. The LAPP will set rules regarding where retail outlets of psychoactive substances may operate. The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 provides that a policy may regulate the location of retail outlets by reference to broad areas within a district, proximity to other premises selling approved products and/or distance from certain types of premises such as schools, places of worship and other community facilities.

4. Despite the designation of ‘low risk’, legal psychoactive substances still cause harm to those that use them and the communities where they live. Minimising this harm is the key outcome from a successful LAPP. An effective LAPP will mean fewer vulnerable people with access to substances, less antisocial behavior from substance use and improved economic performance for local business.

5. Six options were considered for the LAPP. Three options were rejected prior to consultation as not being able to achieve the outcomes for a successful LAPP. The remaining three options were discussed with local boards, external stakeholders and council staff. After consideration of feedback and relevant research a preferred option has been developed.

6. On 3 July the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee endorsed a preferred option for the LAPP (REG/2014/86). The preferred option for the LAPP would prevent licences being granted in areas of high deprivation, near high schools and near addiction and mental health treatment centres. It would also limit how close to an existing shop a new shop could open. This option would reduce the availability of these substances in areas where their presence is likely to have the greatest potential for harm. The prevention of harm is achieved while maintaining the intent of the government to allow a regulated sale of these substances.

Recommendation/s

That the Ethnic Peoples Advisory Panel:

a) agree the draft Local Approved Product Policy will not allow licences for the retail sale of approved psychoactive substances to be granted:

· in high deprivation areas as defined by the Ministry of Health’s Deprivation Index score of 8, 9 or 10 indicating areas that fall in the bottom 30% of deprivation scores

· in neighbourhood centres as defined by the unitary plan

· within 300m of a high school

· within 100m of a primary school

· within 300m of a mental health or addiction treatment centre

· within 500m of an existing psychoactive substance retail licence

Comments

Background

The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013

7. The Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 (the Act) sets a regulatory framework for the manufacture and sale of psychoactive substances. The Act’s purpose is to regulate the availability of psychoactive products and to protect the health of, and minimise the harm to, individuals who use psychoactive substances.

8. The Act banned psychoactive substances from being sold in dairies, service stations, supermarkets, convenience stores and places where alcohol is sold. It also restricted the advertising of products and the sale to those under 18. The Act granted interim approvals to 42 products considered safe for use and interim retail licences to around 170 stores across New Zealand with 52 licences granted in Auckland.

The Psychoactive Substances Amendment Act 2014

9. The Psychoactive Substances Amendment Act 2014 came into effect on 6 May 2014. This Act ended all interim approvals and licences previously granted under the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013. This reversal meant there were no psychoactive substances that were legal to sell and there are no businesses that could legally sell them.

10. The amendment did not change the intent of the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 to allow the sale of low risk psychoactive substances. The Ministry of Health has indicated it will have regulations considered by the Cabinet Legislative Committee in early July 2014 to set out the testing regime required for a product to be approved. It is expected that regulations to allow retail licences will follow early in 2015.

Where the authority to create a local approved product policy comes from

11. Sections 66 to 69 of the Act enable territorial authorities to develop a LAPP for their region. The LAPP is limited to:

· the location of premises from which approved products may be sold by reference to broad areas

· the location from which approved products may be sold by reference to proximity to other premises from which approved products are sold

· the location of premises from which approved products may be sold by reference to proximity to premises or facilities of a particular kind or kinds.

Previous Council decisions

12. On 6 March 2014 the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee approved a work plan for the development of Auckland Council’s LAPP (REG/2014/34).

13. At the 27 March 2014 Governing Body meeting, staff were directed to consider options for reducing the development period of the LAPP. Staff advised that the only viable option for reducing the development time would be to shorten the consultation process to a single round with local boards. There is no longer a need for this reduced development period due to the removal of all approved products by the Psychoactive Substances Amendment Act 2014.

14. On 14 May 2014 council staff presented a number of options for a LAPP to the Community Development and Safety Committee. The committee endorsed the option to limit the sale of substances to specified areas that were evidence based (COM/2014/10). This option was further developed and then presented to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 3 July 2014 where it was endorsed as the preferred option for the LAPP (REG/2014/86).

What is the problem?

15. The Act created a regulatory framework allowing the supply of psychoactive substances to the public that the Regulatory Authority has deemed to be low risk. Despite the designation of ‘low risk’ these substances have been linked to adverse health outcomes, crime, worsening mental illness and aggressive behaviour, especially amongst vulnerable people. People using these substances in public places are causing a number of problems for communities. Communities are reporting public nuisance and disorder, a reduced perception of safety and a decrease in people shopping in nearby businesses. All of these effects are having a negative impact on the economic and social health of communities.

