Our city needs a plan to protect our people, our places, and the things we love from climate change. Dunedin City Councillors have the opportunity to do this by adopting the Zero Carbon Plan and working to achieve zero carbon by 2030. ➡️ Climate change threatens our very future. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) warns of a “rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all” (1). To avoid the worst impacts of climate change, global warming must be limited to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels. This means reducing our carbon emissions as soon as possible. ➡️ Mitigating the impacts of climate change demands urgent action. We must act now to reduce greenhouse gas emissions across all sectors. Although this may seem costly, the IPCC warns delaying action will create a false economy. Our savings now will mean future climate mitigation options become more costly and less effective. ➡️ There is a consequence to delay. If inaction causes us to overshoot the Paris Agreement target of net zero by 2050, the IPCC predicts that we risk triggering feedback loops that will be difficult - or impossible - to reign in. For Ōtepoti Dunedin, this means more extreme weather events, rising sea-levels, and more pressure on our native wildlife and ecosystems. Urgently reducing our carbon emissions is the right thing to do — for our community now and in the future. If Dunedin City Councillors choose to delay our zero carbon targets, we all pay the price. It will threaten our homes, livelihoods and even our lives. Dunedin’s Zero Carbon by 2030 goal means that we are working towards a livable and sustainable future and saving money in the long run. Kicking the can down the road puts that at risk. We simply can’t afford to wait. (1) AR6 Synthesis Report Summary for Policymakers: Climate Change 2023 (ipcc.ch/report/sixth-assessment-report-cycle).

NO CUTS Wayne Brown’s Budget 2023/24 is proposing to cut funding to crucial community support services during a cost of living and climate crisis. The people of Auckland are deeply concerned about the proposed budget. We understand that the Council is facing financial challenges, but we urge Auckland Council to reconsider these cuts as they will have a severe impact on the community. “Cutting regional community focused initiatives … of all groups working with Māori, Pasifika, youth, refugee, new migrant and rainbow communities.” - Page 30, Te Wāhanga Tuatoru: Te Pūtea e Marohitia Ana, Annual Budget Proposal 2022/23. We can see the budget has targeted marginalized communities, yet does not suggest cuts to industry and business whatsoever. The proposed budget cuts will have far-reaching consequences for all Aucklanders, but especially our most vulnerable residents, including children, the elderly, the working poor, and those with disabilities. Cuts to climate change, social services, community venues, public transport, arts,and education will have a devastating impact on these communities, and protesters are determined to make their voices heard. The proposed cuts to community services, including libraries, community venues and centers, youth and homelessness, early childhood education, Arts and culture, water quality and public transport, will have a negative impact on the quality of life for many Auckland residents. These services are essential for the well-being of our community and provide opportunities for social interaction, education, and access to essential resources. Furthermore, the proposed cuts to environmental initiatives, including park maintenance and waste management, will have a detrimental effect on our environment. These initiatives are critical to the sustainability of our city and the protection of our natural environment and resources. We understand that difficult decisions must be made regarding the budget, but we urge the Council to prioritize the needs of the most vulnerable. We believe that alternative solutions and a better budget is possible. The Auckland council’s feedback report suggested that the majority of Aucklanders reject this proposed budget, and it is not suited to serve Auckland residents. The sale of the airport shares is not necessary or helpful and will take Auckland backwards. The airport shares are an important revenue stream, the airport is increasing in value, and it is an asset that the Council can borrow against. The 18% shareholding is also an opportunity for public voice on the future of the airport, a strategic asset - and it is important that the Council holds onto public control in the face of climate and health emergencies. The Community Coalition against the Cuts demands that Auckland Council, Mayor and Councilors listen to Aucklanders. Consider and implement the voices of Aucklanders who took their time to give their feedback. We fully reject this proposed budget, and we demand the following: 1- NO CUTS TO REGIONAL & COMMUNITY SERVICES 2- INCREASE RATES & DEBT 3- NO SALE OF AIRPORT SHARES The super-rich must pay for this budget deficit, not the most vulnerable. We demand that any shortfall in the Council's books should be filled through increased rates on big business, and charges on luxury items such as private helicopters and super-yachts, not cuts which hit the poorest hardest. We need to be expanding services, not cutting them. We demand that the Council expands public transport, making buses and trains free and frequent, and takes more action on climate change amidst a climate crisis. We demand more funding to tackle poverty and homelessness. Therefore, we call on Auckland Council to reconsider the proposed budget cuts and to find alternative solutions that do not compromise the well-being of our community and our environment. We fully reject this budget we will not sit by quietly. We say, NO CUTS! Community Coalition Against Cuts

