John Roughan: Different tacks will show voters the way

John Banks and Len Brown will offer very different degrees of local autonomy. Photos / Herald on Sunday, Supplied

Here is a test of those who aspire to lead a greater Auckland by the end of this year, one of them in particular.

Len Brown, the likeable mayor of Manukau, is presenting himself as the defender of local democracy, which is a good thing because while Aucklanders might generally welcome this "Super City", many sound worried that it is going to be a long way from their locality.

When Local Government Minister Rodney Hide brought his final piece of legislation to Auckland last month there was a glaring hole where the powers of local boards were to be. He said officials had been wrestling with that part of the plan through several meetings in Wellington and concluded they couldn't, or shouldn't, resolve it, Auckland should.

So they passed the task to the Auckland Transition Agency, the non-elected body that is quietly fusing seven municipal councils into one. Its prospectus for the powers of local boards, due in a month or two, will probably prescribe minimal roles for them. But once the newly constituted Auckland Council is elected in October it will have the final say on this, if nothing else. That means we voters could make the decision at the election.

If a centrist John Banks and a devolutionist Len Brown are the main contenders for the super-mayoralty we could have a highly instructive poll, the referendum Aucklanders have never had.

The candidates don't yet know where we want the balance to be between unity and diversity. We want both, of course, and Banks and Brown will promise both.

But if they stay true to their instincts they will offer starkly different degrees of local autonomy.

Brown has not started well. Just before Christmas, three weeks after Hide passed the buck, Brown issued a call for the Government to try again. Leaving the powers of local boards to be decided by Auckland was fraught with problems, he said. "It's like asking the monarch to draft the Magna Carta."

How lame. How typical of Auckland local government. He and Banks, with their experience of city administration, could have spent their holidays drafting their ideas on the respective roles of the council and local boards.

Instead they have been appointing campaign teams that probably want them to say nothing definite until they see which way the wind blows.

Like two yachts in pre-start mode they will want the other to make the first move. If one of them makes a strong pitch for a united Auckland and finds no public opposition the other will go that way, too. If the first mover offers to preserve suburban decision-making so will the rival.

Banks is likely to move first, which says much for him, but as a single-city enthusiast he might try to broaden his appeal by going the other way. Whichever way they both go will be assumed to be the direction voters desire.

At the moment we could be drawn either way. We have yet to be excited by the possibilities of a single city but we could be - especially if we don't read the fine print of its proposed constitution.

If you do read it you will discover the glorified mayoralty and council of greater Auckland will not have much to do. Non-elected bodies are being set up to operate at arms-length from the council and make most of its decisions.

One will look after all roads and transport. Another will administer its property holdings, another its investments, another major facilities such as stadiums, another economic development, tourism and events.

These will be misnamed "council-controlled organisations" but the elected council will have only the power to appoint their directors, and since the terms of appointees will be staggered it may not be possible for a council to have a clean-out.

The rationale is that all these activities are better run by appointees who cannot be easily influenced by politicians who are vulnerable to capricious public opinion. This may be a good thing but it puts local decisions even further from reach.

As the plan stands, if I and my neighbours want to do so much as move the local bus stop we would need to ask our local board to ask the Auckland Council to ask the roading and transport agency.

I put precisely this scenario to Hide and he confirmed it. "What else would you suggest?" he said.

I thought the precise location of a bus stop was something a local board could decide. He didn't argue.

Bus stops, minor street alignments, park management, libraries, swimming pools, commercial licensing, local planning and building design bylaws are the sort of things suburban communities should be able to decide for themselves.

Candidates worth a vote will declare their own list. There is the test.