We need a leader who can put forth a bold vision for Auckland and challenge themselves to realise it, writes Andrew Barnes. Photo / Supplied
OPINION
The politician Ernest Benn described politics as "The art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedies".
It is not clear to me whether this is a consequence of the complexity of the political world or whether the politicians who inhabit it are themselves incapable of making the correct decisions.
There are global cities with global brands – Milan is famed for fashion and textiles, San Francisco for tech – and Auckland does not have this yet.
It is up to you, the reader, to decide which of the current crop of declared mayoral candidates meets these criteria and is the kind of leader who can help create the local reality and international reputation Auckland deserves; who can put forth a bold vision and challenge themselves to realise it; who is capable of finally delivering on the promise of the Supercity.
With Auckland once again bracing itself for the 'excitement' of a mayoral race, I'm conscious that it is critical that candidates for this important role have the appropriate skill sets and experience to at least have a chance to diagnose the issues correctly and to apply the right remedies.
Any organisation needs a clearly articulated vision. In the first instance, then, I would expect a mayoral candidate to be able to articulate clearly to the voters of Auckland what they stand for and what they intend to deliver in their turn.
This should not be something that purely looks at the quantum of increase in council rates but should be broader and more ambitious than that, but nevertheless including definable, demonstrable goals for the most important city in New Zealand.
Put simply, what is it that you are going to deliver that will benefit the people of this city now and in the future?
The successful candidate will then have to demonstrate their capability to deliver on their vision.
Given the size of the Auckland Council bureaucracy, some experience of running complex organisations would be helpful and, given the material inefficiencies of the bureaucracy, they should also have experience in restructuring and re-engineering organisations to extract cost savings and deliver high-quality and timely services.
The individual should also have experience in overseeing complex infrastructure projects and negotiating, or at least assessing and critiquing, capital projects involving public and private sector participants.
It is clear from recent experience, such as the City Rail Link and the America's Cup, the investment proposals often lack a critical, dare I say cynical, overview necessary to ensure that public funds are not dissipated by vanity projects which almost always exceed budgets (often by multiples of their original estimates).
I can recall a conversation with Phil Goff in which I pointed out that the then estimate for the America's Cup was likely to be a fraction of the final bill footed by Auckland's ratepayers.
Regretfully, and for a whole variety of reasons (Covid included), the event only returned 48 cents per dollar spent, because expenses significantly exceeded initial estimates.
This ultimately cost Auckland ratepayers over $200 million.
An uncritical reliance on estimates from vested interests or bureaucrats with little experience of managing these sort of projects inevitably ends up with unsatisfactory outcomes.
There has yet to be an Olympic Games staged anywhere that has even close to its original cost estimates.
To be clear, there are non-financial benefits from hosting such events.
All I ask is for our politicians to be realistic about the costs to be incurred so an informed decision can be made – rather than 'cross your fingers and hope.'
Another critical skill is that the would-be mayor must be capable of bringing the other elected representatives on the journey.
It is clear from the last two terms that the Auckland Council itself was fragmented and dysfunctional.
Partly this is because there was no clear vision for the city which benefited the whole metropolis rather than just select and special interest groups, and partly there was an inability to articulate that vision and to have a clear mandate from the people of this city to execute it.
The successful candidate should also be clear as to their role.
A Harvard professor of mine used to commence every case study with the question, "What business are we in?"
The principal role of the council is to operate and maintain transport infrastructure, planning and development, water supply (at present), and cultural and sporting facilities and events linked to economic development.
It is tempting to be sidetracked by numerous other special interests pandering to different political groups, but these groups can only be given particular attention if the Council is already delivering effectively on its core obligations and roles.
Anything else leads to waste, cost overruns, lack of focus and delivery failures.
The successful candidate should therefore articulate not just what they stand for and what they intend to deliver, but be specific when asked what it is they are not going to deliver.
Another key attribute must be the ability to appreciate and navigate a rapidly changing world.
All too often our leaders draw on historical experience and attempt to apply backward-looking strategies into the current setting.
The successful cities of the future will not look or operate like the cities of the past.
Solutions will need to be created for a world in which people work, play, commute, learn and live differently than we do today.
The city has to be capable of evolving to meet those challenges.
These are often far more fundamental than just, for example, a network of cycleways which envisage the same centrally focused city rather than a conurbation with multiple centres across its breadth.
That is an example of developing a future-focused idea, but in a way that tries to re-engineer the past rather than re-imagine the future and develop a city to meet it.
Finally, the successful candidate needs to understand the cultural and social diversity of New Zealand's only international city.
Solutions that purely benefit a small, inner-city-focused elite are not acceptable, especially when the most significant challenges we face are often in communities at the fringes of Auckland, whether economically, socially or geographically.
We do not need another failed politician or populist candidate.
We need someone with vision and bravery to challenge the status quo and the inadequacies of the current system; to focus on the need-to-haves, not the nice-to-haves.
It is a privilege to be mayor, and the people of Tāmaki Makaurau deserve the very best.
However, we also have a part to play in this process. In September, when the council election is held, get out to vote.
Engage with the various candidates – identify what they stand for and their competence and capabilities.
Failure to engage or vote means we get the politicians we deserve.
• Andrew Barnes is a businessman and philanthropist. He is the founder of Perpetual Guardian.
Exports have historically been a key engine in the world's second-largest economy.