Local democracy under threat? Officials warn against removing council 'four wellbeings'
RNZ / Quin Tauetau
Removing the "four wellbeings" for councils is unlikely to make much difference, and could even impact services and development, officials' analysis of the government's law changes shows.
The report shows the approach taken by the government can be expected to overall improve clarity and concerns about spending "beyond core infrastructure" - but would undermine stability and localism.
It shows the Department of Internal Affairs would have preferred to keep the status quo.
The Local government (System Improvements) Amendment legislation
passed its first reading last night
, with the select committee reporting back in November.
The government and the minister have made their views clear, stating that councils have "lacked fiscal discipline", that they "are not mini-Parliaments; they are service delivery agencies", and that residents have become increasingly concerned about rates.
The opposition parties have argued it is a power grab that degrades the rights of democratically elected councils.
A key part of [https://www.legislation.govt.nz/bill/government/2025/0180/latest/whole.html#LMS1454338 the bill is the government's proposal to remove all 10 mentions of the "four wellbeings" - social, economic, environmental and cultural - from the law governing councils.
However, the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) on the bill from Internal Affairs said that in isolation, this change was "unlikely to benefit communities more than the status quo".
"Previous regulatory impact statements have suggested that despite various changes to the purpose by successive governments, there has been limited impact on council decision-making, activities, and service levels, regardless of intended focus.
"Refocusing the purpose of local government will likely have limited impact on its own and may create implementation costs and issues."
The paper highlighted that the "proposed changes will likely disrupt the sector" and had led councils to do "costly compliance exercises in the past to determine which activities fit within a narrower purpose".
Despite this narrowing, it said the purpose of local government "should reflect the broad range of responsibilities local authorities have under all primary and secondary legislation in New Zealand" - pointing to the 47 statutes councils already have responsibilities under.
It noted that departmental feedback from agencies, including the Infrastructure Commission and the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, as well as the independent Future of Local Government Review (FLGR) - effectively
binned by the government
a year ago - had "contrary views to those of ministers".
"Feedback suggested that removing the four wellbeings could be seen as disempowering local government, and while focusing councils on low rates may succeed, it would likely come at the expense of key council services and infrastructure development."
It noted the FLGR had found successive governments' changes to councils' purpose were disruptive, and recommended the four wellbeings be entrenched in law to provide greater certainty.
Removing the wellbeings "could impact [Treaty of Waitangi] settlement arrangements between iwi or hapū and councils".
However, some councils had told the minister, "they felt it would also help them to manage community expectations and do fewer things better".
In a table assessing the costs and benefits of the legislation, the officials found that "restraint" (addressing concerns about spending beyond core services) and "clarity" (providing useful direction about what councils should be expected to do) were improved compared to the status quo.
However, "stability" (minimising disruption and allowing councils to plan effectively) and "localism" (recognising the broad role of councils valued in communities and empowering them to decide for themselves) would be worse than the status quo.
The RIS suggested that other changes proposed by the government, including additional performance monitoring and rate capping, were "more likely" to support the government's objectives.
While ministers have
continued to say
the changes are targeted at a lack of fiscal discipline by councils, the RIS stated "cost pressures on councils are being driven by capital and operating cost escalation, flowing from supply chain upheaval and a tight labour market during the Covid-19 pandemic, and accelerated headline inflation since".
"Infrastructure costs have long been a major cause of rate increases, with councils needing to upgrade infrastructure, especially for water and wastewater treatment plants, and invest in more infrastructure to meet growth demands.
"Around two-thirds of capital expenditure for councils is applied to core infrastructure, not including libraries and other community facilities, or parks and reserves."
Local government Minister Simon Watts, at the first reading speech on Thursday, said, "We looked at the evidence and it showed that whenever the four aspects of community wellbeing are included in the purpose of local government, rates go up as councils are focused on too many things".
Local Government Minister Simon Watts says the bill is all about reining in costs.
Photo:
RNZ / Samuel Rillstone
Internal Affairs' analysis showed rate increases were "about two percent higher when the four wellbeings are in the Act", so while it bears out the minister's statement, the effect cannot explain the full weight of rate rises across the country.
The data used also did not account for population growth or distinguish between residential or commercial ratepayers.
"Usually, where rates have increased faster, this is because costs for councils have risen faster.
The current infrastructure deficit for local government is evidence of prolonged underinvestment, where rates (along with other revenue sources) did not increase enough to enable responsible asset management.
