Strengthening the Local Government Act would bring New Zealand’s local governance into line with international norms, says Reynold Macpherson. Photo / Laura Smith
Strengthening the Local Government Act would bring New Zealand’s local governance into line with international norms, says Reynold Macpherson. Photo / Laura Smith
Opinion by Reynold Macpherson
Reynold Macpherson is a former Rotorua district councillor and has led the Rotorua District Residents and Ratepayers for a decade. He has a PhD in large system leadership, led Waiariki Polytechnic and the start-up of Abu Dhabi University, held four professorial chairs internationally and has published 17 books and 77 research papers.
THREE KEY FACTS
The Local Government Act 2002 is an act of New Zealand’s Parliament that defines local government in New Zealand.
Prime Minister Christopher Luxon has challenged local government to focus on delivering basic services and fiscal restraint.
Local government faces ongoing issues stemming from historical reforms and differing views on its functions and funding.
The Local Government Act 2002 was introduced to establish democratic and effective governance while acknowledging New Zealand’s diverse communities. Despite its promising foundation, practical application has revealed critical deficiencies that undermine its goals and highlight the need for urgent reform, writes Reynold Macpherson.
The Government’s recent announcementof reforms to local government emphasises the timeliness of its revision.
One significant flaw in the act is its vague provisions regarding the roles and responsibilities of elected members and officials. This ambiguity has led to overlapping duties and, in some cases, abuses of power.
For instance, the act requires councils to separate policymaking from management and to promote openness and transparency, but these principles are often disregarded.
The lack of alignment with international best practices exacerbates these issues.
Governance frameworks in countries such as the UK and Australia emphasise ethical principles such as political impartiality, integrity, and transparency – values insufficiently embedded in the act.
While political neutrality is a cornerstone of the Public Service Act 2020 that applies to public servants in central government, it is absent from the Local Government Act, leaving a gap that undermines impartiality, impedes inter-level co-operation and erodes public trust in local governance.
Beyond ethical principles, the act also lacks a structured framework for policymaking and implementation.
Reynold Macpherson.
Councils frequently operate without clear timelines or transparent consultation processes and that diminishes public confidence. Implementing a standardised model for policy cycles could ensure decisions are timely and credible, reinforcing the legitimacy of council actions.
With regard to policymaking, the act could locate responsibility with elected members and to be led by the mayor for (a) the philosophical processes of reflection and consultation to determine the rightness (tika) of policies, with expert input from disinterested officials, (b) the strategic planning processes they employ to identify and evaluate options and (c) the political processes they use to make decisions and mobilise support for them.
The act could also locate responsibility for policy implementation with council officials led by the chief executive by clarifying (d) the cultural actions of legitimating and mobilising changed practices in council organisation, (e) the managerial activity of organising teams and programmes to achieve objectives and (f) specify the evaluation criteria and processes of formative evaluation to underpin reporting and to start the next round of the policy cycle, with each phase reported to elected members.
Another pressing concern is the limited oversight mechanisms within the act that allow for the potential bypassing of accountability. Secretive meetings and undue privileges granted to specific groups at protocols meetings have fuelled distrust and reduced confidence in democratic processes.
Strengthening the act to mandate transparency, clarify responsibilities and embed ethical standards would bring New Zealand’s local governance into line with international norms.
A particularly contentious issue is the weaponisation of codes of conduct.
Intended to foster respectful and professional behaviour, these codes have often been misused to target and cancel dissenting voices within councils.
This undermines democratic principles such as freedom of expression and association. Establishing an independent local government ombudsman to review codes of conduct complaints would reduce conflicts of interest and restore confidence in these governance tools.
The broader issue of information access also requires attention. Although the act mandates councils to provide timely and accurate information to elected members, disputes over withheld or delayed data have strained relationships between councils and communities. Clearer policies, including explicit timelines and escalation procedures, would promote transparency and enhance trust.
Again, a local government ombudsman could serve as a neutral arbiter in such disputes, ensuring impartiality and fostering stronger governance practices.
Collaborative governance is another area in need of reform. While councils are expected to engage non-governmental stakeholders in addressing shared challenges, these efforts have often been uneven and inconsistent. In some cases, collaboration has been reduced to reflecting the priorities of dominant council factions, sidelining broader community input.
By clearly defining collaborative governance and mandating inclusive, transparent and accountable processes, the act could better balance competing interests and foster trust among diverse stakeholders.
Public engagement is a cornerstone of democratic governance, yet the existing mechanisms for consultation frequently fall short.
Revising the act to require inclusive and transparent engagement processes would ensure all stakeholders have meaningful opportunities to participate at specified times during the policy cycle. Standardised engagement practices, coupled with regular external audits of council performance, would help rebuild public trust and confidence.
Māori participation
Annual reporting is another area ripe for improvement.
These reports are intended to provide communities with clear evaluations of council performance, yet they are often dense and inaccessible. Simplifying the language, incorporating data-driven assessments and conducting external audits of these reports would increase transparency and enable communities to hold councils accountable.
The question of Māori participation in local government decision-making also warrants careful consideration. While Section 4 of the Local Government Act emphasises the importance of Māori involvement, its interpretation has sometimes created tensions over co-governance and perceptions of unequal representation.
Amending the act to clarify the scope of Māori participation while ensuring principles of equal suffrage are upheld would help resolve these disputes. Initiatives should focus on fostering democratic representation that values all voices within a community.
Balanacing budgets
The act mandates councils to practise prudent financial management. However, it simultaneously allows for debt-based long-term planning, often implemented without a clear debt reduction strategy.
This has led to escalating debt levels.
The core issue is that while the act requires councils to balance their budgets, exceptions can be made if justified through long-term plans and community engagement, creating a potential tension between fiscal responsibility and strategic planning flexibility.
Restoring trust between councils and their communities requires systemic changes to address these weaknesses in the act.
Reforms should prioritise transparency, equitable consultation processes and robust accountability mechanisms. Councils must also adopt practices that encourage collaboration with community groups and stakeholders, reinforcing democratic integrity.
To achieve these goals, the Local Government Act must evolve to balance the empowerment of local authorities with the protection of democratic principles.
Strengthening ethical standards, implementing clear governance frameworks, and ensuring inclusivity are crucial steps towards building a system that reflects fairness, integrity and public confidence.
These reforms are not merely desirable – they are essential for creating a more accountable, effective and inclusive local government framework in New Zealand.
