logo
Wondering whether we should wander down the WALGA way

Wondering whether we should wander down the WALGA way

Local Government New Zealand is failing ratepayers, Russell Garbutt writes.
Recently I had the good fortune to have a long conversation with the deputy president of the West Australian Local Government Association.
I was astounded at the range of services that this independent, member-based, not-for-profit organisation offers, and during our discussion we compared it to Local Government New Zealand.
It is more than abundantly clear that the two organisations are like chalk and cheese.
A comparison between their two websites shows the clearly divergent directions both organisations have taken, and I'd suggest that if New Zealand started to follow the direction of West Australia, then the local government rates would be immediately reduced.
The members of LGNZ each pay a "subscription" based on their size and for this they basically get a pile of amorphous benefits. A glance down the LGNZ's reason for being includes these:
• Nga kaupapahere me te kokiritanga — policy and advocacy;
• Nga akoranga me te tautoko — learning and support;
• Nga taiopenga me te tuitui whatunga — events and networking.
Delving a little further, LGNZ:
• Identifies issues and advocate for members to build vibrant communities, policy expertise to unpack proposals, reforms, consultation and legal opinions;
• Says that when anyone from government wants to talk to local government, ministers, MPs, advisers, or influencers [read "lobbyists"] come to LGNZ, who then speak on behalf of councils;
• LGNZ organise regular sector, zone and network meetings;
• LGNZ provide templates for councils to make submissions and policy submissions.
I would contend that all of this is nothing other than a framework for talkfests, the production of word salads and another excuse for councillors to budget yet more travel and accommodation to attend yearly or quarterly bunfights.
In fact, some of these bunfights (generally called zone, sector or national conferences) are attended by those that don't actually qualify, but if the budgets for travel, accommodation and daily sustenance aren't spent, then they might be questioned next year so the money needs to be used.
In totality, LGNZ don't have a single real benefit under their current structure and reason for being.
LGNZ are nothing other than a drain on ratepayers and probably no wonder that several large councils such as Auckland, Christchurch, Kaipara, West Coast Regional, Grey District, Westland District and Western Bay of Plenty had all withdrawn their membership by March, 2025.
Most of these councils quoted failure to provide value for money as the reason for withdrawal from LGNZ.
Now contrast that with the West Australia Local Government Association.
All 139 West Australian local government entities are members, as well as other allied entities such as Fire Service organisations
A full suite of advocacy and advice services are provided as well as employee relations etc, as well as full access to the Preferred Supplier Programme and Procurement.
The last one is the big one.
WALGA — as a very big entity — negotiates the best deal it can get for all the things all councils "need" to do their job including goods, services and works, insurances, electrical energy, telecommunication, vehicles ... the list of areas of common supply is in the hundreds.
Last year WALGA delivered $A380 million ($NZ410m) of such contracts leading to direct and significant savings for ratepayers.
WALGA's bulk buying power also included things like "yellow machinery" and specialist vehicles.
Insurance alone is huge — the WALGA bulk buys through London, all insurance cover for all councils in Western Australia.
Looking at the Central Otago District Council and other councils, they are all complaining that the cost of insurance is one of the major drivers of rate increases — and yet the solution in their hands is not exercised.
The current rationale that councils around the Otago region — including CODC, Clutha, Gore and Waitaki — are using to set up yet another bureaucracy to handle water is bulk buying.
Imagine for a moment the buying power LGNZ would have it was operating a similar system for pipes and other water infrastructure?
But they are too busy talking.
• Russell Garbutt is a former deputy chairman of the Vincent Community Board.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

LGNZ Welcomes Draft National Infrastructure Plan, Calls For Better Collaboration
LGNZ Welcomes Draft National Infrastructure Plan, Calls For Better Collaboration

Scoop

time4 days ago

  • Scoop

LGNZ Welcomes Draft National Infrastructure Plan, Calls For Better Collaboration

Local Government NZ (LGNZ) has welcomed the Infrastructure Commission's draft National Infrastructure Plan, which calls for the Government to commit to greater transparency and more rigorous business cases for major infrastructure projects. LGNZ national council member Mayor Neil Holdom says councils – unlike the Government – already operate under robust legal requirements for long-term planning, transparent reporting and prudent asset management. 'This is exactly what the Infrastructure Commission is calling for, and it's great to see central government starting to hold itself to the same standards it expects of councils,' says Mayor Neil Holdom. 'We all know there are a number of infrastructure challenges in New Zealand, and the best way to tackle these challenges is for central and local government to work together constructively to find the best outcomes. 'There are many things we can learn from one another, and we owe it to our communities to do that if we want to achieve the desired outcomes. 'However, it's also important that we caution against complacency. Councils' experience shows that even with strong frameworks in place, the real challenge lies in prioritising investments that deliver the greatest value for communities and ensuring maintenance and renewals are not overlooked in favour of new, 'shiny' projects – as well as making sure funding and financing settings support both these aims. 'We look forward to working with the Government on a way forward, in order to deliver on better infrastructure outcomes for the country.'

