Debunking a Census Myth

Written by Ben Ross - Talking Auckland

Just Wait Folks

With Statistics New Zealand announcing some preliminary news around Census 2013 – National Population Growth, I have noticed the usual dissenters already cropping up.

Here are two examples:

From Twitter:

Maurice Williamson (a member of the current Government) says unitary plan wrong as NZ population growing slower. Has he done the stats on people leaving provinces to go to AKL?

And from Facebook:

The first census figures are out and here’s what the statistics boss had to say…
“This means that, on average, the population has grown by about 31,000 people per year since the last census in 2006. This was slower growth than between 2001 and 2006, when the population grew by an average of about 58,000 per year,” Government Statistician Liz MacPherson said.
So much for Len’s vision to cater for 1,000,000 more people.
At this rate of growth there will be an increase in population by 2040 of less than 900,000 for the whole of New Zealand – so Auckland might attract about 60% of the total, about 540,000 – just over half of the Auckland Plan figure, Time for some Auckland planners to depart the scene. This is justification for my early call to hold Unitary Plan until census results available.

(Note; David Thorton’s Facebook post was made in “public” mode where everyone can see it. Talking Auckland does not copy over Facebook posts that are not in “public” mode without prior permission of the user in question)

One minor detail folks:

11 Mar 2014  NZ.Stat:  Population Detailed tables that can be modified to contain only the variables the user requires, including geographic breakdowns to territorial authority area and often area unit level. This module has information such as age, sex, internal migration, marital status, and number of children born.

Source: http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/about-2013-census/release-schedule.aspx

Yes October 15 we can find out Auckland’s actual population for the 2013 Census date and compare it to 2006 Census data. But the internal migration data of who is coming to Auckland from where-else in NZ in comparison to external migration and natural birth is something I would be keeping an eye on.

If the statistics show a strong trend towards Auckland then we will need to maintain the High Population Growth projections for the time being.

 

Furthermore the Unitary Plan is reviewed every 10 years once it is operative.

That means the Council at the time can review the population projects and alter the Unitary Plan as required. It means we can scale up or down the urban development as required from those review periods.

Much more prudent than holding off on the Unitary Plan – which would have greatly annoyed the Central Government highly. And much more prudent  as it is easier to scale back from high projects with our planning then having to ramp up because we fell behind from the starting point. Example in ten years time in regards to the Southern Rural Boundary; if growth and migration into Auckland is high then more land within the RUB will need to be released with the possibility the RUB being extended. If the opposite occurs then the land release within the RUB can be slowed down with the possibility of the RUB being contracted. So for now lay the RUB down as it is as a middle road option so we have something to work with – then take it from there through the reviews.

March 2014 – when we can get a good look at what Auckland will be in for. For now let’s get the foundations laid while we can then take it from there.

Six month wait – ah well…

 

Note from Admin: More to hand as this was posted

Who Really Wrote This – Seriously?

 

Heaven’s sake I just wrote this post on debunking the Census Myth and Mayoral candidate Palino and is Deputy Mayoral aspirant Brewer go full force in purporting that myth as seen here: http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/AK1310/S00301/census-figures-demolish-len-browns-plans-for-auckland.htm

 

Where to start or not? Quite simply no point as everything I have said above debunks what those two are saying  I have written posts in the past that also debunk the myths made out above.

 

What is more interesting is that I have just picked up this in regards to housing from Stuff:

Govt to make ‘significant’ housing announcement

The Government is set to make a “significant” housing announcement this week as Finance Minister Bill English warns that the Government is “serious” about reining in a rampant property market.

Source: http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/politics/9253286/Govt-to-make-significant-housing-announcement

…

 

So let me see:

  • Mayor and Government with Auckland’s Transport: in concordance
  • Mayor and Government on the Unitary Plan and the resulting Housing Accord: In concordance
  • Mayor and Government recognising Auckland is up for some large growth hence the Special Housing Areas as a start to get on to top of housing: In concordance
  • Mayor and Government recognising mass investment needed in Auckland: Well they both know that but different priorities
  • Everything Palino is trying to pull off – not in concordance with Government or we would have the Prime Minister said so by now if he was that opposed to transport and the Unitary Plan in Auckland

 

So I think (apart from Brown needing to sharpen up that finances pencil a bit) we are in Okay/Positive mode all things considered at the moment. For Auckland to have a major swing in regards to who is mayor and the make up of Council could upset both the Central Government and investment/growth opportunities here.

I leave you with the initial findings from Statistics New Zealand in regards to our population growth. It makes for some interesting reading with Auckland to pick up a new electorate seat and some pretty strong growth in parts of Auckland.

Source: Statistics NZ – http://www.stats.govt.nz/browse_for_stats/population/census_counts/NumberofElectoratesandElectoralPopulations_HOTP2013Census

 

Final Remarks: I am having some very interesting statistics and Geography discussions about the Census data at the moment. Interesting insights

 

 

 

One thought on “Debunking a Census Myth”

Comments are closed.