Rodney Hide "proactively" releases his local government ideas....

Last week I was provided a copy of a confidential cabinet "minute of decision", relating to the work of the Cabinet Economic Growth and Infrastructure Committee (CEG&IC) for the period ended 17th April 2009. Each page of it is emblazoned with the words: "Proactively Released by the Minister of Local Government"....

You can get your copy by emailing me.
I can forward you the whole thing - 15 pages or so.
The key decision that is minuted in the document says this:

"...The CEG&IC noted that to implement the government's priorities outlined in the Speech from the Throne in local government, work will be undertaken on:
1) Auckland governanance;
2) A clearer process to determine the allocation of functions and costs between central and local government;
3) Local authority decision-making, transparency and accountability..."

The heart of the cabinet paper, which appears to have been written by Department of Internal Affairs officials while being signed by Rodney Hide, deals with the third of these work streams. It seeks agreement from Cabinet for a review of the Local Government Act 2002 to improve the transparency, accountability and fiscal management of local government. I have quoted key extracts of the report that follows - with my take on what these extracts appear to mean.....

"....In the speech from the Throne, the Government outlined three priority areas for its work:
* growing the economy;
* a reduction in government bureaucracy and a focus on investing in frontline services;
* reducing regulatory and compliance demands that get in the way of productivity growth.
These priorities are underpinned by a belief in individual freedom and a belief in the capacity and right of individuals to shape and improve their own lives. Work in the local government portfolio needs to align with these priorities..."

My take: Emphasis on economic growth and productivity. No mention of four wellbeings. Typical policy statement advocating for free market approach.

"I propose to .... reduce bureaucracy and focus on frontline service .... applying a similar approach to local government would encourage a focus on core activities ... roading, footpaths, and public transport; water supply, sewage treatment, stormwater and flood protection; refuse collection and regulation of nuisances...."

My take: Back to basics. No mention of community development, environmental education, community services, cultural activities, arts .... This approach is a throwback to the sort of local government that existed in Britain after the Industrial Revolution. It is unsophisticated, and runs counter to the spirit and purpose of the Local Government Act 2002, which is a modern piece of legislation typical of local government legislation in modern European democracies.

"...With concerns I have about growth in rates and council funding decisions, I have received numerous complaints about excessive rates rises. The Public Finance Act 1989 encourages central government to take a top down approach to budgeting, by first establishing limits on expenditure and then setting priorities... I therefore consider that work should be guided by the following principles: local government should operate within a defined fiscal envelope; councils should focus on core activities..."

My take: Fiscal envelope is code language for rate capping. This is a famous Thatcherite policy of restructuring Council activities, by legislating to restrict their independent ability to raise and set rates. While rate cuts will have some public appeal, rates cuts come at a community cost.

"...Councils can be pressured to expand their services by providing services that benefit a limited number of people but for whaich the whole community is required to pay. This raise equity issues as some beneficiaries of the service 'free ride' on other ratepayers. This leads to the principle that costs should be distributed as closely as possible to benefits received..."

My take: This is code language for user pays. Another famous Thatcherite policy. The services commonly cited are: libraries and swimming pools. But many others also fit: sports fields, community buildings, bowling clubs, help the aged meals on wheels... Hide appears to want user pays for these services. The context for this Hide thought has nothing to do with the concept of developer levies, where, for example, developers are required to pay for 'benefits received'.....

"...More transparent and accountable local government will provide ratepayers and citizens better means to control council costs and activities... there are a number of weaknesses in the present system that limited the ability of ratepayers and citizens to exercise that control:
* local authority elections rarely focus on spending issues. Reasons for this include the rarity of party organisation and that most candidates stand on the basis of their personal attributes to serve the community;
* media scrutiny of local government is weak...."

My take: This where we see Rodney's true colours. He does not respect councillors who 'stand on the basis of their personal attributes to serve the community'. He wants political parties to stand for local government. My experience has been that voters do not want party politics in local government. They don't want tickets. They vote against tickets given the opportunity. They want good quality independent candidates who stand on issues, including rates and spending...

"...More proactive tools for engaging ratepayers and citizens to ensure they can guide or determine council's decisions should be explored. In particular, I wish to consider circumstances in which polls and referenda could be required for certain decisions..."

My take: First thought - how about looking in the mirror Rodney, and applying this thought to your own actions? The present situation requires councils to consult heavily with ratepayers before making significant decisions. How much money does Rodney want Councils to spend on consultation?

So. This is Rodney's agenda. I have been asking for it - through this blog. And now we have it.

The cabinet report notes that: 'a bid has been made to include a Local Government Bill in the 2009 legislation programme' and that: 'to implement changes before the 2010 local authority elections would require a tight timetable....' and that: 'no public discussion document is proposed on these proposals as public views are well known...'

Dramatic changes to the Local Government Act 2002 are in the wind. They are draconian and backward in my view. But at least something is on the table. You do wonder why this stuff is out now, after the proposed changes to Auckland Governance. Talk about putting the cart before the horse. Very poor policy process. Opportunist and knee-jerk...