
Councils under pressure as government pushes ‘back to basics' agenda
Ministers and mayors air out their differences
The relationship between central and local government was extra prickly this week, with a fresh suite of reforms tabled in Wellington and ministers getting a somewhat frosty reception in Christchurch at the Local Government New Zealand conference. The Local Government (System Improvements) Amendment Bill, which passed its first reading last night , will remove councils' legal responsibility to consider the 'four wellbeings' – social, cultural, environmental and economic – when making decisions. Instead, councils will be legally obliged to prioritise so-called 'core services' like water, roads and rubbish.
Opening the conference, the prime minister pitched the changes as a return to basics, saying ratepayers wanted councils to '[prioritise] pipes over vanity projects'. But among the mayors gathered in Christchurch, frustration was palpable at the expectation that they somehow, as Newsroom's David Wiliams put it, 'achieve the triumvirate: upgrading infrastructure, holding down rates, and keeping debt in check'. Clutha mayor Bryan Cadogan said ministers refuse to admit they're demanding the impossible. 'The Government knows it, we know it, but we just keep on getting this.'
Councils fed up with policy whiplash
That frustration is compounded by the sense that councils are forever adapting to the whims of central government. The four wellbeings, for instance, have now been added and removed from the Local Government Act four times since 2002 – inserted twice by Labour governments, stripped out by National. 'Every time we have an election, there's a flip-flop,' said LGNZ president Sam Broughton. As Shanti Mathias reports this morning in The Spinoff, he and others also pushed back at the government's suggestion that councils are blowing money on 'nice-to-haves' like bike lanes and 'fancy toilets'. In his own district of Selwyn, Broughton said, 80% of spending goes to key infrastructure like pipes and roads, with the rest funding services that communities still see as essential.
Coalition partners not convinced on rate caps
One of the other changes introduced in the new bill is benchmarking – mandatory, comparative performance reporting on council spending, rates, debt and outcomes. While this information is already publicly available, the law will now require councils to collate it into reports. Deputy PM David Seymour is a fan: he told the Christchurch conference that 'some healthy competition between councils is long overdue'. He also cheered the removal of the wellbeing requirements, which he dubbed the Puppy Dogs and Ice Cream Bill when they were proposed by Labour, for the second time, in 2017.
However Seymour later expressed reservations about local government minister Simon Watts' proposed cap on rates increases. 'Don't cap your income until you've got your spending under control,' he warned. NZ First leader Winston Peters was even blunter, RNZ's Lillian Hanly reports. 'Doctor, heal thyself,' Peters opined, arguing that central government's own spending record left it in no position to preach to others about fiscal restraint.
Tikanga or 'red tape'?
Seymour's speech also ignited controversy with his attack on what he called 'ceremonial chanting' in the consenting process – a reference to clauses in resource consents requiring karakia or other tikanga Māori. As Māni Dunlop reports in Te Ao Māori News, the line was in his prepared remarks but not in the speech he delivered at the conference. However Seymour doubled down later that day, claiming that developers were backed into a corner over karakia, believing they had to allow their use to avoid controversy. The comments brought Seymour his second rebuke of the week from Peters: 'Why am I responding to what David Seymour doesn't know? Excuse me,' said the NZ First leader, adding that he had spent much of his career defending the 'right protocol'. Karakia, he said, are 'appropriate when used correctly'.