Desired outcome for the LAPP

16. A successful LAPP will minimise harm resulting from the use of legal psychoactive substances. Auckland Council’s proposed LAPP will reduce access to approved substances for vulnerable people leading to reduced harm for vulnerable people and the communities they live in. In addition to harm reduction the LAPP will be practical to implement and cost effective.

Other considerations in developing the LAPP

17. There are two trade-offs that need to be considered when looking at the LAPP. The first is the freedom for people to buy and sell legal products against the harm these products can cause. The more freedom people have to purchase these products the more likely that harm that will be experienced. However if the sale of these products is severely restricted there is a risk of unduly constraining the rights of people to conduct a lawful business. Ensuring a balance between these two principles has been a major component of the LAPP development. It is considered that the current draft LAPP achieves this balance through using the best evidence base possible to minimise harm while not being overly restrictive.

18. The second trade-off is related to the density of retail outlets. If there is a very low density of outlets and/or large areas with no access to products and a demand for them, there is a risk of creating an illegal trade in the products with unintentional criminal activity. When the opposite occurs and there is a high outlet density there is a risk of price competition creating cheap products that lend themselves to being used in high quantity by vulnerable populations. It follows then, that these users would experience higher harm from increased consumption. Ensuring there is an appropriate balance between these trade-offs has been a core component of the options analysis.

Options for the LAPP

19. Six options were considered for the LAPP. Three of these were rejected at the first stage of option development as they were not considered to meet the requirements of a successful LAPP. The remaining three options were developed further and presented to stakeholders and local boards for consultation. These three options were:

· limiting to the CBD and town centres

· limiting to industrial zones

· limiting to specified areas.

20. During consultation there was almost universal preference for the specified areas option. It was generally felt that both the town centre and the industrial zone option had more draw backs than advantages. Even amongst the few groups who preferred another option, the specified area option was the second choice. It was also acknowledged by at least one group that while they preferred another option for their area the specified place option was likely the best for Auckland as a whole. The preferred option presented below is a result of local board and stakeholder feedback as well as research evidence.

Preferred option for the LAPP

21. The preferred option for the LAPP would prevent the sale of approved psychoactive substances in the following specified areas:

· high deprivation, as defined by the Ministry of Health’s Deprivation Index score of 8, 9 or 10 indicating the bottom 30% according to deprivation

· neighbourhood centres, as defined by the unitary plan

· within 300m of a high school

· within 100m of a primary school

· within 300m of a mental health or addiction treatment centre

· within 500m of an existing retail licence.

22. Appendix 1 contains maps showing the areas that would be covered by the above restrictions.

Why high deprivation?

23. There is a scarcity of information and research on the impact of psychoactive substances at a social or group level. In the absence of a body of research, the preferred approach is to use studies that looked at the effects of similar substances. There is a significant body of literature on the effect of alcohol, smoking and other substance use. One effect that stands out from the research is that social areas with high levels of deprivation experience more harm from substance use than those areas with low deprivation. When this is considered against availability theory, which states that decreasing the availability of a substance will tend to reduce its use, there is a strong case that preventing the sale of psychoactive substances in high deprivation areas will have a greater impact on harm than in lower deprivation areas.

24. There is a risk that this approach will create large enough voids in substance availability that it will become attractive to criminal enterprise to attempt to fill them with illegal activity.

25. It is considered that this option would provide a good trade-off between the rights of consumers to purchase legal products and the intent of the act, to minimise harm.

Why neighbourhood centres?

26. These small groups of shops within residential areas are locations that are frequently accessed by vulnerable people. It is considered that both youth and other groups struggling with addictions or mental health would be frequent users of these shops. The use of these substances can be linked to the accessibility of the locations to people’s homes and vulnerable people lacking the mobility to access more distant retail options. Preventing the sale of psychoactive substances in these locations will limit product availability to vulnerable groups.

Why schools?

27. The youth voice representatives and a number of treatment providers both considered that the use of these substances by high school aged youth was a considerable problem. One provider thought that around half of the youth they were seeing had problems as a result of consuming these substances.

28. Consistent with the availability theory, reducing the access to substances is likely to result in a reduction in use. To achieve reduced availability the 300m zone around secondary and 100m zone around primary schools is considered to strike a good balance between restricting business activity and protecting vulnerable people. The smaller zone around primary schools is considered to be appropriate as the children at these schools are less likely to be able to purchase substances due to their age.

Why treatment centres?

