Yesterday the government announced their plans for local government reform, including the removal (again) of the four wellbeings (“promoting the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of their communities, taking a sustainable development approach”). They were created by Labour in 2002, removed by National in 2012, then out back by Labour in 2019. So here we go again.
https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-getting-local-government-back-basics
There’s some good ideas in here - I’m pleased to see some modernisation of the rules “including removing requirements for newspaper notices, to drive efficiency and cost savings.”
I'm interested in the benchmarking as greater transparency and accountability is always welcome. However it will need to cope with the fact that not all local government is the same - Auckland is a unitary council (both local and regional) with multiple levels of governance (as imposed by Parliament). Very different to most of the other councils who have a very different scale and scope.
There’s a lot of talk of “pursuing expensive extras that burden ratepayers” but most of Auckland Council's increases are due to storm response, wage increases, and inflation. It’s also worth remembering that in Auckland only 40% of the council’s revenue comes from rates, with the rest coming from fees and charges, user pays, and return on investments. We’ve also already banked $337M in savings over the past three years, by making tough calls on what we continue and what we stop. I’m not suggesting there isn’t still waste or savings to be found but we’re already working on this with another $66M planned for this year. I don’t believe we need Parliament to tell us how to do what we’re already doing.
I'm a strong believer in localism - our community should determine what they want, not Parliament dictating from afar. Every year we consult with our residents on our annual budget based on our strategy (also consulted with the public). In fact local government consults with residents far more than Parliament does, which seems to rely on broad “electoral mandates” which are questionable at times.
More importantly I worry about the impact on our “non-core” activities like our significant environmental programmes, community grants, and support for arts and culture. This is what our community told us they wanted. But does our critical funding for the Howick Historical Village make the cut? What about UXBRIDGE? Or the local volunteer Coastguard? It’s too early to tell, but are these the “nice-to-haves” the Minister is referring to?
I'd rather the reform focused on addressing the real issues with local government - the awful legislation enforced upon Auckland by Parliament that creates massive inefficiencies and prevents us from doing what our communities want. Or the lack of funding tools available that force an over reliance on rates and have created massive infrastructure deficits. Or the three year terms that (once you take into account election years) effectively means we get 18 months to achieve anything.
It's still early days and there's promises of more reform which I welcome. But it needs to be driven by the right reasons and include local government so we get what we need.
Local Water Done Well succeeded where the previous government's Three Waters failed largely because the government listened to what Auckland needed, working together with local government to deliver positive change.
I hope we see that same approach here.