
Local Democracy Under Threat? Officials Warn Against Removing Council 'Four Wellbeings'
The report shows the approach taken by the government can be expected to overall improve clarity and concerns about spending "beyond core infrastructure" - but would undermine stability and localism.
It shows the Department of Internal Affairs would have preferred to keep the status quo.
The Local government (System Improvements) Amendment legislation passed its first reading last night, with the select committee reporting back in November.
The government and the minister have made their views clear, stating that councils have "lacked fiscal discipline", that they "are not mini-Parliaments; they are service delivery agencies", and that residents have become increasingly concerned about rates.
The opposition parties have argued it is a power grab that degrades the rights of democratically elected councils.
Removing 'four wellbeings' to have little impact
A key part of the bill is the government's proposal to remove all 10 mentions of the "four wellbeings" - social, economic, environmental and cultural - from the law governing councils.
However, the Regulatory Impact Statement (RIS) on the bill from Internal Affairs said that in isolation, this change was "unlikely to benefit communities more than the status quo".
"Previous regulatory impact statements have suggested that despite various changes to the purpose by successive governments, there has been limited impact on council decision-making, activities, and service levels, regardless of intended focus.
"Refocusing the purpose of local government will likely have limited impact on its own and may create implementation costs and issues."
The paper highlighted that the "proposed changes will likely disrupt the sector" and had led councils to do "costly compliance exercises in the past to determine which activities fit within a narrower purpose".
Despite this narrowing, it said the purpose of local government "should reflect the broad range of responsibilities local authorities have under all primary and secondary legislation in New Zealand" - pointing to the 47 statutes councils already have responsibilities under.
It noted that departmental feedback from agencies, including the Infrastructure Commission and the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, as well as the independent Future of Local Government Review (FLGR) - effectively binned by the government a year ago - had "contrary views to those of ministers".
"Feedback suggested that removing the four wellbeings could be seen as disempowering local government, and while focusing councils on low rates may succeed, it would likely come at the expense of key council services and infrastructure development."
It noted the FLGR had found successive governments' changes to councils' purpose were disruptive, and recommended the four wellbeings be entrenched in law to provide greater certainty.
Removing the wellbeings "could impact [Treaty of Waitangi] settlement arrangements between iwi or hapū and councils".
However, some councils had told the minister, "they felt it would also help them to manage community expectations and do fewer things better".
In a table assessing the costs and benefits of the legislation, the officials found that "restraint" (addressing concerns about spending beyond core services) and "clarity" (providing useful direction about what councils should be expected to do) were improved compared to the status quo.
However, "stability" (minimising disruption and allowing councils to plan effectively) and "localism" (recognising the broad role of councils valued in communities and empowering them to decide for themselves) would be worse than the status quo.
Effect on rate rises?
The RIS suggested that other changes proposed by the government, including additional performance monitoring and rate capping, were "more likely" to support the government's objectives.
While ministers have continued to say the changes are targeted at a lack of fiscal discipline by councils, the RIS stated "cost pressures on councils are being driven by capital and operating cost escalation, flowing from supply chain upheaval and a tight labour market during the Covid-19 pandemic, and accelerated headline inflation since".
"Infrastructure costs have long been a major cause of rate increases, with councils needing to upgrade infrastructure, especially for water and wastewater treatment plants, and invest in more infrastructure to meet growth demands.
"Around two-thirds of capital expenditure for councils is applied to core infrastructure, not including libraries and other community facilities, or parks and reserves."
Local Government Minister Simon Watts, at the first reading speech on Thursday, said, "We looked at the evidence and it showed that whenever the four aspects of community wellbeing are included in the purpose of local government, rates go up as councils are focused on too many things".
Internal Affairs' analysis showed rate increases were "about two percent higher when the four wellbeings are in the Act", so while it bears out the minister's statement, the effect cannot explain the full weight of rate rises across the country.
The data used also did not account for population growth or distinguish between residential or commercial ratepayers.
