KEY POINTS:
A union which represents staff from Auckland's local authorities say creating a super-council would only create major costs for Aucklanders, not benefits.
The plan to abolish Auckland's eight councils, including the Auckland Regional Council, and replacing them with a single council has been developed by the Employers' And Manufacturers Association (EMA), the NZ Council for Infrastructure Development and the One Auckland Trust.
On Monday the EMA (Northern) called for a super-council for the Auckland area, the same day National Party leader John Key promised to reform the city's local body structure.
EMA chief executive Alisdair Thompson said the city's seven local councils and the Auckland Regional Council should be replaced by a single "One Auckland Council" and 21 community councils.
Mr Thompson estimated that a single city governance structure would save ratepayers at least $400 a year each.
Today the PSA said the proposal would be extremely expensive and would not produce the savings or benefits for Auckland's ratepayers, that the plan's proponents were claiming.
PSA assistant secretary Warwick Jones said the plan would involve a major cost for Aucklanders.
The PSA represents about 2500 staff working for Auckland's local authorities.
Mr Jones said overseas examples of council amalgamations showed the financial costs involved.
"It's estimated that it cost $400 million to establish a Toronto mega city in Canada in the 1990s.
"A survey conducted three years after the creation of the super city revealed rising opposition to the merger."
Mr Jones said this was because there were inflated claims about the benefits of the supercity, which was imposed on the people.
"It's absolutely vital that these mistakes are not repeated in Auckland."
Mr Jones questioned whether a single Auckland council would reduce costs by $200 million, saving each ratepayer at least $400 a year.
"Council mergers in South Australia, in the mid 1990s, were initially going to save $150 million a year.
"When the mergers began the savings were reduced to $19 million."
Ten years later, in 2005, it was revealed that there was a $300 million backlog in renewing and replacing infrastructure in South Australia, he said.
"There was also increased unemployment, lower economic activity and a loss of services, which threatened the existence of small communities covered by the council amalgamations."
Mr Jones said the PSA acknowledged there were infrastructure issues in greater Auckland and concerns about the cost of local government on ratepayers.
"But experience overseas shows that simply scrapping the existing councils and replacing them with a single council will not magically resolve all of Auckland's problems.
"It makes more sense to work together to improve the region's current local government to ensure that it's able to provide the local services that Aucklanders need.
"We won't be able to achieve this by axing skilled and experienced staff through a massive restructuring."
Research showed people wanted to have a real say in how their communities are run, he said.
"In England there's a move away from creating larger local bodies because it makes it more difficult to achieve the genuine local democracy that people want.
"Concern over the rising cost of water in Auckland City, also shows that people want control over their community's assets and services, so this must be a priority of any local body reform in the region."
- NZPA
