I have just sent in my submission On The Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill
Committee Secretariat
Governance and Administration Committee
Parliament Buildings
Wellington
Phone:04 817 9520
ga.legislation@parliament.govt.nz
This submission is from Dr Tim Maltby
The Submission
I support the intent of this bill which is to reduce pressure on council rates by:
- refocusing the purpose of local government; and
- better measuring and publicising council performance; and
- prioritising core services in council spending; and
- strengthening council accountability and transparency; and
- providing regulatory relief to councils.
- General Comments
I would like to make the following general comments:
The current trajectory of council rates increases is unsustainable. Ordinary New Zealanders can not afford continued rates increases that are above the rate of income growth. This is particularly true for those on fixed income such as pensioners. The fact that we are seeing the same or similar problems in virtually every council in New Zealand indicates that there are serious structural and systemic problems which should be addressed. Councils across New Zealand have governance problems, and Management problems. It is timely for government to help address those issues.
I would like to address two main topics: crown sovereignty, and council management structure.
- In my comments
LGA refers to the Local Government Act.
LGB refers to the Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill
- Crown Sovereignty
Section 41 (3) of the LGA states that
A governing body of a local authority is responsible and democratically accountable for the decision-making of the local authority.
Governance is clearly defined as the responsibility to make decisions. The LGA has inserted Maori into the decision making process, which is governance. The legislation is using semantics to introduce co-governance into local authorities, and is making local authorities subservient to Maori. That is not a democratic process. All New Zealand citizens, including Maori, should have equal rights under the law. There should be no extra or special rights for Maori or any other group. All New Zealanders should be treated equally. That is the basis for our democracy, and for crown sovereignty.
Sharing governance dilutes the sovereignty of the local authority, and hence the sovereignty of the crown. Local authorities act on behalf of and under the authority of the crown. Shared decision making severely affects the ability of local authorities to act in accordance with section 41 (3), significantly reduces efficiency and effectiveness and increases costs, and hence places upward pressure on rates. Addressing sovereignty, is an essential part of reducing pressure on rates.
There is nothing in the Treaty of Waitangi that involves Maori in the decision making process. Article 1 of the Treaty stipulates the sovereignty of the crown. Article 2 protects property rights. Article 3 of the Treaty grants Maori the same rights and privileges as crown subjects (grants citizenship). There is no grant of extra privileges to Maori in the Treaty.
Similarly, tikangi knowledge should have no special place in New Zealand legislation. Maori cultural beliefs should not have any special priority over the cultural beliefs of other New Zealanders.
Maori are fully able to use the same democratic processes as all other New Zealanders. Creating extra rights for Maori in decision making processes (governance) that are not available to other New Zealanders, and which are not themselves democratic, is working against the democratic principles espoused in the LGB and the LGA.
I believe that for New Zealand to have a viable future as a democracy, all New Zealanders must be treated equally, and there should be no special provisions based on race, ethnicity or any other factor. Creating such differences will only divide society, rather than unite it. Legislation should not be used to create special rights based on race, ethnicity or other factors.
- Part 1 : LGA section 4 Treaty of Waitangi
All references to the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi should be removed. There are no legally defined principles. The actual meaning of the Treaty should be used, not so called principles which are a legal sleight of hand and a means to introduce extraneous terms into the Treaty which are not in the actual wording of the Treaty.
All references to decision making by Maori should be removed.
- Part 2 LGA Section 14 Principles relating to local authorities
Clause (1)(d) should be repealed.
- Part 3 LGA Section 33 Membership of Commission
A knowledge of tikanga Māori should not be mandatory for commissions. If tikangi knowledge is required for any particular circumstance, advice or guidance can be obtained.
- Part 4 : LGA section 40 Local governance statements
(d) I oppose Maori wards or any other special wards created for any special interest group. All New Zealanders should be treated equally and have equal representation rights.
(I) I oppose special policies for any separate group. Policies should apply equally to all groups.
- Part 4 LGA Section 57 Appointment of directors
(3) A knowledge of tikanga Māori should not need to be considered when appointing directors of a Council Controlled Organisation. If tikangi knowledge is required for any particular circumstance, advice or guidance can be obtained.
- Part 4 LGA Section 60A Significant decisions of council-controlled organisations affecting land or water
The section should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Part 4 LGA Section 64B Statement of expectations
Sections (1)(a)(iii) and (1)(b)(ii) should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Part 6 LGA Section 75 Outline of Part
Section (b) should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Part 6 LGA Section 77 Requirements in relation to decisions
Section (1)(c) should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Part 6 LGA Section 81 Contributions to decision-making processes by Māori
This clause should be repealed in its entirety. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Part 6 LGA Section 82 Principles of consultation
Section (2) should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same consultation rights as other New Zealanders.
- Part 6 LGA Section 102 Funding and financial policies
Sections (2)(e). Policies on remission and postponement of rates should be applied equally for all New Zealanders.
Section (3A). The principles set out in the Preamble to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993 are not reflective of the text of the Treaty and should be repealed as part of the bill.
- Part 6 LGA Section 108 Policy on remission and postponement of rates on Māori freehold land
Policies on remission and postponement of rates should be applied equally for all New Zealanders.
- Part 6 LGA Section 125 Requirement to assess drinking water services
Section (5)(d) Maori organisations should have to meet the same technical and competence requirements as any other organisation. There should not be different criteria for Maori organisations.
- Part 7 LGA Section 199F Appointment and register of development contributions commissioners
Section (3)(c) should be repealed. A knowledge of tikanga Māori should not need to be considered when appointing directors of a Council Controlled Organisation. If tikangi knowledge is required for any particular circumstance, advice or guidance can be obtained.