"Usually, where rates have increased faster, this is because costs for councils have risen faster.
The current infrastructure deficit for local government is evidence of prolonged underinvestment, where rates (along with other revenue sources) did not increase enough to enable responsible asset management.
"For example, despite rates appearing to increase more towards 2007, the Infrastructure Commission has identified the period from 1995 to 2008 as a time when rates were consistently below their post-World War II average as a share of gross domestic product, and this coincided with a deterioration of the stock of transport, water and waste assets."
Limited consultation and scope for analysis, rates capping process uncertain
The analysis stated that the minister only allowed officials to examine two options: the status quo and his preferred approach.
"The data and evidence used in carrying out this analysis was generally low quality due to limitations on options exploration and consultation.
"There was a heavy reliance on previous regulatory impact statements that covered the same or reverse law changes."
The inclusion of the wellbeings has been added to or removed from the law four times since the Act came into force in 2003, so there were more than enough previous analyses to draw from.
It remains unclear whether rate capping, which the minister wants "before Christmas", would be included in the bill after the select committee reports back in November.
In a response to RNZ, the minister said decisions had not yet been made on whether rates capping would be added to the current bill, or in new legislation.
"This week I confrimed that the government is exploring a rates capping system with policy work underway since Cabinet agreed in April. I will bring advice back to Cabinet for consideration later this year. I intend to progress work on a rate-capping system suited to New Zealand that is flexible enough to support our housing growth aspirations and which allows us to respond to the infrastrcuture deficit while limiting spending on nice-to-haves.
"We want ratepayers to get value for money and with issues like average rate increases in 2024 of 9.6 percent vs CPI inflation at 2.2 percent , constraining increases is an option we are actively considering."
However, the analysis repeatedly highlights that efforts to "limit council revenue from rates" are part of the government's intended package of reform, and a section laying out a timeline of changes includes a redacted entry that follows the implementation of the changes described in the bill.
The disclosure statement prepared by the department noted that the RIS was limited to assessing the impacts of refocusing the purpose of local government.
It said the Regulations Ministry had determined other aspects of the bill did not need to be assessed, "on the grounds that these proposals would have no or only minor economic, social, or environmental impacts".
The ministry also asked the minister to provide an analysis on rates capping when reporting back to Cabinet on the overall bill in December.
The statement also showed Watts had asked for consultation relating to transparency and accountability with the Free Speech Union lobby group, the Taxpayers Union lobby group, the New Zealand Initiative think tank, Transparency International, and other ratepayer groups and academics.
On performance management, the department also sought feedback from a reference group, and on regulatory relief, the department was instructed to consult LGNZ, Local Government Professionals NZ, Federated Farmers, and Business NZ.
Officials also shared a clause of the draft bill with the Local Government Funding Agency.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


NZ Herald
an hour ago
- NZ Herald
Dropkicks? Shouldn't we make it easier for people to vote?