Writing in The Spinoff, Liam Rātana notes that such clauses are typically inserted by mutual agreement to build respectful relationships with mana whenua, and argues that Seymour's complaints are based on misunderstandings of both tikanga and how consent conditions actually work. 'While highlighting these clauses as unnecessary 'red tape' and 'roadblocks', Seymour says his changes will put 'power back with communities',' Liam writes. 'I wonder which communities he's talking about?'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

RNZ News
a day ago
- RNZ News
Departing councillor: ‘Social media abuse has got out of hand'
Whanganui district councillor Jenny Duncan is calling time on her 12 years' service. Photo: RNZ / Leigh-Marama McLachlan Long-serving local councillor Jenny Duncan is calling it quits, after four terms on the Whanganui District Council. Duncan, who served six of her 12 years as deputy mayor, has announced she will not stand for a fifth term in October's local body elections. "It's now time to hand over the reins," she said. "When the negativity outweighs the reward, it's time to go." Duncan said each term had its own challenges, highs and lows, and rewards, but the role had become more complex over time and took up "way more hours than intended, which is fine if you still enjoy it". She lashed out at the government and "keyboard warriors". "Costly impositions and criticism from government and the contempt they direct at us is not deserved by Whanganui," Duncan said. "Social media abuse has got out of hand in the past five or so years. "Keyboard warriors who draw swords before engaging sound thought or seeking facts is truly disappointing. All you're doing is showing your own ignorance and bias." The "dreadful" period during the pandemic, when government-mandated restrictions were in place, had emphasised for her how important it was to treat each other well, all the time. "I love my community, respect my colleagues and can attest to the huge amount of work that goes into our decisions. "We're often at variance, but with robust discussion and challenge, better decisions are made. "If you don't understand the decisions, maybe you didn't read the nine reports and attend the seven workshops that we did." Jenny Duncan (far left), taking part in a Whanganui District Council meeting. Photo: Local Democracy Reporting/ Tuakana Te Tana Duncan is one of several long-serving Whanganui councillors who have announced they will not seek re-election. Deputy Mayor Helen Craig and Charlie Anderson are also standing aside, after 12 years in the council chambers. Duncan said she was pleased to end her service on a high note. "The average 2.2 percent rate increase [for 2025/2026] is a testament to how hard staff and councillors have worked over the past few years to drive up efficiency and reduce cost. "We've done it sustainably. You don't get to 2.2 percent without an outstanding chief executive and staff, and a mayor and councillors working hard to make it possible." Some high points of her council career included how it handled the 2015 flood, port redevelopment, and the North Mole and Rangiora Street projects. Reinstating the 'h' in Whanganui and stopping the food scraps collection were also highlights. She was proud that councillors had consistently refused catered lunches, new furniture and a heat-control system in the chamber. "It's either too hot or too cold. We really are here for our community and not the benefits." Duncan said she would have liked to see further action on housing before stepping aside and she put in a plug for Māori wards. "I'm sorry I'll miss the new Māori ward councillors. Please vote 'yes' to retaining them in the coming referendum. "You'll not regret it." Duncan said she would take some time out and a long trip to Scotland, after her council work. "Then we'll see what pops up. Something always does." LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air.


Newsroom
a day ago
- Newsroom
Why Auckland's 2027 America's Cup bid never stood a chance
Auckland's unsuccessful five-month bid to secure the hosting rights for the 2027 America's Cup appears to have been doomed almost before negotiations started with the Government. Documents released to Newsroom show that Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown's insistence that the Government allow his council to bring in a hotel bed levy as a funding source, was an early and significant hurdle. The Government had already refused the bed levy request, and Auckland's failure to have any other way of co-funding the event was highlighted repeatedly in advice to Cabinet ministers from the Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE). The city's hopes to stage the 38th cup regatta were extinguished on April 1, when Auckland Council's culture and economic agency announced the Government had declined to co-fund it. Following the failure to strike a deal with Auckland and the Government for 2027, the cup defender sold the hosting rights to the Italian port city of Naples. Team New Zealand had revived hopes of a 2027 home defence in October 2024, soon after winning the cup for a third consecutive time in Barcelona. Documents sought by Newsroom from the council agency Tataki Auckland Unlimited, and MBIE, show a five-month negotiation that began with enthusiasm, but that soon ran into difficulty. Four months into that process, Grant Dalton, the chief executive of Team New Zealand, expressed frustration that no one from the Government had been in touch with him. It was 10 days after Team New Zealand's unprecedented third consecutive cup win, that Auckland officials began moves to secure the 38th running of an event the city had last hosted in 2021. Barcelona hosted the 37th cup, after the Labour-led government and Auckland Council, which backed the 2021 Auckland regatta, made an offer to Team New Zealand that fell short of the defender's needs and was rejected. Unusually, Dalton began talking about what a post-Barcelona future might look like, even before the team had secured the Auld Mug in late 2024. At first, Auckland didn't seem to be a part of it. 