"For example, despite rates appearing to increase more towards 2007, the Infrastructure Commission has identified the period from 1995 to 2008 as a time when rates were consistently below their post-World War II average as a share of gross domestic product, and this coincided with a deterioration of the stock of transport, water and waste assets."
The analysis stated that the minister only allowed officials to examine two options: the status quo and his preferred approach.
"The data and evidence used in carrying out this analysis was generally low quality due to limitations on options exploration and consultation.
"There was a heavy reliance on previous regulatory impact statements that covered the same or reverse law changes."
The inclusion of the wellbeings has been added to or removed from the law four times since the Act came into force in 2003, so there were more than enough previous analyses to draw from.
It remains unclear whether rate capping, which the minister wants "before Christmas", would be included in the bill after the select committee reports back in November.
However, the analysis repeatedly highlights that efforts to "limit council revenue from rates" are part of the government's intended package of reform, and a section laying out a timeline of changes includes a redacted entry that follows the implementation of the changes described in the bill.
The disclosure statement prepared by the department noted that the RIS was limited to assessing the impacts of refocusing the purpose of local government.
It said the Regulations Ministry had determined other aspects of the bill did not need to be assessed, "on the grounds that these proposals would have no or only minor economic, social, or environmental impacts".
The ministry also asked the minister to provide an analysis on rates capping when reporting back to Cabinet on the overall bill in December.
The statement also showed Minister Watts had asked for consultation relating to transparency and accountability with the Free Speech Union lobby group, the Taxpayers Union lobby group, the New Zealand Initiative think tank, Transparency International, and other ratepayer groups and academics.
On performance management, the department also sought feedback from a reference group, and on regulatory relief, the department was instructed to consult LGNZ, Local Government Professionals NZ, Federated Farmers, and Business NZ.
Officials also shared a clause of the draft bill with the Local Government Funding Agency.
Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero
,
a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
Mediawatch: 'Surprise' rise in Trump's trade tariff?
One of many headlines calling the 15 percent tariff rate imposed by the US 'a surprise'. Photo: The Post "If the name of New Zealand is seriously so threatened, why didn't New Zealand First introduce this bill 12 months ago? Why not six years ago? Why not negotiate it into the coalition agreement when they formed a government?" Jack Tame asked on his Newstalk ZB show last weekend . He was talking about the New Zealand (Name of State) Bill freshly proposed by NZ First MP Andy Foster, which would legislate New Zealand as the official name of the country. "Could it possibly be that a few hours before ... Australia and the UK achieved lower trade tariffs with the United States, while our government's top officials were apparently surprised to learn that our tariff had been increased?" he asked. Party leader Winston Peters didn't like it. On social media, he pointed out that on the same show five years ago, Jack Tame had backed 'Aotearoa New Zealand' as the official name for our nation. In a long interview about the Bill on the alternative news platform The Platform, Peters said he was delighted his "counter-attack" on Jack Tame was getting good online engagement. The hike in US trade tariffs didn't come up until Peters himself mentioned it at the very end. "Before you go, you know, we've got this thing with the United States and everybody's alarmed. I've seen all the headlines on Radio New Zealand and all the newspapers today. We'll turn this thing around. You watch," the foreign minister said. Since 5 April, US importers of New Zealand products have been paying a 10 percent tariff on all goods - and 25 percent on steel and aluminium. While Tame said the 15 percent tariff the US confirmed late last week seemed to be a surprise to our government and trade officials, the media seemed surprised too. Many news stories - and many headlines - called it a 'surprise' rise . But ahead of that, Trade Minister Todd McClay himself said the tariff could rise to 15 percent. At a media conference earlier, President Trump himself told reporters that the universal tariff could increase to 15 or 20 percent for countries that had not struck deals with the US. Todd McClay also told reporters last week, if the tariff rate goes to 15 percent our exporters have already adjusted and will be able to deal with it. If so, they adjusted a bit better than the surprised media this past week. On Newstalk ZB, Mike Hosking told his listeners the lower rate charged across the Tasman was the real shock. "Australia can land their beef and their wine at 10 percent, we land ours at 15," he complained. But to those surprised by that, Scoop's Gordon Campbell said they shouldn't have been. "We sell them more than they buy from us. In Trumpland, any country that runs a trade surplus with the US is a bad country that is ripping the US off. How bad have we been? Pretty bad, in Trumpian terms," New Zealand is a victim of