This week, Justice Minister Paul Goldsmith announced what he described as a 'significant, but necessary change' to New Zealand's electoral laws. He said this will address 'strain on the system'. The most controversial of these changes is stopping same-day enrolment for voters in a general election. Same-day enrolments are counted as special votes, which can take about 10 times longer to count than ordinary votes. Special votes have become more common in recent elections and a Regulatory Impact Statement from the Ministry of Justice said there had been an explosion as more people enrolled or updated their details on the day they voted. There were about 300,000 to 350,000 same-day special votes cast at the last election. The total number of special votes was 602,000, or about 20.9% of all ticks made. The Electoral Commission forecasts this will rise to 739,000 special votes in the 2026 election. So, to ensure the final results for our election don't take too long, the ability to enrol to vote will stop 13 days before election day. Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said anyone who can't get their A into G in time was a 'dropkick'. 'I'm a bit sick of dropkicks who can't get their lives organised to follow the law, which registering to vote is a legal requirement. Then going and voting to tax away hard-working people's money and have people that make laws that restrict their freedoms.' After his somewhat partisan comment, Seymour went on tell reporters, 'If you can't be bothered doing that, maybe you don't care so much.' But it is obvious these people – hundreds of thousands of Kiwis – do care. They care enough about our democracy and the future of this country to go to a polling station on election day, register and vote. The Act leader also said people are fighting around the world for the chance to vote in a democracy. This is true, but the irony appeared totally lost on Seymour as he argued about the merits of a law that would restrict the opportunity for people to do just that. This country loves a battler and treating thousands of everyday New Zealanders with disdain rarely returns a positive result. Seymour might be well served to dropkick his descriptor quickly, or the battlers may dropkick him at the polls. Along with concerns about turnout, the Electoral Commission advised that special votes are more likely to come from areas with high Asian, Māori and Pacific communities. Younger people are also more likely to cast special votes – particularly first-time voters. Labour leader Chris Hipkins called the proposed changes 'draconian'. That is hyperbole. But he is right that it's anti-democratic. Perhaps any law that restricts a person's opportunity to vote should require a supermajority in Parliament? This might also stop the ridiculous see-sawing we see every government cycle around prisoner voting. Sign up to the Daily H, a free newsletter curated by our editors and delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.


Otago Daily Times
2 hours ago
- Otago Daily Times
‘Scary' 30% rates rise on cards
Councillors hear an update on Local Water Done Well proposals at a workshop this week. PHOTOS: ANDREW ASHTON Ratepayers could face a "scary" 30% rates rise in just two years if the Waitaki District Council's plans for an in-house water services unit are accepted. That was the stark reality laid out for councillors at a workshop this week to plan how to move forward from a decision two weeks ago to opt out of a joint water entity with three other Otago councils. Mayor Gary Kircher said he and the rest of the council were committed to making the best of that decision, which now involved sending a draft plan to the government by the end of July, before a full water services delivery plan (WSDP) was presented to the Department of Internal Affairs in September as required by the government's Local Water Done Well legislation. "We have to make sure that we do set up our in-house option as best as possible and I won't tolerate anyone undermining that." However, the size and cost of that was put into perspective by two Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) representatives at the workshop. They reiterated their points from a previous meeting that the in-house model would have to meet the government's financial stability rules for a period of 10 years, even if the plan involved a joint venture with other authorities before then. The in-house model would have to stand on its own merits for a 10-year period for assessment purposes. If those rules were not quite met, a facilitator could be appointed to work alongside the council to help the plan meet the targets. Department of Internal Affairs representatives Marlon Bridge (left) and Warren Ulusele at the workshop. The other, "more intrusive" option was to send in "the specialist", DIA representative Warren Ulusele said. "That person is appointed in the council, they make decisions on behalf of the council. They can look up across the council finances, potentially look to redirect funding from other purposes and redirect it back into Three Waters investment. "They can look at the revenue streams and determine that they need to go up. So I point that out, not in a threatening way, but just to be absolutely clear about this conversation around control and that's concern, again, not just this council, consultation across the country and it's understandable. "That person is appointed by the minister with one objective and that is to develop a financially sustainable plan. They will look to do that as quickly as possible and their focus is meeting growth. So they're not looking across the range of responsibilities you have, the range of considerations you have." WDC chief financial officer Amanda Nicholls then laid out the council's finances saying they would look "scary" at this stage of the process, pointing out external debt per rateable property would significantly exceed the benchmark of $4000, while debt continued to grow over the years. However, it would require a rate rise of about 25.61 % in the 2028 LTP year to fund the in-house unit, and then rate rises of about 4% for each of the following years. All those rises and the 2028 rise could also increase by a further 5% if the council, as was likely, was required to fund depreciation of water assets. When it came to council debt, the workshop heard the WDC would breach its debt cap in 2035 and every year thereafter, potentially requiring further rate rises to lower it. Two weeks ago, Waitaki district councillors voted to exit the Southern Water Done Well partnership with Clutha, Central Otago and Gore in favour of an in-house water services delivery unit. The joint arrangement was previously the council's preferred option before it was put to public consultation. Public consultation across the four councils drew in over 1000 submission with the in-house business unit model the preferred option in Waitaki (54%) and Clutha, while only 26.7% supported the joint entity, most popular in Gore and Central Otago. Prior to that the Department of Internal Affairs said joining a four-way, multi-district water company was the "only viable option" for the district. The DIA representatives this week said they had heard nothing to allay their "concerns" over the council's chosen path, saying they could not see a pathway for the council to develop a plan that was credible. "Hopefully, it'll come to light as you uncover more of what information discloses as you put more of the facts into the equation." The council intends to hold weekly public workshops, videos of which will be posted on its website, every Tuesday this month to keep people up to date with progress. A recording of this week's meeting, with chapter points for each section, the presentation given by the council's finance team, and the letter from the DIA are all available on the council website. "Council encourages the community to watch the videos, read the presentation and the letter from the DIA to be fully informed about the development of the WSDP," a council statement said.