'Whether New Zealand could host the (next) Cup would be for politicians to decide and make a bid, rather than the team actively seeking a deal,' he told Stuff in a September interview. But on October 27 more than a week after victory, Dalton told this writer, in Barcelona, that confidential talks were underway to explore a joint public-private sector hosting bid in Auckland. 'We are completely genuine in terms of – if we can get this (event) home, we will,' he said. Two days later, inside Auckland Council's culture and economy agency, that work began under a code name. 'We will refer to it from now on as the 'Special Project' or SPWG, rather than the America's Cup,' wrote Tataki's head of major events Michelle Hooper to a chosen group of 10 agency staff on October 29. 'There is stiff competition from other cities to host this event, so we need to move swiftly and with focus to pull together a winning bid to present to Team New Zealand,' Hooper wrote. Tataki Auckland Unlimited (TAU) met in person with Dalton and his chief operating officer Kevin Shoebridge a month later. Notes prepared by TAU have all dollar references redacted, but noted 'there is potential private sector funding interest from a consortium of wealthy benefactors to the tune of (blacked out).' 'This sum could be doubled with the right structure, support and campaign, based on discussions with the representative of this group,' said TAU. Newsroom understands the hope was that private backers could provide as much as half of the media-reported hosting sum of $150 million. Barcelona's late and successful hosting bid for the 2024 cup was made possible only when wealthy individuals in just 15 days agreed to underwrite $44.8 million of revenue, kickstarting the formal bid. TAU provided 'high-level' information to MBIE in November and more detail in December, outlining the case for hosting, and some of the key elements in a bid. All the infrastructure was already in place in Auckland, said the local officials, following the investment made for the 2021 Cup, creating space for bases and public viewing. A total of $348.4m of ratepayer and taxpayer money went into permanent infrastructure on Auckland's waterfront, and event-running costs. A TAU briefing prepared for Cabinet ministers in December 2024 doesn't reveal the hosting fee sought by Team New Zealand, but Newsroom understands it was around $40m. An initial cost-benefit analysis commissioned by TAU put the net benefit at up to $1.19 for Auckland, for each dollar invested, and up to $1.15 at a national level. The briefing also outlines what would soon appear to become a significant hurdle for MBIE and the Government. 'The mayor is clear that Auckland's financial contribution is dependent on the introduction of a visitor levy,' said TAU. Brown appeared to be using the cup hosting as a lever to get government approval for a nightly bed levy – something the government had already ruled out. Under Brown, Auckland Council significantly reduced ratepayer funding for major events, in the expectation the government would agree. Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown is adamant the Government allow his council to bring in a hotel bed levy as a funding source. Photo montage:Before TAU's first detailed pitch went before Cabinet ministers, MBIE's Kylie Hawker-Green wrote back to the Auckland officials to ensure she would be accurately conveying the city's stance on its funding contribution. 'I will be stating that Auckland's cash contribution is contingent on the establishment of an accommodation levy of some form being established prior to the event delivery window,' she put to TAU. She intended to tell ministers that: 'If no accommodation levy is established, Auckland Council will not be in a position to contribute a direct cash contribution to AC38.' Two days later, Hawker-Green presented a 23-page briefing to the Major Events Ministers Group, made up of eight ministers, Sport and Recreation's Chris Bishop, Melissa Lee for Economic Development, Finance Minister Nicola Willis, Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters, Minister for Auckland Simeon Brown, Paul Goldsmith for Arts, Culture and Heritage, Trade Minister Todd McClay, and Tourism and Hospitality's Matt Doocey. Hawker-Green outlined Auckland's dependence on a future bed levy, under a section entitled. 'Funding sources are highly speculative'. To that same meeting, TAU argued benefits that would flow into the marine and technology sectors concluding the event would 'provide Auckland and New Zealand with an unparalleled opportunity to showcase its marine and technology prowess'. 'By hosting the event, Auckland cements its position as a world-class destination for innovation, sport sustainable technologies and cultural celebration.' A potential event programme submitted to MBIE by TAU in November 2024, outlined cup events in Auckland spanning a year, from a women's and a men's regatta in February 2026, through to the challenger series and the cup itself from October 2026 to almost March 2027. The December ministerial briefing paper included MBIE's 'preliminary views' such as this fleeting reference to the upsides of hosting. 'Crown investment in an event of this significance and scale presents a strong signal of New Zealand's ability and willingness to host mega events and would catalyse direct economic activity for Auckland.' A subsequent MBIE paper from February 12, 2025, included an ominous line about that multi-minister briefing. 'Pre-Christmas engagement on the opportunity drew mixed views from the MEMG (Major Events Ministers Group). MBIE's advice to ministers in a range of papers provided to Newsroom, highlights what it saw as risks, and downsides for the Government. Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown's insistence that the city be allowed to introduce a nightly bed levy was repeatedly cited as a hurdle. 'Local government investment remains unconfirmed,' was one sub-heading on a topic MBIE officials would underline repeatedly. The other cash problem was that the undisclosed amount being sought from the Government's coffers outstripped what was available in its Major Events budget, where some money was already ring-fenced for unnamed possible events. 