29. As with schools and high deprivation areas, limiting the availability of these substances to vulnerable people is likely to be the most practical approach to minimising harm. Both mental health treatment centres and addiction treatment centres serve people who would be considered particularly vulnerable to the effects of these substances. Many of the treatment providers expressed a strong preference that they should not be for sale close to any mental health treatment centre or addiction treatment centre.

30. Treatment centres are more likely than schools to shift location or for a new operation to open. If a new treatment centre moved or opened close to an existing psychoactive substance retailer, the shop would not be expected to close. It would be considered far too onerous an expectation for an existing business to stop trading if a new sensitive site opened nearby. This decision is not final; with all retail licences being reviewed every three years there will be an opportunity to reconsider the suitability of a location. This position is supported by the Ministry of Health, Psychoactive Substance Regulatory Authority and internal legal staff.

Why restrictions on how close a shop can be to another shop?

31. Research in New Zealand and overseas has clearly established a link between the density of alcohol outlets and the alcohol related harm experienced by local communities. It is considered reasonable to assume that there is a high likelihood of a similar link for psychoactive substances. Thus density control is considered appropriate to assist other measures to minimise the harm experienced by users of these substances. Council staff are working on developing a risk rating similar to the rating used by the Ministry of Health to assess alcohol licences. This rating would allow licence applications for the sale areas to be prioritised based on the risk of harm they pose.

Why nothing else?

32. For each area considered for inclusion as a sensitive site there needs to be a trade-off between the freedom (trade and access to product) that is removed and the benefit gained from the decision. There were a number of areas considered as possible sensitive sites where it was difficult to reconcile the potential benefit with the restriction required to achieve it. Potential sites that did not meet the criteria for inclusion were churches, playgrounds, public spaces, libraries and community centres.

Consideration

Local board views and implications

33. Workshops on the proposed options were held with all of the local boards except for Great Barrier, Waiheke and Orakei Local Boards who declined to be involved in the process. Of the remaining 18 local boards Whau declined to attend the workshop and did not provide any feedback.

34. Of the 17 local boards who took part in the LAPP workshops 13 endorsed the specified place option as their preferred option. Four boards for local reasons preferred either the town centre or industrial option as they felt it provided tighter restrictions in their areas. All of these local boards also provided the specified areas as their second option acknowledging that it was unlikely that all local boards would opt for their preferred option. The Hibiscus and Bays Local Board declined to provide a preferred option.

Maori impact statement

35. Māori are over represented amongst the groups of vulnerable people likely to be affected by using approved psychoactive substances. This over representation has two effects. Firstly getting the right option for the LAPP to maximise harm reduction will be more effective for Māori. Secondly, any solutions need to be designed in close collaboration with Māori to ensure they are workable and support wider initiatives aimed at improving Māori outcomes.

36. A workshop has been undertaken with representatives from Hapai Te Hauora Tapui an agency representing Māori health providers in the Auckland region as part of the initial stakeholder discussions. Council staff will be working with the Independent Māori Statutory Board and Te Waka Angamua to set up hui for comprehensive Māori input into the draft LAPP.

Implementation

Step	Estimated timeframe
1. Stakeholder engagement on draft option Officers will seek feedback from internal, external and political stakeholders on the approved draft LAPP option.	July – September 2014
2. Final draft LAPP for special consultative procedure Officers will then present a final draft policy to RSPC for approval for consultation.	9 October
3. Special consultative procedure Officers will follow the special consultative procedure set out in section 83 of Local Government Act 2002. This will include public submissions and hearings.	November 2014
4. Adopt final policy Following the hearings the draft will be finalised and presented to RSPC for adoption.	March 2015
5. Implementation and review A copy will be sent to Ministry of Health after it has been completed. The LAPP will then be reviewed every five years in accordance with section 69 of the Act.	Ongoing

Attachments

No.	Title	Page
a View	Option impact - North	35
b View	Option impact - South	37
c View	Option impact - West & Central	39
d View	Option impact - East & Central	41

Signatories

Authors	Callum Thorpe - Principal Policy Analyst
Authorisers	Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning

Interim Chairperson	Feroz Ali
Members	Carlos Abdelrahman
	Asoka Basnayake
	Naoe Hashimoto
	Anita Keestra
	Yee Yang 'Square' Lee
	Angela Lim
	Kafeba Mundele
	Wong Liu Shueng
	Dave Tomu
	Christian Dee Yao
Liaison Councillor	Denise Krum

Authors	Rita Bento-Allpress - Democracy Advisor
Authorisers	Anaru Vercoe - Manager, Community Policy & Planning