The Labour Government has a long held policy of extending Schedule 4 over the Southern Hauraki and has had a policy of no new mines on conservation land since 2014. Since taking office in 2017, the Party has failed to make either policy law. We are writing to you now as Conservation Minister to challenge you to step up and prevent mining companies from undermining Hauraki / Coromandel and all conservation land nationwide. We believe that in order to retain any credibility around conservation, your Government must fulfill the commitment made upon first taking office by passing a law that will fully protect all conservation land from mining. We understand that negotiating with tangata whenua takes time, but that specific Te Tiriti obligation can be written in to the law. We are in a biodiversity crisis, we are in a climate crisis. Why would we compromise even part of one of our biggest assets, our biggest carbon sinks, our last bastion of the unique and special ecology of Aotearoa New Zealand, conservation land, by allowing and enabling mining activity in these places. You as Minister have the power, and the responsibility, to ensure that our children and grandchildren can have a relationship with the natural world that sustains us in the years to come; the responsibility to ensure that all the unique flora and fauna reliant on these spaces can survive and flourish into the future, the responsibility to provide for future generations.

We believe recent disasters have heaped misery on people, many of whom live in permanent crisis. In our view, previous actions have been unsuccessful in preventing persistent poverty; poverty has been exacerbated by recent disasters; and the current system is not fit for purpose. A Basic Income can be a foundation upon which an equitable system can be built. We feel we urgently need a system that is both unbureaucratic and reliable, to lift people out of poverty and provide help when needed. Click down below to read our Open Letter https://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO2304/S00166/an-open-letter-to-parliament-from-basic-income-new-zealand.htm

Everyone deserves to be kept safe online. But NZTech’s Code of Practice for Online Safety and Harms does not go far enough to protect New Zealanders from the very real dangers of online harm. The Code aims to bring together social media platforms like Meta (which includes Facebook and Instagram), Google (including YouTube), TikTok, Amazon (including Twitch) and Twitter to set an industry standard for online safety in Aotearoa. The Signatories to the Code committed to provide annual reports on their efforts toward reducing risks and harms across a number of measures - a worthy goal, in theory. However there are very real problems with the Code as it currently exists. Our main concerns are: • The Code’s self-regulation is not credible. The Code fails to ensure independent oversight of the Signatories. While an ‘Oversight Board’ is being created, membership on that board is at the sole discretion of the social media companies and there are no credible safeguards to maintain or scrutinise the Board’s independence. Those impacted by these companies are not promised a voice nor the means to use it. • The Code isn’t focused on Aotearoa. We believe that the Code’s Signatories are seeking to benefit from our international reputation to influence global regulation. The Code invokes Te Ao Māori, but the content is generic, as are the proposed governance arrangements and the consultation process. There’s no mention of the specific challenges our communities face online nor how the Signatories are working to address those challenges. The initial global reports from the Signatories were very general statements of their global policies and many of the Signatories did not even provide minimal Aotearoa-specific data. • The Signatories’ community engagement has not been effective nor credible. This is particularly embodied by the inauthentic community engagement that has been performed. While many of the people at organisations like Netsafe and NZTech have done genuine and authentic work to try to engage with civil society to make the Code effective, and we do appreciate the mahi they have performed, they have been hamstrung by the Signatories’ decisions and objectives. This means while concerns and feedback have been carried back to the Signatories, they have not been taken on board nor implemented. That’s why New Zealanders need to come together to call for better protection. And that’s why the Coalition for Better Digital Policy, led by Inclusive Aotearoa Collective Tāhono, Amnesty International Aotearoa New Zealand and Tohatoha has been formed. Many of us have been constructively critiquing the Code since it was publicly released in 2022. As a group, we aim to enable robust, inclusive, and effective regulation of technology in Aotearoa, with a focus on upholding human rights and preserving the benefits technology can provide us. Our shared experiences have convinced us that the current processes being used will not make the Code truly effective. We are calling on NZTech and the Signatories to work with us to develop a process that meets the needs of everyone at risk of harm from these companies. Add your voice by signing the petition to call on NZTech to #FixTheCode.

