Flooded by bureaucracy

By BERNARD ORSMAN

In the middle of the rates revolt, one of the hundreds of people to contact the Herald, Peter Reece, asked how many councils, mayors and paper shufflers it took to run Auckland and whether we needed a deluge of expensive regional bodies.

For Mr Reece and the many others who asked if the Auckland Regional Council rates fiasco was the "Auckland disease" at work, here are some answers.

A vast network of 24 ratepayer-linked bodies runs Auckland; seven councils, the ARC, public transport, museums, water reticulation, roads. These apparatchiks will spend more than $2.5 billion this year, of which a little more than $1 billion comes from rates and water charges. The rest comes from user charges, grants and loans.

The bureaucracy has 5800 staff, 276 elected members costing $6.8 million, dozens of board members and 24 chief executives, each earning up to $460,000. Auckland is awash with committees, strategy documents, workshops, action plans and forums. If nothing else, the ARC rates revolt has triggered a debate about the need to abolish tiers of local government and ad-hoc authorities and the merits of a super-city. It raises questions about the fairness of property taxes and alternative ways of funding a city playing catch-up after years of being plundered by petrol taxes and councils' failure to provide decent infrastructure.

Suggestions by readers to save money point to concerns about waste in administration, salaries, perks and trips elected members seize at every opportunity.

Judy Knights, of Blockhouse Bay, said if local government wanted to save money, why not cut back on administration and brochures telling people how great they were?

She could have been referring to the $190,000 cost of a glossy brochure the ARC sent to every Auckland property owner in May. Or the Auckland City Council's $1 million City Scene news sheet which budding politicians criticise - but then use as a propaganda tool when they reach office.

These are small steps. If Auckland's 1.2 million people and 450,000 ratepayers want to put the brakes on rampaging rates bills and user charges, the structure needs an overhaul. Will Auckland become one super-city? Probably not. Should the regional monster be tamed? Definitely.

Two years ago, work was done on examining one-, three- and four-council options. Former Prime Minister and constitutional law expert Sir Geoffrey Palmer then said the only way for Auckland to solve the problems of transport, sewage and water was by abolishing all the councils, including the ARC, to replace them with one super-city.

He suggested the super-city have 25 councillors - a big reduction on the present batch of 126 councillors and mayors who pocket ratepayer-funded salaries of up to $143,382.

Sir Geoffrey said a super-city would need a revenue system other than rates to fix its problems, such as a share of tax revenue or a goods and services tax.

"I do think there has to be some alternative to property taxes. Property taxes in the end can't have too much freight put on them. They have probably reached the end of the line in New Zealand, especially Auckland," he said this week.

Sir Geoffrey said the super-city would meet strong resistance from local body politicians. Even if it was precipitated by a crisis such as the ARC rates revolt, it was a huge change and it would take time to work through the complexities and address Auckland's needs.

Prime Minister Helen Clark has stated the new Local Government Act offers Auckland communities the opportunity to form a super-city, but she is cool on the idea. Her concerns are to do with retaining community access to decision-making and the implications for local democracy.

Since 2001, the super-city idea has stalled. Officials believe it would be impossible to achieve this level of democratic regionalism under the Local Government Act and it would need further legislation from central government.

There have been attempts to make the existing local government structure work better, notably in the areas of water and transport. A review of the water and wastewater industry was completed last year. The idea of forming one company to provide water and wastewater services to every home and business in Auckland was not a goer, but moves are afoot by the water wholesaler, Watercare Services, Auckland City's retailer, Metrowater and Manukau City to combine their services.

A transport governance and funding review by the councils and ARC together with the Ministry of Transport has been underway. It is chaired by former Labour Cabinet minister David Caygill. With so many fingers in the transport pie, not to mention political agendas, it is little wonder the review has so far achieved virtually nothing. Auckland City's transport chairman Greg McKeown says the present transport matrix sees him sitting for three hours, eight times a month, at meetings that go round in circles.

McKeown and North Shore Mayor George Wood favour a greater Auckland transport authority, but the chances of a single body to plan, build and run the region's roading and public transport are slim. The political obstacles defy belief and the funding arrangements are complex. Petrol taxes, rates and, possibly, tolls all in one kitty.

Wood says it was a shame Auckland was not formed into a super-city at the time of local body amalgamation in 1989, and to go down that path now would be difficult and costly for councils such as North Shore and Auckland City because of their relative wealth.

Manukau Mayor Sir Barry Curtis supports the creation of three councils, but not a single city. He has suggested a North Harbour council, comprising North Shore, Rodney and northern Waitakere; a new Auckland council, combining Auckland City and southern Waitakere; and a new Counties Manukau council, taking in Manukau, Papakura and Franklin.

Sir Barry says this would achieve considerable savings but retain strong local communities and ethnic characteristics.

Rodney Mayor John Law says a super-city would become a power base for big parties and undemocratic processes and run foul of the Local Government Act's philosophy of empowering local communities.

Maybe it will take outside help from someone like former Ombudsman Sir Brian Elwood, who oversaw amalgamation in 1989, to address the concerns of Peter Reece and others.

Rates for councils and the ARC

Herald Feature: Rates shock