KEY POINTS:
Whatever happens to Auckland's local government restructuring, one thing will remain unchanged. Aucklanders will still be reliant on the essential public services that local governments provide.
They will still need clean water and roading. Rubbish and waste water removed from their homes and businesses. Easy and affordable access to their parks, pools, libraries and recreation centres. And all the other services that local government provides.
All these services have one thing in common. They require staff with the skills and knowledge to deliver them.
It is essential that we don't lose sight of that fact amid the speculation about what may emerge from the report of the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance.
There is speculation that Auckland's eight councils will be replaced by a "Super City". Many will assume this will mean a cut in staff.
But that's not what the Government in Queensland did in March last year, when it cut the number of councils in the state from 157 to 73.
In making that huge reduction in the number of local authorities the Queensland Government guaranteed that no council staff, below the level of chief executive, would lose their jobs for three years.
Why? Because they recognised that if the restructuring was going to achieve the goal of improving local government in Queensland, it was essential that they retain their local government workers.
Here's how Queensland Local Government Minister Andrew Fraser put the case: "Local government reform is about building stronger councils for our growing state and for that to be achieved we need to maintain a strong workforce."
The Queensland Government also guaranteed that the pay and working conditions for the state's 32,000 council staff would be protected for three years following the mergers.
This retention of council staff, and protection of their pay and conditions, was actually passed into law. It is included in a Code of Practice that sets out how the old councils will transfer their staff into the new merged councils which came into being on March 15 last year.
The code was drafted after wide consultation. It was supported by all of Queensland's councils, their staff and unions, the state Government and local government employers throughout Australia.
It was formally agreed to by the 2500 members of the Local Government Management Association of Australia, the Local Government Association of Queensland, the Queensland Department of Local Government, unions and the Queensland Government which made it law.
The code aims to "maximise the retention of local government staff." To achieve this goal the Queensland Government introduced a NZ$14.7 million Staff Support Package as part of the mergers.
So why is there such strong support in Queensland for retaining staff in a local government restructuring? The answer can be found in South Australia, where the number of councils was reduced from 118 to 68 from 1995 to 1998.This restructuring resulted in a cut in council staff which caused a cut in services caused by understaffing.
The Centre for Labour Research at the University of Adelaide studied the impact of the South Australian council mergers. Its report, issued in 2001, states: "In many councils and at different levels understaffing is biting deeply. This was reflected not only in widespread requests for more staff but also because more than half of the employees were working unpaid hours."
The centre's study found that "reductions in outdoor staff numbers, which have followed amalgamations, have reduced council functions".
The Local Government Association of Queensland said it did not want a repeat of the cuts in staff and services that occurred in the South Australian mergers.
It cited the findings of the Adelaide report in its submission on the Queensland restructuring and to back up its call to protect the jobs, pay and conditions of its council staff.
The association was in no doubt that these protections were needed: "Whilst the LGAQ has been accused of scaremongering in relation to job security issues, the fact remains that job losses will occur as the result of amalgamation."
The PSA believes there are lessons to be learned from the local government restructuring that has occurred in Australia.
Whatever happens to Auckland's councils as the result of the royal commission's report, we should not repeat the mistakes made in South Australia.
We should follow Queensland's lead and ensure that we retain our council staff and that we protect their pay and conditions.
The Queensland Government did this because it recognised that this was necessary to achieve its goal of improving the state's local government. Isn't that what we all want to achieve in any restructuring that occurs in Auckland?
It's what staff in Auckland and the PSA want. That's why our submission to the royal commission recommended that the Queensland Code of Practice be the model we follow in any changes that are made to Auckland's local government.
* Richard Wagstaff is the national secretary of the Public Service Association. The PSA has 2400 members working for Auckland's eight local authorities and council-controlled organisations.
