Local Business Owner And Community Volunteer, Ben Cox, Selected As ACT Local Candidate For Henderson-Massey Local Board
Ben runs a local advertising consultancy and serves on the boards of Waitakere Swimming Club and TAP Sea Scouts, supporting youth in the area.
Ben is known for his practical, nononsense approach. He wants the HendersonMassey Local Board focused on what really matters — looking after local services and facilities, setting clear priorities, and pushing council to deliver the improvements our area needs. Ben wants HendersonMassey to be a safer, better place for everyone.
'I care about this community because it's my home too,' Ben says.
'People are tired of seeing their rates go up while things like parks, footpaths and community facilities fall behind. We need a local board that listens, plans properly, and isn't afraid to push council on the big issues.
"I'll work hard to make sure every rates dollar is spent wisely, that our board advocates strongly and pushes council for safer roads, better stormwater management and wellmaintained facilities, and that HendersonMassey gets its fair share. I want families and businesses to feel proud to live and work here.' – Ben Cox
Earlier this year, ACT New Zealand announced it would be standing Common Sense Candidates for local government for the first time — after hearing from New Zealanders across the country who are sick of rising rates, ballooning budgets, and councils that ignore the basics while chasing ideological vanity projects.
When you vote ACT Local, you know what you're getting:
Fixing the basics
Cutting the waste
Ending race-based politics
Restoring accountability
ACT Local Government spokesperson Cameron Luxton says:
' ACT Local candidates are community-minded Kiwis who've had enough of wasteful councils treating ratepayers like ATMs. It's time to take control on behalf of ratepayers — to restore accountability and deliver real value for money. ACT Local is about getting the basics right: maintaining roads, keeping streets clean, and respecting the people who pay the bills. Our candidates won't divide people by race or get distracted by climate vanity projects. They're here to serve, not lecture." – Cameron Luxton
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsroom
42 minutes ago
- Newsroom
Planned terrorism law overhaul ‘slippery slope to authoritarianism'
New Zealanders who publicly express support for terrorist groups could be charged with a criminal offence, as part of secretive proposals being considered by the Government. While officials say the changes are a necessary update, one civil liberties group has expressed concerns the law may be misused to suppress free speech on politically contentious issues. The Terrorism Suppression Act, enacted in 2002 following the September 11 terror attacks, allows governments to formally designate people or groups as terrorist entities, freezing their assets and making it illegal to financially support, recruit for, or participate in a designated terrorist entity. The coalition Government is eyeing reforms to the law, with limited consultation currently taking place behind closed doors with a handpicked selection of groups and experts. In a copy of the consultation document seen by Newsroom, the Ministry of Justice said the Government had agreed to progress 'targeted amendments' to the law, which had not been substantively reviewed since its enactment. The document said existing offences in the law 'don't capture the full range of behaviours or activities of concern that are part of the contemporary threat from terrorism', and needed to be updated. Among the changes being considered were making membership of a terrorist entity a criminal offence, creating new offences to capture public expressions of support for a terrorist act or designated entities (such as showing insignia or distributing propaganda), and modernising definitions for terms like 'material support' to capture new online forms of support. The consultation document also raised the possibility of a streamlined designation process, saying the current decision-making system was lengthy and the designation period was short. Officials asked those being consulted whether the current requirement to have the Prime Minister review decisions twice 'balances robustness of decision and the speed of decision-making appropriately', as well as whether it was still appropriate for the Attorney-General to be consulted on designation-related decisions. The document also proposed extending the renewal period for terrorist designations to five years, from three at present. In addition, officials outlined a 'disconnect' between the designation framework and the regulation of harmful online content, with designated terrorist entities still able to influence and exploit New Zealanders via online platforms. To address those concerns, content disseminated by a designated entity could be defined as terrorist content, with a mechanism developed to identify and sanction terrorist-operated websites. The NZ Council for Civil Liberties, which was not selected for the targeted consultation process but had been leaked a copy of the document, is concerned with both the secretive nature of the discussions and the changes being proposed. The council's chairperson Thomas Beagle said the Terrorism Suppression Act already gave governments strong powers to outlaw organisations. Misuse of the definition of 'terrorism' in other countries had led to the outlawing of groups that did not engage in violence, with the aim of suppressing free speech on an issue. 