As regional councils prepare to be restructured out of existence, critics warn the real battle will be over who controls the reorganisation that follows, writes Catherine McGregor in today’s extract from The Bulletin.
To receive The Bulletin in full each weekday, sign up here.
A once-in-a-generation overhaul
Billed as the biggest shake-up to councils in at least three decades, the government’s proposal to scrap elected regional councillors and hand their powers to boards of mayors marks a dramatic turn in the long-running debate over how local government should work. As The Press notes, RMA reform minister Chris Bishop and local government minister Simon Watts say the current system is “tangled”, “duplicative” and “too expensive”.
Their fix is a two-step process: first, replace regional councillors with new Combined Territories Boards (CTBs), made up of territorial mayors and potentially Crown-appointed representatives. Second, require those boards to produce detailed Regional Reorganisation Plans that could significantly reshape how – and by whom – essential functions like transport, flood protection and environmental regulation are delivered.
Reorganisation – but by whom?
Each CTB will have two years to draw up its Regional Reorganisation Plan, a blueprint for how local government services should be arranged in the long term. These plans must meet government-set criteria, from affordability and service improvement through to Treaty commitments, and would be subject to local consultation. But they only take effect once signed off by the local government minister, meaning the final decision rests firmly with central government. While the plans “could conceivably decide to continue on with the CTBs”, RNZ’s Russell Palmer writes, the discussion document’s focus on efficiency strongly signals a push toward amalgamation.
Bishop has already suggested that, with the forthcoming RMA changes, “people will see the attraction of unitary authorities”. Former Christchurch mayor Lianne Dalziel argues in Newsroom that the announcement about abolishing regional councils is really a “red herring”. “The real issue is the proposed regional reorganisation that would follow, and which would be subject to total government control, with the minister of local government given the final say.”
A fond farewell to localism
Dalziel says she feels let down by the government going back on its “promises of localism”. By requiring minister-approved plans, the reforms mark a decisive move away from regions controlling their own fates. Furthermore, as RNZ’s Palmer writes, opponents “argue it is undemocratic to remove the elected councillors – particularly if Crown Commissioners reporting to government ministers end up with the power”.
The tension echoes Joel MacManus’s Spinoff column from last year which argued that “Christopher Luxon loves localism, until locals have the wrong opinions”. MacManus notes that Luxon told an audience just last year that “We, like you, believe in localism and devolution, not centralisation and control.” Since then, MacManus writes, the government has repeatedly stepped in when councils made decisions it disliked. “Locals keep having different ideas and opinions than the government, and it is really getting in the way of localism.”
What is Shane Jones on about?
On a slightly tangential note, Hayden Donnell’s Spinoff column yesterday explored NZ First minister Shane Jones’ penchant for florid insults – a quirk on full display in his RNZ interview reacting to the regional council news. Jones accused the Otago Regional Council of being overrun by “green banshees”, compared it to the Kremlin, and – most bewilderingly – claimed it had been “taken over by these demonic eggbeaters out of Dunedin”.
Donnell was unable to determine what, precisely, a “demonic eggbeater” is meant to be, though he did uncover precedent: Jones used the same phrase earlier this year to insult Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick. The wider pattern, Donnell argues, is Jones continuing to hide behind the absurd, deliberately inflammatory rhetoric he loves to spout. “There’s little of real substance in Jones’ orgy of banshees and egg-beaters,” writes Donnell. “It’s a distraction from legitimate criticism. A torrent of hot air. Maybe if we could harness it we wouldn’t need so many fossil fuels in the first place.”