Jones says he wants to break up DoC
Jones says he wants to break up DoC

Newsroom

time5 days ago

  • Newsroom

Jones says he wants to break up DoC

Twice in the last week, minister Shane Jones has said he'd like to 'break up' the Department of Conservation. He said so once during Scrutiny Week hearings, and again at a local government conference in Wellington when he said he wanted 'all of that gone'. Now, the pro-mining, 'Make New Zealand Great Again'-wearing resources minister says there will always be a place for conservation in the government, but he wants to see the department's extensive land estate dismantled and opened for development. Jones' support for mining projects has been constant and consistent. During an appearance at Scrutiny Week, the minister once again donned his 'Make New Zealand Great Again' cap with 'Drill Baby Drill' written below the slogan. When asked by National's Vanessa Weenink about the prospects of future gold mining in the South Island, Jones lamented that the Department of Conservation had 'weoponised and catastrophised' preservation and endangered species. This focus on preservationism had cost the country whatever profit it might have made mining its mineral wealth, including from gold. Earlier in the week Jones presented at Wellington's Local Government New Zealand conference, where he told a room of regional government representatives that his party didn't see the need for local government as we know it. Incoming changes to the Resource Management Act meant the justification for local government would not 'continue to exist', said Jones. The minister then took aim at the Department of Conservation. Because the Wildlife Act enabled it to be a 'major impediment' to development, Jones said 'I want all of that gone'. But speaking to Newsroom, Jones clarifies that what he really means is the department's land holdings. In his eyes, Jones is actually seeking to liberate the department 'from the statutory riddle they're having to live in' as a consequence of being made responsible for stewardship land – land he says was put under their care decades ago because it simply had nowhere else to go. Jones does not think the department is capable of – nor should even be responsible for – legislative matters like 'making expeditious decisions that open up the DoC estate to a variety of other uses'. With legal responsibility for nearly a third of the country's land, the conservation estate includes areas containing gold and rare minerals like antimony. Jones says New Zealand 'cannot afford' not to mine these resources. Even so, Jones does not believe the department should go the way of the Archey's Frog – a native, endangered New Zealand species found atop a rich gold deposit, to which the minister was willing to say 'goodbye, Freddie' last year. 'There will always be a need for an agency that represents conservation and national parks and other rare blocks of land,' Jones says. 'But we cannot have a situation where nearly a third of the country's landscape is managed for preservation purposes. New Zealand cannot afford that.' Jones feels 'some sympathy for the DoC workers', as he sees them pulled in opposite directions by the dual agendas of economic development and preservationism. The Department of Conservation has faced litigation from 'a whole variety of stakeholders, including hapū', says Jones, which does nothing to increase its efficiency. The department is best-suited to looking after national park land and 'catching rats and killing cats and stray dogs and various other critters that are undermining biodiversity'. Much of the tension hinges on the status of stewardship and conservation land, technically under the department's purview but never intended to be permanently so. Jones says it was just 'parked there as a part of Rogernomics'. 'There's nothing to stop us from exploring the creation of a Public Lands Commission, and that commission can hold land that isn't actually required for Department of Conservation purposes,' Jones says. Green MP Steve Abel, who followed Jones' original remarks in the select committee hearing, disagrees. Abel says stewardship land ought to be gazetted as conservation estate. Among it is 'some of the most extraordinary ecological values, of the highest ecological worth that we have in the whole conservation estate – it just hasn't been designated yet as that'. Jones' description of stewardship land as unworthy of conservation 'misleads people to think that stewardship land hasn't got huge ecological value, which much of it does'. Jones' remarks probably wouldn't wash with majority sentiment, Abel says. 'I don't believe New Zealanders want to see our environment pressed for the profits of some Aussie gold miners.'

Poll: Supermarkets to get voting bins in bid to raise Chch local body elections turnout
Poll: Supermarkets to get voting bins in bid to raise Chch local body elections turnout

Otago Daily Times

time18-06-2025

  • Otago Daily Times

Poll: Supermarkets to get voting bins in bid to raise Chch local body elections turnout

Additional in-person voting bins will be available at supermarkets for the October local body elections in an effort to boost turnout and improve accessibility. More than 70 bins will be in public locations, such as supermarkets and libraries, after the drop-off points were considered a success during the 2022 election. Turnout for local body elections is relatively low with 43.3% voting in the Christchurch 2022 election, compared to 78.2% nationally for the 2023 general election. Voting bins were only available at 23 city council facilities last election, notably all libraries and most services centres. 'Building on past success, we will expand the use of highly visible orange vote bins,' said a city council spokesperson. 'Locations are currently being confirmed. Details of these will be promoted, provided to electors with the voting documents and available on the city council website.' Mayor Phil Mauger supports the voting bins being in a range of locations. 'Anything that can help make voting easier in a way that works for people and helps lift participation is a positive thing,' he said. It comes as support increases for in-person voting, instead of postal, for local body elections nationwide. A report by Local Government New Zealand in March advocated for a transition to in-person voting in time for the 2028 election. Postal voting was labelled as 'outdated' and inaccessible for younger voters not used to the postal system. It would require a law change by Parliament as the Local Government Act determines the local body elections voting system. Mauger said he is open to in-person voting and other options for Christchurch. 'Provided it can be done securely and fairly, I'm open to a mix of approaches that suits the needs of people – whether that's in-person voting, postal voting, or online options for the future.' Wellington had a similar turnout to Christchurch in 2022 with 43.2% while Auckland and Hamilton were significantly lower at 35.5% and 29.4% respectively. Dunedin had a higher turnout with 48.2%. Voter turnout by city council ward in 2022: Banks Peninsula – 60.3% Cashmere – 53.4% Fendalton – 49.2% Halswell – 48.4% Harewood – 47.3% Heathcote – 47.1% Coastal – 46.3% Waimairi – 44.6% Burwood – 44.4% Papanui – 44.2% Innes – 38.4% Spreydon – 38.2% Hornby – 36.9% Linwood – 34.4% Central – 31.1% Riccarton – 29.6%

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store