Kiota.
I'm Chelsea Daniels and this is the Front Page, a daily podcast.
Presented by The New Zealand Herald.
Last week we reported on the issues at Wellington City Council. After councilors voted against selling airport shares, forcing a rethink of the council's long term plan. The Coalition government labeled the council a shambles and threatened to send in a Crown Observer. Well they've now delivered on that threat, with Local Government Minister Simeon Brown confirming that appointment.
Will be coming. The move puts more.
Pressure on Meyortry far Now and to counselors to sort out their issues, but it has also sparked debate around if the bar is too low for the government to intervene. Today on the Front Page, Jim Palmer, a consultant who chaired the Review into the Future for Local Government, is with us to discuss the issues at our council tables. Jim, what was your reaction to the news about a Crown observer coming to Wellington City Council.
Yeah, it's been an issue that has obviously challenged the Minister and those in Wellington for the last couple of three weeks, and perhaps it wasn't a surprise that ultimately
an observer is to be appointed. While the circumstances of Wellington perhaps will benefit from an observer from the review that we undertook a couple of years ago, this is probably symptomatic of some of the issues that we're seeing in local government and they're more likely to recur over time given the significant challenges the sector's facing.
What kind of challenges did you predict in that review?
Well, over the next thirty years, they're going to be not only significant funding pressures, there's infrastructure challenges. We've got economic and geopolitical impacts that we're uncertain how to play out. Extreme weather events are coming, We've got persistent inequity, low
social cohesion, and things like climate change. All of those things play out locally and they are very demanding and put extreme pressures on local communities, on local government, and currently in the review panels view the current systems just not set up to be able to handle those challenges. So the types of issues that we're seeing in Wellington are likely to recur more frequently.
What sort of precedent is there for a Crown observer to be appointed? It's not a common occurrence, is it. But it's not really that rare either.
Well, the Minister had a number of options available to him intervening should he choose to do so, and the Crown observer is one to my knowledge, there's been one previously in Westland that there have been other Crown managers appointed, recently in Laodore for flooding, previously in christ Church City over building control, and more publicized have been the commissioner
appointments at Todong, e Ken and Kuypra. So there has been precedent for intervention at times, and obviously the Minister, based on the advice he's received, believed that a threshold had been met for that type of intervention. An observer is probably the lightest touch intervention that probably could have been decided upon.
It is my view that we accept this and work constructively with whoever is appointed. The Minister has fairly pointed out instances where councilors have walked down meetings, refused to go and have also publicly criticized each other and council staff. The council will have to pay for this unexpected cost.
One criticism that's emerged from some academics and commentators is that the bar for an observer might be a bit too low, particularly at the moment when a lot of councils have financial issues.
What do you make of that viewpoint.
I'm not quite sure the advice the Minister has received and that'll be released in due course, no doubt, but which will probably have traversed that very question. You've certainly got to let democracy take its course, and that's not always smooth, and there is the three year annual performance review that the councilors and mayors go through which the community passes a verdict on how well they've performed. But in the meantime, you know, sometimes some councils do need help.
And in the case of Wellington, yeah, they've got some significant financial challenges that are trying to work their way through, and they've got a council that has probably struggled to consistently deliver the leadership. The fact that they're just down the road from Parliament and quite public and visible, and they've had a couple of other issues that recur in the media have added to that pressure. So it's perhaps not unsurprising that the Minister has decided, but it's whether
that creates a bar, I'm not so sure. I think every situation will need close, separate consideration, and I don't think there's necessarily a bar that can be easily articulated to say this is the point where an observer or greater intervention is required and we are not. So it's a judgment call, and ultimately the minister has the responsibility to make that.
So you reckon that this could happen a bit more often than in the past, I suppose. Do you think other councils are worried taking in Viicago, for example, where Mayor Nobby Clark has twice been censured by his own counsel over comments is made in public. Does that meet the threshold of concern or does Wellington have the kind of misfortune of, like you said, being in capital city, being a little bit closer to central government.
I'm not wanting to comment on the particulars of Invercago, and probably no, there are mechanisms to address that, and clearly, if there had been sufficient concern about that, then there
may have been next already taken. So clearly in that case there has been no intervention, and they're from a national perspective obviously, wasn't considered to meet a threshold if there is such a threshold, So yeah, each case is going to require its own consideration, and a large part of it is how the actual elected members tackle the challenges.
There are challenges of plenty coming for local government and we've seen that with large rate increases signaled in ltps and they will be there for years to come, along with debt ceilings which are making investment and infrastructure challenging and in some cases unaffordable or communities, and that's where
the funding model needs a total reset. So those type of issues are recurring and until there is some systemic change then it sounds a little gloomy to say, but I would suggest that these type of issues are going to be on the front pages of papers more and more frequently.
Do you think the public takes into account how important local councils are.
I think generally people love living in the communities that they reside and really enjoy the amenity and the services that they have on hand, but many take those for granted absolutely. You know, local government touches individuals every day in multiple ways. From the minute you get up and blush the loo and brush your teeth through to drive and being in parks and pools and libraries, and the fabulous facilities and activities that are supported that support a
community to make communities great. All of those things generally are led or supported by local government and so they have a far greater impact on people's day to day lives than perhaps many appreciate.
The local election numbers compared to national election turnout numbers are significant different as well, so maybe people should be reflecting on the importance of their local councils a little bit more. And during the election campaign a National Party spokesperson actually told stuff local government has an important role to play, but too often councils are an after thought for central government. Would you agree with that statement? Should central government work more with local councils.
