The government’s irresponsible announcement about local government changes on May 5 has sent councillors around the country into a spin.
It is irresponsible because it is pushing councils into making rushed decisions without carefully considering the issues and without properly consulting the people who will be affected.
Before anyone decides what the best local government structures might be for a region, let’s figure out a proper process for getting to that point. This is an important decision that will affect our communities for decades to come, and it’s a decision not to be made in a rush.
So what’s this all about?
The government announced in November last year it wanted to see changes in local government. The emphasis was on council amalgamations and creating unitary authorities — councils that combine both city or district council with regional council functions, such as in Nelson and Auckland.
The government’s preference seems to be a single unitary council covering a whole region.
Then in early May its updated plan appeared. Councils can submit proposals for change by August 9 in a ‘‘Head Start’’ process, and Cabinet will decide whether these are approved or not. Anyone else will enter a compulsory backstop process for change after the October 2028 local government elections.
Coming up with proposals now is getting ahead of ourselves. The first step is to agree on who should be involved in the decision-making and a process for carrying this through.
The decision-making group must be much wider than mayors and councillors alone. Mana whenua must be involved from the start because the change is crucially about environmental management. Our communities must also have a say because it is about how they are represented.
There are lots of complex issues here, particularly in a region as large and diverse as Otago. Current regional council functions around flood protection, natural hazards, freshwater quality and biodiversity have to be managed regionally. Rivers, rainfall and pest species don’t take notice of artificial boundaries.
How do we balance this incentive for region-wide scale with the need for local representation? Can a single mayor and council properly represent communities as diverse as Queenstown, Ranfurly and Balclutha, or Dunedin and Kurow?
The current regional boundaries may not be the best ones. There could be a case for combining Otago and Southland or even South Island functions, and for rationalising representation of the Waitaki catchment. We won’t know unless we discuss and investigate this.
The government push is firmly for council amalgamations, so how will we figure things out fairly when councils have different levels of assets and debt? The future ownership of Port Otago has already entered the conversation. There will also be value in retaining long-standing initiatives such as the ORC’s ECO Fund, which has been supporting community environmental projects since 2018.
To further complicate matters councils are negotiating a great deal of change around water services, resource management reforms and the increasing effects of climate change. Two Otago councils are in the middle of appointing new chief executives.
There is more uncertainty because the government made no effort to find cross-party support for its proposals around local government, so a change at November’s general election could mean another change of direction.
There is further danger in the government’s Head Start process. A group of councils can put forward a proposal that affects other councils or communities without their consent.
This is a recipe for ongoing discontent when it is an enduring solution we need.
Unfortunately, this latest round of change makes no attempt to deal with the underlying issue around local government funding. Local government’s share of GDP in New Zealand has stuck around 2% since before 1900 (apart from a brief foray into the 4% zone during the Great Depression of the 1930s).
Over decades councils have been loaded with more responsibilities and expectations, while funding still relies predominantly on rates.
In Otago we cannot reasonably meet the government’s three-month timeframe to get into the Head Start pathway.
We don’t have to. The Head Start policy document states: ‘‘Head Start is voluntary. Councils that do not opt in will not face mandatory change until after the 2028 local elections, giving them space to focus on delivering the first generation of plans under the new planning system.’’
Let us work towards having a good proposal finalised well before the 2028 local government elections, but not in three months.
Our communities deserve a well-considered decision.
• Alan Somerville is a Green Party Otago Regional councillor.