- Part 7 LGA Section 199K Additional powers of development contributions commissioners
Section (4)(a) should either be repealed, or the same rights should be allowed to all other cultural groups. All New Zealanders should be treated equally.
- Part 7 LGA Section 205 Use of development contributions for reserves
Section (d)(iii) should be repealed. Public money should only be used for amenities which have unrestricted public access. Public money should not be used for Maori cultural or other purposes, unless the same rights are granted to other cultural groups.
- Schedule 1AA LGA Section 22 Delayed effective date of requirement for certain funding and financial policies to support principles in Preamble to Te Ture Whenua Maori Act 1993
Policies on remission and postponement of rates should be applied equally for all New Zealanders.
- Schedule 7 LGA Section 36 Local authority to be good employer
Section (d) should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Schedule 10 LGA Section 8 Development of Māori capacity to contribute to decision-making processes
Section 8 should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Schedule 10 LGA Section 35 Development of Māori capacity to contribute to decision-making processes
Section 35 should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Schedule 11 LGA Matters relating to rates relief on Māori freehold land
General: There should be no special treatment of Maori or any other group in New Zealand. All New Zealanders should be treated equally. Criteria for rates relief should apply equally to all New Zealanders.
Section (1) These matters should apply to all Freehold Land, not just Maori Freehold Land.
Section (2) These objectives should apply equally to all Freehold Land, and all cultures and traditions or be repealed. The objectives should not just apply to Maori Freehold Land and Maori culture and tradition.
Section (2)(a) Ratepayers should not be subsidising traditional activities.
Section (2)(b) Ratepayers should not be subsidising Maori hereditary ownership of land.
Section (2)(c) Ratepayers should not be subsidising Maori retention of land.
Section (2)(d) Ratepayers should not be subsidising economic use of Maori land.
Section (2)(e) Ratepayers should not be subsidising Maori cultural beliefs.
Section (2)(f) Ratepayers should not be subsidising economic use of Maori land or Maori housing.
Section (2)(g) I fully support, but it should apply to all owners of Freehold Land.
Section (2)(h) Rates based on access to services should be applied equally to all Freehold Land.
Section (2)(h) Rates based on physical accessibility should be applied equally to all Freehold Land.
Where Maori land is used commercially or for housing, Maori should be contributing to rates equally with other New Zealanders. Maori enjoy the same rights, and in fact additional rights, as other New Zealanders, and should expect to contribute equally with other New Zealanders. Regarding alienation, there should be similar standards as for other New Zealanders, with caveats for non commercial land etc (Section (2)(g)). Maori should not be a special class under the law.
All New Zealanders would like to enjoy the relief provided to Maori in Schedule 11. That relief should either be applied equally to all New Zealanders, or it should be repealed.
- Schedule 13A LGA Section 8 Development contribution objection hearings
Clause 2)(b) should be repealed. Maori already enjoy the same rights as other New Zealanders.
- Council Management Structure
The current council management structure was largely put in place during the local government reforms of 1989. The structure was based on a market model developed from business theory. The proposal was that a more business like council would be more effective and efficient. Council management was changed to a chief executive at the top, along with a senior management team organised along commercial business lines.
This has resulted in council management being dominated by a “Professional Management Class”. The chief executives and the senior management team are usually selected on management qualifications, rather than technical qualifications or experience related to the council core business (water, roads, infrastructure and services etc). Consequently, the management teams generally do not understand the core business of the council, and are unable to make good decisions. I beleicve that management theory alone is not enough for sound management. Technical competence is required for good council management. The main business of council is civil engineering, so that a level of technical competence in civil engineering is required.
Because management do not understand the council core business, there is an over reliance on consultants and outside experts to provide advice. However, management often do not have sufficient knowledge or experience to ask the right questions, and the advice is often poorly understood or ignored. There is a top management team with a different culture to the bottom of the council where the work is done. The two cultures do not speak the same language, and can not effectively communicate. It destroys the career path for technical staff, which makes it difficult to recruit and retain good technical staff.
Across New Zealand, there is a large, expensive but ineffective corporate management layer in councils, which is a major contributor to costs and inefficiency. Most councils have a bad management structure, and lack technical competence. Addressing the council management structure, is an essential part of reducing pressure on rates. Business theory doesn’t work.
I believe that councils should return to an in-house promotion and career development model so that the top management team have come from working inside a council, and have good experience of council core business. This would also provide a career path for technical staff, and would make it easier to recruit and retain good staff.
This is a complex topic and I can not provide easy simple recommendations. Perhaps government should be less prescriptive, and allow councils to experiment with different management models. Some possible items to address.
- Part 4 : LGA section 42 Chief executive
Is the chief executive the best model?
- Schedule 7 : LGA section 34 Terms of employment of chief executive
Claus (1) : Are five year terms the best model? Five year terms encourage short termism and fly in fly out management, sometimes called seagull management.
Clause (2) Are performance based contracts the best option? My experience is that performance indicators promise much and deliver not very much at best, and negative results at worst, which is the usual case. Large organisations are very complex, and it is impossible to define their performance by a few simple metrics. In most cases, using performance metrics or indicators skew the organisation towards those metrics, to the detriment of the overall organisation.
Clause (3 – 7) Do these clauses need to be so prescriptive?
- Schedule 7 : LGA section 35 Performance review at end of first term of appointment
Clause (1) I believe that the performance of the chief executive should be assessed more frequently than just at the end of their term. The performance reviews should also include the performance of the whole council organisation, as that is a reflection of the performance of the chief executive.
Suggested amended text 35 (1):
(1) A local authority must conduct and complete reviews of the employment of the chief executive.
(a) at regular intervals or as determined by the governing body : and
(b) not less than 6 months before the date on which the chief executive’s contract of employment for the first term expires
Suggested additional text 35 (2) (d): or swap (c) and (d)
(d) the performance of the council organisation.