its own export success, Gordon Campbell said - a bit like butter buyers in our duopolistic supermarkets. Trade Minister Todd McClay also confirmed that 15 percent was no surprise on NZME's rural show The Country . "If we had run a trade deficit with the US like Australia, would we have got 10 percent?," host Jamie McKay asked McClay on Wednesday, in Bangkok en route to Washington to plead our case. "It is as simple as that," the trade minister replied, confirming he had been told as much previously by US trade representative Jamieson Greer. "He said it didn't matter if you had camped out here in Washington, if you'd had a trade deal or you're negotiating one. For any country that had a trade surplus against the US last year - it is 15 percent or more," McClay said. Todd MaClay dodged the next question, about whether we would agree to buy more stuff from the US to reduce our trade deficit. This week McClay and columnist Gordon Campbell both pointed out that the trade surplus has in previous years been flipped by one-off purchases of big-ticket items like aircraft. The deal Trump struck with the EU earlier this month included billions of dollars-worth of energy and military equipment. Many people in many industries are now watching this space, including the media - surely not so surprised by now. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
Mediawatch: Media applauds old school move on NCEA
TVNZ's Simon Dallow with a blunt assessment of NCEA, after the government announced proposals to dump the system. Photo: TVNZ 1 News "Old school grades are set to return," 1 News host Simon Dallow told 6 pm news viewers on Monday evening at the top of the show. Earlier that day, breakfast news shows had been primed for an imminent "massive announcement." As is often the case with government policy announcements, the nation's major newsrooms already knew about it. For them, it was not so much 'breaking news' as lifting the embargo on news the minister's media minders had already given them a heads-up on. It turned out to be abolishing all levels of NCEA - and new national qualifications for secondary school students to be phased in over the next five years. On Sunday, 24 hours before the big reveal, TVNZ's Q+A kicked off with Crimson Education founder Jamie Beaton calling for change in national education culture. "NCEA basically is not a rigourous curriculum. Students graduating often are two years behind in core subjects like maths and science, so there's a massive gap for most New Zealanders," said Beaton, the holder of ten degrees by the age of 30, viewers were told. "There's a real movement against testing and exams, which I think is quite poisonous. And that actually puts us further and further behind, you know, leading education systems like Singapore or Korea or the kind of elite schools in California." But whether underachievers were being held back by NCEA rather than high-achievers was not discussed so much. While some in the media had not expected the complete - albeit staggered - scrapping of NCEA, the New Zealand Herald's political reporter Jamie Ensor wasn't one of them. "It is in line with the government's general position on education," he wrote on Monday . "As far as public opinion goes, it is likely to be popular if parents' confusion with the current system is anything to go by. According to the Education Review Office, about half of parents don't understand it." The same seemed true of most broadcasters and commentators airing their reckons after the announcement. RNZ education correspondent John Gerritsen pointed out on Morning Report that the returning A-E grades were not really a big change. "If you think about it - Achieved, Merit, Excellence - well that's C, B and A. A change in the nomenclature, but that's maybe a little bit easier for parents and so forth to understand." MR's Ingrid Hipkiss admitted she was one of them. She upbraided herself for reverting to what she called "old person-speak," referring to 'the fifth form' and 'School Cert'. But she wasn't the only one that day. For its youth-focussed Now You Know video explainer, The Spinoff deployed an 'old man' to explain - with tongue-in-cheek - that A means good and E is bad. There was plenty more old-mansplaining about NCEA in the media this week. "Along with the mad open classrooms, isn't it fascinating how forward the old days appear to be," ZB's Hosking said on his morning show. "You're going back to the 1980s (when) you couldn't go ahead to the next year until you passed whatever it was you were going for. I took up music in the fifth form because I failed tech drawing in the fourth form," he said. The ability to get some credit, or switch courses before an end-of-year exam failure is a feature of NCEA that might have helped him back in his school days. Later that day, ZB's veteran political correspondent Barry Soper was also more comfortable with what he remembered. "This is going back to what it was in the olden days when I was at school. At least you've got a good yardstick for employers to look at," he told ZB listeners. A yardstick would be a 91.4 cm stick today, but Soper knew in his own mind what students of today need. "We can't have this namby-pamby standard in education where we don't like winners and losers," he told ZB listeners. Across the media there was consensus in commentary that NCEA had not achieved - and actually diffused educational achievement in 20 years since its introduction. "How does this work? It seems to be so broad and so vast and you get bits for this and bits for that. Just give them a foundation