Save Auckland from the Royal Commission

When I wrote this blog I was feeling a bit desperate about the state of play. You'll see it's a wildly pragmatic approach. Trying to make some sort of silk-purse out of Rodney Hide's ear. But as you'll see it proposes a committee structure to manage the governance of the "middle tier". Now (23rd April) I think this approach is a cope out. I leave it here out of a sense of completeness. But don't think I am now serious about this. Having thought about it - I'm not serious.....

* Adopt an incremental approach * Ensure Auckland’s economy stability
* Protect Auckland’s development from uncertainty
* Fix what’s broke by implementing clearly needed improvements

Profound changes have been proposed to Auckland governance by the Royal Commission. These present severe implementation challenges. The risks of failure outweigh the possible benefits. Toronto is a good example of how long it takes a city to recover from large scale restructuring, and to become effective.

The foundation for the Royal Commission recommendations was provided in the ARC’s submission, which was criticised as draconian and failing to either understand or appreciate the role and importance of local government. However the Royal Commission did not consistently adopt the ARC’s idealised model which called for one central authority and about twenty local councils, and which would have necessitated the wholesale abolition and restructuring of Auckland local government.

Because of this inconsistency, the Royal Commission’s recommendations are neither one thing nor the other. They fall between the two pillars of local democracy and centralisation. They are severe in their impact and deliver an unbalanced outcome.

When the Royal Commission was established the global economy was on a more certain footing than it is now. Today, Auckland and New Zealand are on much more precarious economic terrain. While this uncertainty can present opportunity for change, it also intensifies the risk of failure. Auckland’s economic stability is an essential component of New Zealand’s economic recovery.

It would be a major risk to Auckland’s economy and New Zealand for Government to adopt the whole suite of the Royal Commission’s recommendations.

A pragmatic and precautionary way forward would be for Government to support some of the Royal Commission’s recommendations. This would be an incremental or staged approach. It would be seen as measured and responsible.

This is a short list of high priority improvements which are straightforward to implement with minimum risk of unintended consequences and uncertainty. Manageable Changes and Reforms for Auckland. The following is a summary of practical changes drawn from the report of the Royal Commission that can be implemented now - not without difficulty – and that will have a lasting beneficial effect on Auckland with reduced risk. These changes can be built upon in the future, while having significant utility now.

• Water & Wastewater: Implement general thrust of Royal Commission recommendations. This includes the transfer all water and wastewater assets to Watercare, along with management responsibilities.



• Transport: Implement general thrust of Royal Commission recommendations.



• Local Government Structure: Retain existing 3 tier structure, but make the following incremental changes:
  
  Auckland Regional Authority: Same duties as existing ARC; plus responsible for Watercare; plus directly responsible for Waterfront Development Agency (not through ARH); plus required to develop one spatial plan for whole region (this to have statutory effect by providing a duty to provide development direction through Regional Policy Statement); plus duty to issue one rating bill and collect all rates and water rates for itself and for TLAs (Ratepayer bill sets out separate TLA, ARA and water rate components); has mayor elected at large plus 15 (or so) councillors;
  
  TLAs: Same duties as existing City and District Councils; less water and wastewater functions; less arterial road control; sets local rates for balance of services which are collected on its behalf by Auckland Regional Authority; required to give effect to strengthened and directive Regional Policy Statement; no elected at large mayors – but Municipal Council Chair elected by members, some reduction in number of members reflecting reduced role;
  
  Community Boards: Same duties as now.

These changes by themselves are significant. They will step the Auckland region irreversibly into the sort of future envisaged by the Royal Commission, but not in a way, and at a speed that risks instability and consequent long term damage.