How should the Wellington region be governed?
This month Wellington City Council will consider the future of local government in the region. We asked Wellington Deputy Mayor Ian McKinnon to background the debate.
GOVERNING bodies have a major responsibility in planning for future challenges. In the past eighteen months the profile of local government in New Zealand has changed markedly. Auckland has 1.4million people and huge economic and political weight, Christchurch has 367,000 and major requirements after the earthquake. Obviously their needs are different. What is the most appropriate way to govern the Wellington region?
The Wellington Region has a population of 487000 (Wellington City, 200000 and about 54% of the Region’s GDP), with eight territorial authorities (Wellington; two in the Hutt Valley; Porirua; Kapiti; three in the Wairarapa) – that’s eight mayors and chief executives plus their teams of councillors and employees. There is also a Greater Wellington Regional Council with a similar make-up of personnel.
Will the Wellington Region, and Wellington City, be able to compete with its present governance structure? - that’s the question which must be addressed to ensure that secure strategic position, if not for ourselves then for the generations which follow.
In any such amalgamation will the ‘local’ in local government be preserved, for local government is about local issues. Auckland has a two tier structure but some say the second level (the focus on community issues) hasn’t enough authority v the first level. Presumably any change in the Wellington region doesn’t have to be a duplication of Auckland though.
Would amalgamation give savings? It certainly should if there is a reduction from the current nine governing authorities. Such operations as transport, water, energy sources, waste, etc don’t necessarily recognise political boundaries so there should be economies here? Financial modelling would give the answer.
Equally importantly, would Wellington City be in a better position to protect and enhance its social, economic and environmental position if it is part of a larger authority? Would this give greater influence over key decisions such as central government investment? Alternatively, could such advantages be achieved anyway through collaboration and shared services within the region, while at the same time better retaining the ‘local’; OR are the challenges such that the city’s future would be more certain within a larger authority, while also giving the advantages of full coordination of services and activities, including fairness in the area of regional funding?
Full consideration must be given to this issue, which the Wellington council is deliberating on this month, not just amongst the politicians, but also in the wider community, particularly in Wellington City which is the largest authority by whatever measure. Any decision on what is best for the region should come from within rather than be imposed. A degree of speculation about future NZ is inevitable.
Are there risks here? There are always risks but sometimes the greater risk can be doing nothing.
GOVERNING bodies have a major responsibility in planning for future challenges. In the past eighteen months the profile of local government in New Zealand has changed markedly. Auckland has 1.4million people and huge economic and political weight, Christchurch has 367,000 and major requirements after the earthquake. Obviously their needs are different. What is the most appropriate way to govern the Wellington region?
The Wellington Region has a population of 487000 (Wellington City, 200000 and about 54% of the Region’s GDP), with eight territorial authorities (Wellington; two in the Hutt Valley; Porirua; Kapiti; three in the Wairarapa) – that’s eight mayors and chief executives plus their teams of councillors and employees. There is also a Greater Wellington Regional Council with a similar make-up of personnel.
Will the Wellington Region, and Wellington City, be able to compete with its present governance structure? - that’s the question which must be addressed to ensure that secure strategic position, if not for ourselves then for the generations which follow.
In any such amalgamation will the ‘local’ in local government be preserved, for local government is about local issues. Auckland has a two tier structure but some say the second level (the focus on community issues) hasn’t enough authority v the first level. Presumably any change in the Wellington region doesn’t have to be a duplication of Auckland though.
Would amalgamation give savings? It certainly should if there is a reduction from the current nine governing authorities. Such operations as transport, water, energy sources, waste, etc don’t necessarily recognise political boundaries so there should be economies here? Financial modelling would give the answer.
Equally importantly, would Wellington City be in a better position to protect and enhance its social, economic and environmental position if it is part of a larger authority? Would this give greater influence over key decisions such as central government investment? Alternatively, could such advantages be achieved anyway through collaboration and shared services within the region, while at the same time better retaining the ‘local’; OR are the challenges such that the city’s future would be more certain within a larger authority, while also giving the advantages of full coordination of services and activities, including fairness in the area of regional funding?
Full consideration must be given to this issue, which the Wellington council is deliberating on this month, not just amongst the politicians, but also in the wider community, particularly in Wellington City which is the largest authority by whatever measure. Any decision on what is best for the region should come from within rather than be imposed. A degree of speculation about future NZ is inevitable.
Are there risks here? There are always risks but sometimes the greater risk can be doing nothing.
Have Your Say
0 Comments
No comments.