to move forward," said Sarah Henry, Are Media editorial director said on the Herald Now show on Monday. She said she had been to parents' meetings and read NCEA literature but was still confused by it. That was music to the ears of panel guest Tim Wilson, the former TVNZ journalist now at the Maxim Institute think tank which has long campaigned for change. "I need to see the education system smarten up. I need to see a reduction in the size of the curriculum and core subjects and standardised tests so I know that our boys are doing well and can continue to do well," the father-of-four said. The Herald Now panel that day all agreed too many students were gaming the system in too many courses for them to count credits. "One I saw the other day was that you must have knowledge of the inner workings of an espresso machine," laughed host Ryan Bridge. But making coffee - and understanding coffee machines - can only generate a few NCEA credits. And, arguably they are more useful skills today than the woodwork and tech drawing that seemed to make middle-aged radio hosts misty-eyed for the clarity of the assessment system of their school days. Scepticism, concern and confusion about NCEA credits and the standards is real. Likewise, concerns about under-educated students turning up in work and university in recent years. Opposition politicians, teachers representatives, school principals and parents all voiced concerns in the media coverage this week. "Mike Hosking loves it. Apparently parents and principals love it. Erica Stanford certainly loves it," Mike Hosking's producer Glenn Hart said on his daily highlights podcast ZBeen last Wednesday]. "I just feel like there's one group of people we haven't talked to about what they want. Oh yeah - the kids, the students. But who cares? Who cares what they think?" he said. A good point well made. TVNZ's 1News did vox pop some school students in their reports. On Tuesday RNZ asked tertiary undergraduates about it. And on Monday, The NZ Herald featured Brynn Pierce, a Year 12 student at Newlands College recently in the news as a Youth Parliament MP. He said NCEA was "overly confusing" for him in his first year, and "vague in terms of course endorsement" afterwards. Meanwhile on ZB's drive show, host Heather du Plessis-Allan eagerly endorsed the Minister of Education Erica Stanford. "She's smashing it out of the park" she said approvingly. But the Otago Daily Times was not so sure this week. Its editorial on Thursday said there was too little detail about exactly what will replace NCEA to give the minister an 'A' for it just yet. The Herald's Audrey Young this week credited Stanford with "a momentous change with relatively little dissent." Partly that was due to her own confidence and drive - and ability to identify problems, find solutions and push them through, she said. But Young also said the widespread lack of confidence in the current system - shared by many of the media pundits - was the other main factor. And though you wouldn't know it from much of the coverage this week - consigning NCEA to the dustbin of educational history isn't a done deal just yet either. The proposals are in a discussion document PDF open for consultation during the next six weeks. In the media discussion so far, any drawbacks have not had much attention. But more students are likely to come out of education with less or even nothing to show for it under the proposed new system. After the NCEA announcement coverage peaked, RNZ's John Gerritsen pointed to new stats that show school leavers with no qualifications are at the highest level in a decade. 16 percent of last year's leavers - and 28 percent of Māori students - left school with no qualification last year. Every teacher RNZ spoke to also warned the timeline for introducing a new curriculum next year, followed by the new qualification from 2028 through to 2030, was tight and would require a lot of support. While most school principals backed the change when the media asked for their views, AUT senior lecturer in education Stuart Deerness warned: "The loudest voices calling for educational change don't always represent what all students need." "The story of NCEA shows how powerful the actions of elite institutions can be, even when they don't intend to cause system-wide change," he wrote for The Conversation . "Since NCEA was introduced between 2002 and 2004, these prominent schools have increasingly opted for alternative assessment systems. This effectively undermined trust in the official assessment system," Deerness said. While the flexibility of NCEA has been portrayed as a weakness by many people this week, it has been a benefit for some students, Annabelle Lee-Mather said on The Spinoff's politics podcast Gone By Lunchtime . "(NCEA) gives students' families time to course-correct. You can see from early in the year how they're tracking, where they need to focus and where they can build up their credits - instead of your kids working all year at school and then flunking out at the end and you don't have time to fix it," she said. Sign up for Ngā Pitopito Kōrero, a daily newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.
RNZ News
2 hours ago
- RNZ News
NCEA not achieved, Tariff ‘surprise,' magazines on the block
Mediawatch looks at how the media graded NCEA as 'not achieved' after the government proposed dumping it this week. And the headlines said Trump's 15 per cent tariff was 'a surprise.' But was it? Some of our most popular magazines are up for sale across the Tasman - again. Who's buying? Podcast (MP3) Oggcast (Vorbis)
