Welcome to the first issue of Local Matters, the electronic newsletter of AUT University's Local Government Centre.

The purpose of the newsletter is to bring to New Zealand local government, and those with an interest in good local governance, a mix of views, commentary and insights into current developments both locally and offshore.

Each issue of Local Matters will provide informed update on what is happening with local government elsewhere, drawing out the lessons for New Zealand.  We see this as an important service, providing busy local government officials and elected members with an easily accessible information on how other countries are dealing with some of local government’s perennial challenges such as funding, structure, role and function and how to engage local communities and with electors.

This issue's guest commentary comes from Dick Sorabji, Deputy Director of Policy with the New Local Government Network in London.  NLGN is one of England's most influential independent think tanks and very close to current government and official thinking.  Dick brings an insider's perspective to the process of change in local government in England and Wales post the Lyons report.

In international highlights we look at the process of local government reform in Queensland and reflect on its implications for New Zealand local government.  Have we yet moved beyond the obsession with the apparent benefits of size and business efficiency to asking what local governance really means?

Hot topics will focus on the "big ticket" items on the New Zealand local government agenda. We will reflect on the Royal Commission on Auckland Regional Governance and what it might mean both for the future governance of the Auckland region, and for New Zealand local government generally.

The report of the local Government Rating Inquiry also gets a mention.  Is it genuinely a possible breakthrough for local government funding as a number obviously hope, or is it a potential Trojan horse, threatening to undermine the autonomy of local government?

We hope that you will find the newsletter a valuable additional resource, helping keep you up-to-date with important developments both here and elsewhere, and providing objective and informed comment on the key issues of the local government day.

Back to top

2007 has already been the busiest year for new policy on local government since Labour came to office in 1997. All announcements have danced around Michael Lyons’ concept of ‘place shaping’. Lyons argued that councils should not be judged on the delivery of specific services, but instead on achieving outcomes that change communities for the better.

Lyons described much of this agenda. His interim report in December 2006 touched on new approaches to governance, the need to move away from nationally driven targets and the vital role of local government in driving economic growth. His final report emphasised greater fiscal autonomy from Whitehall.

These ideas have re-surfaced in government policy plans this year. Those plans have removed the grey zone in which the choice between further centralisation or devolution could be fudged. However, they have not all pointed to the same conclusion.

The contradiction is explained by a dilemma that will underpin much of British politics until the general election is finally called in 2009 or later. National policy goals increasingly depend on place shaping and so require devolution. Yet Whitehall fears letting go and distrusts local government accountability.

So when Lyons’ called for real fiscal autonomy through reformed council tax it was rejected by all parties in Parliament. Yet the tight financial settlement in the autumn spending review will mean above inflation rises every year. Council tax reform is back on the agenda

Government supported his call to cut the burden of national targets. The old Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) is being replaced. The October spending review cut national targets on local government from 1200 to 200. Central government has tried to be more joined up through an improved set of 30 Public Service Agreements (PSAs) that cut across departmental silos.

Whitehall followed Lyons’ advice, creating more room for place shaping. However, it was only days before the first attempts to re-centralise broke cover. An important test for devolution in England will be whether new performance controls to be announced in November support devolution, or draw power back towards the centre.

Economic growth is the most tangible example of place shaping. It has long been a priority for Gordon Brown. The sub-national review of economic development proposed a duty to promote economic well being. Groups of councils covering natural economic areas are to lead growth plans through multi-area agreements (MAAs). Where MAAs are managerially robust and have support from local public and private sectors the promise is that national public services will have to bend their plans to meet local needs.

Yet Whitehall won’t let go without reassurance on the quality of governance at the local level. The review proposed that England’s part elected Regional Assemblies be abolished. It is not yet clear whether they will be replaced by greater power for local leaders, or by centralising to the newly created Regional Ministers. The outcome may turn on the transparency of local accountability.

Back to top

The UK government continues to promote initiatives for greater devolution (though perhaps somewhat reluctantly – see Dick Sorabji’s overview).

The 19th of October saw the release of An Action Plan for Community Empowerment.

In the words of the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government:

'Bringing Government closer to people, passing power from Whitehall to the town hall and direct to local communities, isn’t just the right thing to do. It’s the best way to revitalise the local roots of our democracy and help build respect. It is the surest way of making local services reflect people’s needs.'

The action plan, and the resources which accompany it, have a number of very valuable case studies, and a useful discussion of principles albeit with a somewhat top-down flavour.