Estimates are that Aotearoa has approximately 14,000 people without any visas or legal status. These are migrants, their whānau and tamariki who have been living in fear during some of the worst challenges we have faced as a country. They are victims of our regressive immigration policies, not criminals. Overstayers deserve to lead a life with dignity and respect. They deserve to be safe and deserve to be helped, especially during hard times like the Northland floods and Cyclone Gabrielle. With the current system, overstayers have hesitated to seek medical help such as covid tests and covid vaccination, for the fear of being reported to authorities and subsequently being deported. And now many of them are flood victims afraid of seeking assistance provided by the government. This is potentially a dangerous and unsafe health situation, not just for the victims but for the entire communities surrounding them. Many of our overstayers are children of parents who do not have lawful status. It is harsh and unfair to punish the children by depriving them of access to needed services such as health care providers, education and safety services. Researchers at UNITEC published an excellent report highlighting the plight of overstayers and their families – the stresses are multi-fold and affect their mental well-being. The solution proposed by researchers is also policy change and legal status for the overstayers. Link to the full report: https://www.unitec.ac.nz/sites/default/files/public/documents/Tuvalu%20project%20report%20-FINAL-13.12.2021.pdf An amnesty for all overstayers regardless of their country of origin is the need of the time.While we appreciate that the Prime Minister is going to look at the petition regarding Pacific overstayers, he needs to be inclusive and act sooner than later. We ask the Prime Minister to give overstayers work rights and their children access to public education, allowing them to lead a life of dignity.

The service provided by Auckland CABs is absolutely essential – something that is even more apparent in times of crisis. With the recent floods and the ongoing challenges of daily life, Auckland CABs are helping people with information and advice and connecting them with the support they need. Last year our dedicated volunteers in Auckland CABs helped more than 160,000 people. Auckland Council is proposing to significantly cut or even remove all funding from CABs in Auckland in its budget for 2023/24. This could result in the complete closure of the CAB service, which has been serving Tāmaki Makaurau for over 50 years. Let Auckland Council know that they should not cut funding to Auckland CABs.

A proposed venture to start mining the Barrytown flats could lead to a decades-long industrial operation in this beautiful area of the West Coast. Despite the company and council's claims to the contrary, a venture of this size and scale could have many more than minor adverse effects on the community and environment including: * All of us who live and have businesses along the scenic Coast Road. * The environment: particularly birds, wetlands and the vulnerable coastal zone with a high-water table. * Highway safety for all, residents and visitors; along the narrow Coast Road. * The reputation and enjoyment of the Coast as a tourist destination. Therefore, the GDC and WCRC should adhere to democratic process and allow the affected parties to at least be heard. PUBLICLY NOTIFY any consent to mine here!

The charities sector, accountable first to the communities of Aotearoa, plays an important independent role in our democracy. With over 28,000 registered charities in New Zealand, the Charities Amendment Bill will have a far reaching impact in the for-purpose (aka the ‘not-for-profit’) sector. It has been asked whether the Charities Amendment Bill is a ‘wolf in sheep’s clothing’. While some elements of the Bill are helpful and look good, the devil is in the detail. Government says the Bill will ‘modernise’ the Charities Act 2005. In fact, much of the Bill ensures greater Government control of the charities sector, reduced sectoral independence, and a reduction thereby of the sector’s essential contribution to democracy. It was Labour Party policy for the 2017 election to “prioritise the long-promised first principles review of the Charities Act”. This would include ensuring that charities can engage in advocacy without fear of losing their charitable status. The Minister now says this review is not needed. Any legislation impacting on this sector needs to provide an enabling framework rather than one that restricts the sector from being a voice for its communities. This will be the last chance for the Act to be independently reviewed for many years to come. The petition can be signed by an individual or an organisation, or by both, separately. Please complete this signing by midday on 8th December, so it can be submitted to the Select Committee in time. We encourage you to make your own submission by emailing the Select Committee directly at [email protected] or using this online form on the Parliament website: https://www.parliament.nz/en/pb/sc/make-a-submission/document/53SCSS_SCF_BILL_127163/charities-amendment-bill

Our Whangarei  local body elections currently use the First Past the Post (FPP) voting system. If the candidate we vote for does not make the threshold, our votes are "wasted". The Single Transferable Vote (STV) system will allow us  freedom of choice to rank our candidates and still elect someone in of our choice without  "wasting" votes. When our votes are guaranteed to count like this, vote wastage and vote splitting is eliminated.