'Laws that enable governments to outlaw organisations and any show of support for them are amongst the most dangerous tools the public in any democracy can give to ministers.' Thomas Beagle, NZ Council for Civil Liberties As an example, Beagle cited the British government's decision to designate Palestine Action as a terrorist group, after the group's members broke into a Royal Air Force base and sprayed red paint on refuelling planes to protest the United Kingdom's support of Israel over the war in Gaza. UK home secretary Yvette Cooper argued the move was necessary and followed 'a nationwide campaign of direct criminal action against businesses and institutions', but United Nations experts, Amnesty International and others have accused the Government of legal overreach and criminalising legitimate activities by innocent members of the group. With expressions of support for Palestine Action now a criminal offence in the UK, more than 100 people were arrested at demonstrations over the weekend, many for displaying placards in support of the group. In a separate incident, a protester holding a Palestinian flag and signs saying 'Free Gaza' and 'Israel is committing genocide' was accused of breaching the country's terrorism laws, despite explicitly saying they did not support any designated terror groups. Beagle said the changes being proposed by the Government could easily be misused in similar ways to shut down organisations it did not like politically. 'People will be criminalised not just for being members of an organisation but for expressing support for the issue it was focused on. These are highly dangerous attacks on freedom of expression and freedom of association.' It was 'a disgrace' that the Government's policy work and consultation was taking place behind closed doors, he said, given the expectations of open government 'Laws that enable governments to outlaw organisations and any show of support for them are amongst the most dangerous tools the public in any democracy can give to ministers. 'There is a very strong public interest in consultation on this law reform project being as open as possible. Without it, the government will foment public distrust in its intentions, and in the processes of policy making.' The Government needed to open public consultation to all New Zealanders at an early stage, rather than when a bill was introduced to Parliament, given the proposals could take the country 'further down the slippery slope of authoritarianism'. Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith says some parts of the Terrorism Suppression Act are no longer fir for purpose. Photo: Lynn Grieveson Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith told Newsroom the changes followed the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the Christchurch terror attack, which called for a review of all counter-terrorism legislation to ensure it was current and allowed agencies to operate effectively. 'Aspects of the Terrorism Suppression Act are no longer fit for purpose and need to be modernised and future-proofed,' Goldsmith said. The Ministry of Justice's criminal justice general manager Alida Mercuri told Newsroom the proposals were not targeted at any particular group, but were about improving the effectiveness of the designation system. The Terrorism Suppression Act already contained protections against misuse to suppress free speech and non-violent protest, which would not be removed or reduced. Mercuri said a range of agencies, experts, academics and stakeholders 'with relevant experience', including public sector agencies, had been chosen for the targeted consultation process.
Otago Daily Times
an hour ago
- Otago Daily Times
‘Otago is being overlooked'
A new medical school will be established at the University of Waikato. File photo The government's backing of a third medical school at Waikato is yet more evidence it cares little about Dunedin, opponents say. Health Minister Simeon Brown said yesterday Cabinet had approved $82.85 million in government funding towards the project, with the university chipping in more than $150m. The numbers differ from National's policy heading into the 2023 election. Then, it pledged $280m for a third medical school at Waikato University, with the university to raise a further $100m. The school would also open in 2028, a year later than National had promised, but still with an initial roll of 120 students. The University of Otago and University of Auckland — which run the country's two existing medical schools — had submitted to the government they could train more medical students for significantly less than the cost of establishing a new medical school. Megan Pōtiki. PHOTO: ODT FILES Otago Polytechnic executive director Dr Megan Potiki said she was surprised by the decision, "which even Treasury had described as unaffordable". "Otago Polytechnic has concerns about the potential impact on clinical placements for our nursing ākonga [students], and on the long-term security of our industry-leading nursing programme." Dr Potiki's comments come after the government's decision to place Otago Polytechnic in a federation model rather than being fully stand-alone. "It appears Otago is being overlooked by this government with their recent decisions, and Otago's proud tertiary track record is being undermined." Otago University, which had been strongly opposed to the idea, yesterday had a mixed response. . Megan Gibbons. PHOTO: SUPPLIED Pro-vice-chancellor for health sciences Prof Megan Gibbons said the university