On the 30th of October, the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act received the Royal assent.  The act implements the recommendations of last year's White Paper including:

• Local Area Agreements will have a statutory basis and there will be a formal framework for co-operation with local partners;
• there will be a new unringfenced area based grant to provide local authorities and their partners with greater flexibility in the use of funding from central government;
• overview and scrutiny committees will have new powers to review and scrutinise the actions of key local public service providers, including the Environment Agency, Learning and Skills Council etc;
• principal local authorities will have devolved powers to undertake community governance reviews, and the possibility, as elsewhere in England, to set up parish councils in London;
• Councillors will be able to raise issues of local concern with overview and scrutiny committees as part of expanding Councillor Calls for Action to cover all local government services;

More information on both of these initiatives can be found at www.communities.gov.uk

Back to top

The terms of reference for the Royal Commission make fascinating reading.  They range from the ownership, governance and institutional arrangements for public infrastructure services and facilities to the governance and representation arrangements which will best:

• Enable effective responses to the different communities of interest and reflect and nurture the cultural diversity within the Auckland region; and
• provide leadership for the Auckland region and its communities, while facilitating appropriate participation by citizens and other groups and stakeholders in decision-making processes.

Taken at face value, there is a real sense that central government recognizes the crucial differences between the effective and efficient provision of regionwide infrastructure, and the subtleties of local governance.  In a sense, this is a very real achievement as most of the debate within the Auckland region so far has focused on infrastructure to the neglect of local governance.

Do the terms of reference signal that the government will take the recent Rating Inquiry seriously?  Not only is David Shand one of the commissioners, the commission is to take into account "the implications of the findings of the Independent Inquiry into Local Government Rates for local government arrangements in the Auckland region."

Exclusions include the purposes and principles of local government, local government arrangements in New Zealand generally, the extent to which recommendations relating to the Auckland region may also be appropriately implemented elsewhere, and central government agency and institutional arrangements dealing with expenditure of appropriate funds, provision of services and the stewardship of assets within ministerial portfolios.

It is tempting to wonder how the Royal Commission can take a "first principles" look at governance arrangements for the Auckland region without considering the purposes and principles of local government. 

To exclude consideration of local government arrangements elsewhere, including the application of the recommendations elsewhere, seems disingenuous.  The Royal Commission will be the most comprehensive examination of local government within New Zealand for many years.  Inevitably the judgements commissioners make about the nature of local governance, the relationship between management of large-scale infrastructure, and the place shaping role of local government at the neighbourhood level, and the arrangements which will best accommodate different communities of interest and cultural diversity will set the pattern for the rest of New Zealand.

The three commissioners are all people with formidable qualifications and experience, and a reputation for not fudging issues.  We can expect clear, forthright and comprehensive findings.  What we cannot yet know is the underlying philosophy which will inform those findings.  None of the commissioners have a background in local government as such.  Are they proponents of the "bigger is better, and efficiency is the name of the game" school of local government, or are they believers in the benefits of devolution, participatory democracy and community engagement?

The commissioners will do the publics of Auckland, and of New Zealand, a real service if they set out sooner rather than later the basic principles they believe should apply to establishing the governance, management and institutional arrangements both for local government generally, and for its different elements including both regional infrastructure and local governance.  Local government, for its part, should see the Royal commission as a major defining event in the future of New Zealand local government generally and ensure that the commissioners understand the inevitability that their recommendations will help frame the future of local government not just for Auckland but for New Zealand as a whole.

Terms of Reference for Royal Commission

Back to top

The report attached provides a summary of Funding Local Government, the report of the Local Government Rates Inquiry, and lists the 96 recommendations of the Panel.

'Local government works well in meeting the diverse needs of New Zealanders. It provides, at reasonable cost, a substantial range of basic services, which can broadly be categorised as either network infrastructure (roads and public transport, the "three waters" - water supply, waste water and stormwater - plus solid waste disposal) or community and social infrastructure (cultural and recreational facilities), as well as a range of regulatory activities. Overall it accounts for somewhat less than 5% of national expenditure.'

The focus of the report is on the spending and funding decisions related to these services. The funding system is under pressure because of significant growth in expenditures and growing affordability problems with the main source of funding, namely rates.

The LGC's Director, Peter McKinlay, offers his thoughts on what next here.

Back to top

The polling booths have been taken down, the votes have been counted, and the results have been pouring in. Last month, students from over 100 schools across New Zealand participated in the country’s largest-ever mock election, aiming to teach young people about the local government democratic process. Initial feedback from everyone involved indicates that the first national Kids Voting has been a roaring success.

Nationally the most obvious difference between the student and adult election was the turnout, with students appearing much keener to have their voices heard. At a local level, although in some areas, the students’ votes mirrored their parents voting patterns such as in New Plymouth; usually there was a degree of variation between whom young people selected to represent them, and the candidates that were actually elected by adult voters.

Across Auckland students opted for the mayor that had been in office to serve a second term as opposed to the popular choice amongst the adults. Similarly in Wellington, only one school voted in line with the adults in the mayoral election.

Students at Columba College in Dunedin chose completely different councillors to represent them, to the extent that the first person elected by the adults, was one of the first eliminated in the kids election. It was a similar case for Otaki College in Kapiti Coast where both mayoral and councillor results varied hugely to the actual outcome.    

Many local councils worked closely with their local schools in the run up to the election to create exciting initiatives to bring Kids Voting to life. 

