The numbers, along with good representation, are the key matters we need to get right for the region.
That’s why Environment Southland has developed a financial model — so Southlanders and councils can compare the indicative costs and savings of different restructure options. It is not designed to favour a particular option; it is simply a decision-support tool.
It was built from published long-term plans, funding impact statements and water service delivery plans of the four Southland councils and has been independently audited. We have since refined it with senior financial staff from all councils.
The numbers show that from 2034, a one unitary council structure would save $9.8m annually; a two unitary council structure would save $2.2m annually (but would have significant debt (-$15.1m) from the transition period to 2034); a two unitary + regional business unit structure would save $4.8 annually; and a one unitary council structure + regional business unit structure would save $9.0m annually. There’s a lot more detail on our website, es.govt.nz that’s worth a look.
Our aim is to inform the conversation and to look at how regional council functions — flood resilience, catchment management and biosecurity — could work in different structures, given they are delivered at a catchment and regional scale.
These are big decisions for Southland. Let’s be sure to make them with our eyes wide open.
— Jeremy McPhail is chair of Environment Southland