'The Crown would need to establish a new appropriation to provide investment in the AC38,' wrote officials in a March 4 briefing. In short, the Government had no earmarked funds available, nor had Auckland Council. On February 28, TAU lodged a formal application for Major Events funding with MBIE. Along with the formal document, the Auckland agency forwarded an email it had received from a clearly frustrated Grant Dalton. 'To date, in the four months since Emirates Team New Zealand won the America's Cup, I/we have not had any direct contact or indication at all from central government level (PM, ministers or even MBIE) if they are even interested in the America's Cup being hosted in Auckland,' Dalton wrote. 'It is of paramount importance and necessity to have a firm indication from the Government on the extent of their desire to host AC38 before this can progress any further with meaningful direction.' 'In response' noted an MBIE ministerial update on March 4, 'the Minister for Sport and Recreation (by then, Mark Mitchell) contacted Mr Dalton directly to discuss the Crown's consideration of the investment opportunity.' Dalton had wanted faster progress, and had told TAU in late 2024 that if a business case for local hosting was submitted by the end of that year, he would halt negotiations with other potential venues, until the bid process concluded. Seemingly unaware of the skeptical tone in MBIE's briefings, TAU was pressing on. On March 25 it asked the ministry to agree to a timeline in which the Government's decision on funding would be made by April 18. But by the time that email from TAU's Michelle Hooper landed in MBIE's inbox, the hosting bid was dead. A week earlier, in the MBIE briefing to the Minister of Finance, and Economic Growth, Nicola Willis, the ministry said: 'Noting ETNZ's upcoming end of April 2025 deadline, the significant risk around Auckland not having identified a funding source, and the opportunity cost of an investment of this quantum in the present economic climate, we present two options for you to consider'. Willis chose the second: 'instruct officials to cease work on the proposition now, noting risks, and advise TAU accordingly.' On February 21, four days before Hooper's last nudge to MBIE, Willis' private secretary emailed the ministry: 'The minister has signed the paper (attached), agreeing to cease work and notify TAU.' The final six-page paper from the ministry to Willis – which presumably outlines the final view on the merits of funding a cup hosting – has been withheld from Newsroom, by MBIE. Over the following week, much of the material released by MBIE to Newsroom, is about the preparation of a communications plan around the decision being announced. On March 27, MBIE's chief executive Carolyn Tremain broke the news to TAU's chief executive Nick Hill in a phone call, who then told Dalton. The formal letter from the Government came the following day. 'We acknowledge that events like the America's Cup can deliver a range of significant benefits,' wrote Tremain. 'However, Auckland Council's contribution was based on the introduction of a new 'accommodation levy' or similar funding mechanism, which is not a priority for this Government,' she wrote. 'Additionally, the investment risk would require government to identify and ring-fence new money at the expense of other funding priorities such as health and education.' In a statement publicly ending the hosting hopes, TAU's Hill wrote: 'This situation again illustrates the need for a long-term sustainable funding model in New Zealand to support major events.' A month later, further underlining Auckland's shrunken funding for major events, Hill in a memo to local politicians, informed them that an advanced bid to host the Gay Games had been strapped, and a lean funding pipeline also put at risk Lions rugby tours in 2027 and 2029, and an ICC Tour cricket World Cup in 2028. Team New Zealand continues to negotiate with challengers, to agree a protocol – a set of event and design rules – for the Naples cup regatta in 2027.


NZ Herald
2 days ago
- NZ Herald
Why a new slave labour commissioner won't change anything
Of course, this comes hard on the heels of a select subset of our politicians jumping up and down about Israel's mistreatment of people in Gaza and Russia's attacks on Ukraine. I am yet to see either Israel's or Russia's reaction to our protests. Probably because they didn't take notice. Perhaps we could introduce a tariff on products imported from those economies who don't abide by our anti-slavery policies? Of course, no one would take notice of that either. The reason the US can introduce tariffs is because the world cares about what they think. They're the world's biggest customer and they have the biggest defence force. But us? Get real. In a radio interview on Newstalk ZB this week, Belich suggested that if appointed, the new commissioner will not focus his or her efforts on small business. Only those with revenues of over $50 million per annum will be targeted. Excuse me? Firstly, my hazy recollection of New Zealand's issues with slavery and labour exploitation suggests that the problems have been detected in small businesses. One case that I recall involved workers doing domestic and orcharding work. Another higher-profile case involved an Auckland restaurant and migrant workers from India. Yet another saw an investigation into a bowling alley. Let's be clear, these are small businesses with revenues substantially less than $50 million. Secondly, there are plenty of privately owned businesses with perfectly good recruitment and employment records, with no historical examples or even suspicions of anything resembling slavery or labour exploitation, and with turnovers of $50 million or more. And here is a suggestion that, not content with the time wasted in those businesses responding to anti-money laundering requirements, health and safety stupidity, environmental nonsense and climate reporting, we