was disappointed the government did not follow the alternative and more cost-effective option of further increasing the intakes into the country's existing medical schools. "However, any investment that supports growing and sustaining the health workforce is a step towards strengthening care for our communities — particularly in rural and under-served regions." Otago was committed to working alongside others in the sector to ensure the best outcomes for the health of all New Zealanders, she said. Auckland University dean of medical health services Prof Warwick Bagg would not comment on that university's previous opposition to the plans. Instead, Prof Bagg looked towards the positive. "Today is a historic day for medical education in New Zealand. The government has made its decision, and the good news is the extra 120 students." Others were not so sanguine. Bryce Edwards. PHOTO: ODT FILES Director of The Integrity Institute Dr Bryce Edwards issued a scathing assessment of the decision that said it had been political rather than one made in the best interests of the health system or the education system. "It's a stark contrast to have the new Dunedin hospital really restrained in its build and essentially funds cut back, producing a less than optimal new hospital at the same time that $83m is going to be spent elsewhere in the health system that, frankly, very few experts believe is a good spend of money. "The people of Dunedin and Otago should feel aggrieved." Taieri MP Ingrid Leary, of Labour, said nothing about the decision had been transparent. "There's nothing rational about it either. "Given the cuts to the new Dunedin hospital, the vindictive and appallingly communicated decision last week by Penny Simmonds regarding Otago Polytechnic, and now this decision that effectively kneecaps our medical school, it is clear that Christopher Luxon and his three-headed government don't care one iota about the deep South." In August last year, Treasury shared the concerns of the existing medical schools saying the plan was unaffordable and that there were other ways to achieve the government's goal of increasing the number of rural GPs. Green MP Francisco Hernandez said the government had committed to yet another irresponsible, white elephant project. "The quarter of a billion dollars on just capital costs for a third medical school would have been more responsibly spent on boosting the number of doctors that Aotearoa needs from tried-and-true training facilities at Otago and Auckland." University of Waikato vice-chancellor Prof Neil Quigley said it was "a landmark moment for New Zealand". "We will be offering a programme that selects and trains doctors in a fundamentally different way and will complement New Zealand's two existing medical schools."
NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
FamilyBoost: Just 153 families getting maximum $75 weekly childcare tax credit
The more a family spends on childcare, the higher the rebate. Labour released a scathing statement, saying the number of families who received the maximum credit was too low and it indicated the Government's flagship cost of living programme was 'in tatters.' 'A year in, only 153 people have received the [maximum] FamilyBoost entitlement for the entire year. National has broken its promises and is making life harder for New Zealanders. 'National is completely out of touch with what our communities need.' Finance Minister Nicola Willis flatly rejected the accusation National had broken a promise, saying they had delivered on 'every promise that we made in relation to FamilyBoost'. 'We were very clear prior to the election that how much you would get under FamilyBoost depended on how much you spent on ECE fees and what your income was. 'Everyone who has applied for a FamilyBoost rebate under the scheme has received their full rebate, as it was advertised to them, prior to the election.' She said Labour had 'made clear it would remove the FamilyBoost payment'. Willis said more than 60,000 families had claimed FamilyBoost, and Labour's plan would rob them of much needed cost of living relief. Recently, Willis announced the Government had tweaked the eligibility settings meaning 'thousands' more people would be able to make a claim. The maximum rebate has increased from 25% to 40% of a family's weekly childcare costs and the income cap has been raised from $180,000 to $230,000. Willis said about 16,000 more families are expected to enter the scheme as a result of these changes. 'Those numbers are annual and we will monitor uptake each quarter to see whether the expected uplift is occurring. 'I am confident that these more generous provisions will encourage more families to apply for FamilyBoost and will be welcomed by the families already benefiting from the scheme who can look forward to more generous rebates in future.' Families are required to keep copies of their early childcare invoices to submit for a payment, which has raised questions about how many eligible families would end up receiving the payment. When launching the policy in March 2024, the Government explained it had to weigh up waiting years so a direct childcare tax credit could be implemented or get going with payments that year but make parents wear the 'administrative burden'. Willis says IRD is looking into whether a direct refund model can be established. This could include automating payments with ECE providers. Julia Gabel is a Wellington-based political reporter. She joined the Herald in 2020 and has most recently focused on data journalism.