Otorohanga College students attended an information session to find out more about what the local council did.  About 74 students were involved in the sessions, which included a bus trip around Otorohanga, a guided tour through the council’s premises and presentations by council members and key staff – paving the way for valuable future interaction between the school and council.

Over 15 enterprising schools used the opportunity to quiz their local candidates on their policy stances.  Waitaki Girls’ High School students fired questions at the Mayoral and Oamaru ward candidates to help them decide who should make the cut.  About 250 students in New Plymouth District heard from the 20 candidates who stood for the Mayoralty, City and South-West wards, where the four participating schools came from.

For your local authority kids voting results, click here.

Back to top

For the first time in New Zealand local government research has been specifically commissioned to identify “who and where are disabled people and what are their needs and strengths”.

Four agencies have joined together to purchase research to enable them to better understand the needs and aspirations of disabled people in Auckland.  These research partners are: Auckland City Council, the Auckland District Health Board, Waitakere City Council and the AUT Local Government Centre. 

The broad research objectives are:-

1. To find out the cultural, economic, environmental and social realities of disabled Aucklanders
2. To create a shared understanding about disability and the experiences of disabled people
3. To enhance the citizenship experiences of disabled people in Auckland City by growing the community’s capacity through civic engagement and involvement
4. To better understand and meet the health and educational needs of disabled Aucklanders now and into the future
5. To appropriately distribute the research findings to interested individuals, agencies, and communities.

It is intended that this research will involve the collection of vital information through engaging directly with disabled people who reside in Auckland City as well as sifting through the existing, relevant statistical data. 

AUT Local Government Centre is leading this research for the project partners. Other councils from across New Zealand are already indicating their interest in both the research process and the eventual outcomes, with a view to possibly replicating this important work with their local disabled community members. For information about the research, including request for proposal information See here or phone the Project’s Research Manager: Nic Mason ( (09) 921-9999 ext 6034 or nmason@aut.ac.nz  Proposals close 14th December 2007.

Back to top

The Institute of Public Policy, situated within the Auckland University of Technology, is an independent research and development centre. They have a framework that provides a dynamic relationship between private and public sectors, the market economy, central and local government and the wider community. This makes their applied research and graduate studies grounded in reality, and provides resources that help you make evidence-based decisions and develop the know-how to speed up innovation in your specific field.

The current programmes that are available through the Institute are:

Doctoral Programmes in:

• Economic and Social Development
• Public Policy

MPhil Degrees in:

• Economic Development
• Public Policy
• Community Development

Graduate Diploma in:

• Economic Development

Master of Arts in:

• Children and Public Policy

Restorative Justice

Community Development:

• Professional Development

For more information go to this page, or phone 09-921-9999 ext 8399

Back to top

Although the concept that ‘dirty air’ is bad for people has been around since ancient times, it is only within the last decade that the mechanisms have started to be identified. A number of large-scale epidemiological studies have shown that effects can occur at quite low levels of pollution, over a wide range of people, due to a number of different exposure scenarios.

The Health and Air Pollution in New Zealand (2007) study of 67 urban areas found that air pollution is associated with:
• 1,079 cases of premature mortality – that is, people dying earlier than they would have if they had not been exposed to air pollution, mostly associated with PM10 (901), but also with CO (178)
• 1,544 extra cases of bronchitis and related illnesses
• 703 extra hospital admissions for respiratory (465) and cardiac illnesses (238)
• 1,921,000 restricted-activity days – that is, days on which people cannot do the things they might otherwise have done if air pollution was not present.

The bulk of these effects are associated with particulate pollution (PM10), but there are also effects associated with other pollutants, such as NO2, CO and volatile organic compounds. This research found that nationally, 1 in 20 people (4.8%) die earlier than they would have because of air pollution. In Christchurch (and some other South Island towns with very high pollution levels) this could be as high as 1 in 9 people. This result should not be interpreted too dramatically, although it certainly indicates a situation to be avoided by reducing air pollution. The concept of premature mortality means that some of these people may be dying a matter of days or weeks earlier than they would have otherwise. But it also means that they may be dying months or years earlier, resulting in high economic and social costs.

Back to top

The Ministry for the Environment has produced this best practice guidance document to assist local government when procuring contracts for waste management and recycling. The guidelines were prepared between October 2005 and May 2006 and were based on the information available at the time.

Since then the policy guiding waste management and minimisation has gone through − and continues to go through − a period of increased focus and development. The Ministry for the Environment is currently in the process of developing waste policy that will have a direct impact on the way waste management and minimisation are carried out in New Zealand.

Back to top

The Office of the Commissioner for Children and AUT's Local Government Centre are undertaking child impact assessments in three councils. These are thought to be the first local government-specific child impact assessments in the english-speaking world.

Child impact assessments (CIA) aim to ensure that policy makers consciously consider children’s interests in their decision-making processes. A CIA can be used to determine the likely effect of a policy on children before that policy is implemented. CIA involves determining whether the impact of policy is likely to be in the best interests of children, then making adjustments to avoid or mitigate negative outcomes and to maximise the benefits. Download a summary here.

Back to top