are now going to ask them to bow to the needs of a slavery commissioner! During the radio interview, Belich admitted that she had no idea of how big a problem slavery is in New Zealand. Elsewhere, I noticed that an accompanying statement said the proposed policy was a response to a World Vision initiative urging us to do something. And so the truth comes out. The proposal to appoint an anti-slavery commissioner is yet another sop to an overseas organisation that wants to tell us how to live our lives. Labour's anti-slavery bill misses the mark. writes Bruce Cotterill. Photo / 123rf Deep down, New Zealanders are good people. We don't like the thought of labour exploitation any more than other decent human beings. But we can stand on our principles all day long. It doesn't mean those in lofty positions of power elsewhere will take any notice. But let's not underestimate the cost of taking our arguments to the world. The last time we appointed a commissioner, it was to oversee the cost of groceries. From the moment he was appointed, this writer has been highly sceptical of any benefit at all being delivered to the average New Zealand household as a result. But there he is, sitting in an office within MBIE with a 30-strong staff costing us millions. And this one would be no different. Then there is the fact that we have a very good police force. Is it not their job to sniff out criminal behaviour, including anything to do with labour exploitation or slavery? New Zealand currently criminalises slavery and trafficking under existing legislation. That legislation should be enough for the police to act where necessary. If it's not, let's upgrade the legislation instead of creating another government office. There is something sadly lacking in New Zealand political circles at present. It's called common sense. We seem to be damn keen to jump on board any bandwagon, cause, or worse, gravy train, that pops up without any logical thought about our priorities, potential outcomes, or financial cost. I'd like to suggest that our politicians would be better to focus on the things that can make a difference to our troubled little economy. New Zealand has a whole lot of challenges that I'd like to see our elected representatives focusing on. At the top of that list is this. Stop wasting money. At all levels of government, including local government, we continue to press the case to spend more money. The recent rates increases tell us that Auckland's mayor is one of the few who focuses heavily on costs. And yet it should be the job of every politician to work out what our priorities are, and then tell us how they can do more with less. But no, projects run over time and budgets are blown. Annual forecasts allow for increasingly eyewatering sums of money for what should be relatively simple and straightforward services. When you're broke, you have to focus on the things that really matter. That's where the attention goes. And that's where the funding goes. In government terms, we're not really broke, but we're not exactly flush either. The Greens will tell us that we can borrow more money and still have less debt than other nations. But they're overlooking the fact that our low productivity environment makes borrowing a lot easier than paying it back. And our interest bill is already our fourth biggest cost. We'd be foolish to allow it to go any higher unless that debt supported increased income, greater productivity or both. It's no secret that our problems are plenty. The usual suspects, Health and Education, seem well-funded but poorly resourced. What does that mean? It means there's plenty of money allocated, but not enough of it lands at the coalface. Elsewhere, our infrastructure deficit is massive and we need different thinking to work out what to do about the inadequacies of our power, water and transport infrastructure in particular. Then there are our people who can't look after themselves and those who can't cope in today's society. Not looking after those people properly leads to downstream effects, including increasing burdens from health and crime. Right now, New Zealand is not doing well enough on any of these measures. If we want to aspire to become a country that's respected and listened to internationally, we would do well to remember the following. The country that can do most to help those less advantaged, including victims of war, famine and yes, even slavery, are those countries with strong economies. Before we start telling the rest of the world how to behave, we need to build an economy that can afford to offer help, rather than just cheaply throwing words around telling others how to live their lives. As it turns out, we do have room for a new commissioner. I'd like to think we could appoint a commissioner who would make a real and substantive difference to New Zealand. Firstly a difference to the outcomes for our people but also a difference to our international standing. Fixing this one would give us greater license to tell others how to behave. Currently, that license is weakened because of our own inadequacy. You could call that person the Commissioner for our Greatest Embarrassment. But in reality, they would be a Commissioner for Child Safety. In other words, something or someone that provides a massive focus on preventing us from killing our kids. Can you believe that we have a Ministry for Children, a Social Wellbeing Agency, and ministerial portfolios for Child Poverty, and for the Prevention of Family Violence? I wonder what all that costs. And yet here we are, ranking 35th in the OECD for the wellbeing of our children. In case we've forgotten, on average, one child dies every five weeks in New Zealand at the hands of someone responsible for their care. Of the 127 children murdered between 2007 and 2020, three-quarters were under the age of 5. Let that sink in for a moment. Then tell me that the slave trade in China, Nigeria or India is more important. I'd like to think we have bigger priorities than the opposition's latest bill. Our parents used to say, worry about your own backyard first. That sounds like great advice.