1News
2 days ago
- 1News
NZ passport redesign to have English words above te reo Māori
New Zealand's passport is being redesigned to place the English words above the te reo Māori text — with the new look being rolled out atl the end of 2027. Since 2021, newly issued passports have had the words "Uruwhenua Aotearoa" printed in silver directly above "New Zealand Passport". Internal Affairs Minister Brooke van Velden today confirmed the positions of the text would be swapped in future to reflect the coalition's commitment to using English first "as it is the language most widely spoken by the New Zealand public". She said the redesign – which would be unveiled later this year – was being done as part of a scheduled security upgrade, ensuring no additional cost to passport-holders. Passports with the new design would start being issued only after the existing stock of booklets had been used up. ADVERTISEMENT A spokesperson for Internal Affairs told RNZ the department was working towards an "end-of-2027 release date" for the updated passport. The ACT Party celebrated van Velden's move on social media, saying the change would "restore English before te reo Māori – without costing taxpayers". The Department of Internal Affairs, in 2021, promoted the passport's existing "unique design" as one to "be proud of" and highlighted the more prominent use of te reo Māori both on the cover and throughout the book. The change came as part of a deliberate push by the coalition to give English primacy over te reo Māori in official communications. New Zealand First's coalition agreement with National stipulated that public service departments had their primary name in English and be required to communicate "primarily in English" except for entities specifically related to Māori. It also included an as-yet-unfulfilled commitment to make English an official language of New Zealand. On Wednesday, NZ First leader and Foreign Minister Winston Peters objected to the Green Party's use of the term "Aotearoa New Zealand" during Parliament's Question Time. ADVERTISEMENT "No such country exists," Peters said. "The name of this country in all the documents, and the membership of the United Nations, is New Zealand. "We are not going to have somebody unilaterally – without consultation, without consulting the New Zealand people – change this country's name." Speaker Gerry Brownlee insisted Peters respond to the question in a "reasonable fashion" and pointed to his ruling earlier this year that it was not inappropriate for MPs to refer to "Aotearoa New Zealand". "The New Zealand Geographic Board also recognises and uses the term 'Aotearoa New Zealand'," Brownlee told MPs. "It would be utterly ridiculous for this House to ban such use if the Geographic Board itself is using that." Returning to the issue yesterday, Peters requested Brownlee reconsider on the basis that the Geographic Board had no jurisdiction to alter the country's name. But Brownlee was unmoved. ADVERTISEMENT He noted that the word "Aotearoa" was regularly used as a name of the country, including on New Zealand passports, which he said Peters would be familiar with — given his role as Minister of Foreign Affairs. "He would have – over some five years or more – presented the New Zealand passport at various passport stations around the world and never questioned the fact that our passport has the word Aotearoa on the front of it," Brownlee said. "I'd further say that through all of those years ... there has been not a syllable, not a sound, not a mutter, not a murmur, no condemnation whatsoever from a government he was part of. "That is the end of the matter."