Our review undoubtedly recommended that there needs to be far stronger partnership, genuine partnership, and it's not the command and control style that successive governments. And I'm not just this government, but many governments take a paternalistic view of local government and there is great opportunity for central and local government
to be working together. I talked with one mayor in a region and they're talking about youth unemployment, and they said that there were ninety different agencies being funded to address youth unemployment and they range from central government agencies, local government NGO and other organizations, all trying to do
the right thing, but a lack of focus. If they'd come together and said okay, here are the three or four agencies that could be delivering this and delivering it far more effectively, we could get far greater value for money out of that. Also, the way in which government and local government are prepared to partner with community, community organizations,
community groups. This huge amount of volunteering and goodwill in a community, if it's engendered in the right way, there is great grassroots opportunities to deliver far better value as well. So the opportunity is immense, but it does require a fundamental reset of the relationship between central government and local government. Particularly in the first.
Instance, the government dared revoke three waters, which many local councils weren't a fan of. But in other areas the government has actually been a bit more firm with councils. Councils that want to keep their multi wards now have to hold a referendum on that, and Prime Minister Chris va Luxe has had strong words for counsels at a conference in August, telling them to rain in the spending.
Rate Payers expect local government to do the basics, pick up the rubbish, fix the pipes, fill in the potholes, and more generally, maintain the local assets quickly, carefully and cost effectively. What they don't expect to pay for is a laundry list of distractions and experiments that are plaguing council balance sheets across the country.
Is this the right message and we're talking about that relationship that government should be fostering and sending if it does want to work constructively with councils.
Yeah, building a strong, genuine partnership requires trust and confidence in each other, and that takes some time. It takes people to be in the room and get together and understand the different perspectives. Certainly understand the government has three years in a series of priorities that it wishes to pursue and doesn't want to be distracted by things which don't necessary very early aligned with its priorities. I think
that's been understood by local government. But to go to the fundamental reset, then there does need to be a change in the way and which central government and local government relate to each other and work together. We identified significant opportunities to be able to reimagine the way and which central government and local government work together and with respect.
I don't see those actions being taken to the extent needed to create the change that will benefit ultimately the communities that both government and local government are there to serve.
Yeah, nobody really likes to be told what to do.
It's like having a big brother and them saying no, you're doing it wrong, do it this way, and not really having a constructive conversation about it.
Hey.
Absolutely, and it's not just this government. Successive governments have taken that approach, which is difficult to respond to, and local government traditionally has been an easy course to whip in has been and sometimes local government, to be honest, doesn't help itself and provides plenty of opportunities and dead
rats to be held up and examined. And what happens with one many get card with the same brush, and so you know, the unfortunate reflection on the whole sector that perhaps isn't always warrant.
Every new government that comes into office talks about building strong relations with local government, but successive National and Labor governments have a buttered call from local government for new funding tools like ending GST on rates, pain rates on crown property and if anything, successive governments have added costs
to local government. The end of the day, central government has not been willing to hand over new funding tools that would take the pressure off Ugland Council and all the councils around the country.
You chaired the Future for Local Government review which was announced by the Labor government. In terms of those seventeen recommendations that the review made, how do you think they're going Has any been acted upon?
Certainly, Local Government New Zealand, the body who represents the interests of local councils, certainly did a good job in analyzing the report and thinking about recommendations that wanted to support the government. To be honest, there's only a handful of recommendations that are in one way or another being considered. The issue of funding generally no funding, although the government might consider some bespoke funding arrangements such as congestion charging
or bid tax or the like, minor concessions. We did talk about the opportunity for city and regional deals, which has been picked up by the government, although to be honest, rather slowly. It's going to take some years for those to emerge in be bedded, and there is a consideration of electoral change changing the electoral cycle. There are some aspects of the review that are being picked up and being indirectly given attention to, given that the Minister didn't
accept the report's recommendation, so there is change. Our panel was off the view though that to make the level of change that was required, it actually required a systematic implementation of all of the recommendations. You just couldn't cherry pick one or two.
Are there any of those recommendations that you just want to see happen if you could click your fingers and have it happen tomorrow.
What do you think needs to happen.
Well, there's a as I say, there were seventeen that we thought were pretty important. In those nothing happens until there is a fundamental reset of the relationship between central and local government. Funding is a particular concern and underpins many of the challenges the sector face. Increasing the governance capacity and capability of local government as in a important thing. Investing in training and development for elected members and ensuring
that they've got the right people to support it. Local government, you know, there needs to be a reconsideration whether the way in which local government is currently structured is sustainable and is going to be able to deliver to the future. So they are some other things, but there are many others, including the importance of a strong t tendity relationship with ee HAPU. That was a key issue that we identified
as well. So there are many issues that our panel traverse that we believe there needed to be significant change initiated otherwise. You know, in my view, in five to ten years time, people will look back at our report as these issues continue to present significant challenges and there might be a lost opportunity that sits amongst that.
Thanks for joining us, Jim. That said, for this episode of The Front Page.
You can read more about today's stories and extensive coverage at enzed Herald.
Dot co dot z.
The Front Page is produced by Ethan Siles with sound engineer Patty Fox. I'm Chelsea Daniels. Subscribe to the Front Page on iHeartRadio or wherever you get your podcasts, and tune in tomorrow for
Another look behind the headlines.