Our Auckland local elections currently use the First Past the Post (FPP) voting system. If the candidate we vote for doesn't make the threshold, our votes are "wasted". There is a modern alternative. The Single Transferable Vote (STV) system will allow us the freedom of choice to rank our candidates and recycle our "wasted" votes. When our votes are guaranteed to count like this, it shows more respect to our individual sovereignty and needs, rather than forcing us to vote under the duress of the fear of "wasted" votes "vote-splitting". At least 1,863 voters wasted their vote when they voted for me in the Waitematā Local Board elections this year, under the current voting system (FPP). My favorite local board candidate would have been voted in if those 1,863 "wasted" votes would have been recycled under STV for him. I didn't know such an awesome fellow was running until I was already nominated, and I continued to run partly because there was a possibility that we could both be elected, and partly so I could speak up and illustrate with a poignant lived experience that the ability to recycle votes does matter in practice and not just in theory. Under FPP, neither of us two made the voting threshold. We wasted at least 9,139 votes - that's 10,000 people who spent at least an hour on this, 10,000 total work-hours of people doing their civic duty, wasted.... That's a problem for all FPP democracies, but there is a local solution already ready for us if you want to choose it! Under Section 29[1] and 30[2] of the Local Electoral Act 2001, if I present Auckland Council with signatures with names and addresses of 5% of all Auckland enrolled voters, then they are forced by central government legislation to hold a vote on changing our voting system to, say, STV. STV doesn't have wasted votes like our current one. Other more progressive cities in New Zealand[3], such as Palmerston North, which I'm proud to originate from, have already had and passed voting system referendums to switch to STV, because it allows better representation and limits the possibility of duopoly party voting blocs just aiming to do the bare minimum to capture the middle vote and play to fears of "wasted" votes. STV allows voters to vote with truth in their hearts for what they truly believe is their best choice, safe in the knowledge that that vote will be reused and recycled towards their other choices if it is "wasted". This respects individual sovereignty better than FPP, because voters are less able to be manipulated by fears of vote-wasting. I would like to bring the wider choices that the residents of these other areas enjoy in their voting system, to Auckland. If you can help me with this, then please sign this petition with your name and electoral enrolment address in the Auckland region. I will not use your name or address for any other purpose other than Section 29 of the Local Electoral Act 2001. It is illegal under New Zealand law (the Privacy Act) for me to do anything else with your personal information except this. So please vote, for better voting! Ngā mihi, Andi Liu / 刘安迪 2022 Waitematā Local Board candidate and Waitematā and Gulf Ward candidate References: [1] https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2001/0035/latest/DLM93979.html#DLM93979 [2] https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2001/0035/latest/DLM93985.html#DLM93985 [3] https://www.dia.govt.nz/diawebsite.nsf/wpg_URL/Resource-material-STV-Information-Index

Solution vs Demolition: Our local and extended community love this building. We respect its past & the aspirations of mana whenua and Te Tiriti obligations. The Unitec/Carrington site is about to become an urban development of up to 3500 homes. We support affordable, well designed housing, open spaces and amenities that can coexist with scheduled heritage and an alternative internal roading access design. The building has had a history as a psychiatric hospital (1865-1992) & as the home of Unitec’s vibrant Architecture and Design School (1994-2021). Our community trust's 2020 feasibility study for MHUD on the interim adaptive reuse of Carrington Hospital's Building One had overwhelming community support to activate Building One as an Arts, Creative & Wellbeing hub. Built in 1865 and finished in 1905, it has a footprint of 8500sqm, over 2 main levels, with 300 studio spaces including a gallery, library & café. Partial demolition will remove over 600sqm of unique spaces that could have been used by community groups & creatives such as visual artists, dancers, film makers & educators. This building & environs will lose its connection to our community if partially demolished. This is an important valued landmark and reference point for our everyday neighbourhood interactions & wellbeing. We love the spaces, the ecology, the memory, the heritage & support the exciting opportunities to come. We need your help to share our message with people who care about heritage, can influence decision makers & show that the new road option is a "win/win, both/and" vs "either/or" solution. Join our Building One page here: https://www.facebook.com/groups/318949932076119 Read more about our proposed solution here: https://www.pcset.org.nz/projects