There is a disconnect between what voters expect of local representatives, and what they can deliver.
Most New Zealanders assume that the mayors and councillors they elect will have the power to implement their promised policies. The reality is different. While mayors can make appointments and establish committees, their actual authority is constrained. Meanwhile, unelected chief executives wield considerable power over council operations and the flow of information to elected members.
The consequences are visible across the country. Carterton District Council attempted to silence a councillor for expressing views aligned with her election platform. Waitomo’s mayor faced a similar situation. In Gore, relationships deteriorated to the point where both mayor and chief executive faced resignation calls. Wellington City Council now has a Crown Observer following an impasse over its long-term plan.
The dysfunction comes at a significant cost. Core infrastructure like water and roading have been neglected while nice to haves like Tākina have been pursued. Rates increased by 12% in the year to September 2024 with more big increases to come. The government is pushing for councils to return to basics. But its reforms will struggle without addressing the core problem: the subversion of democratic accountability by council administrators.
International experience offers some models for reform. The German state of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) faced similar challenges with their British-inherited system. Their solution was to combine the roles of mayor and chief executive. Twenty-five years later, these reforms enjoy broad support. They have delivered clarity and accountability. My report recommends considering NRW’s approach.
Alternatively, Auckland's successful mayoral office model could be extended to other councils. This model provides the mayor with staff advice and resource independent of the CEO.
The report also recommends:
The consequences are visible across the country. Carterton District Council attempted to silence a councillor for expressing views aligned with her election platform. Waitomo’s mayor faced a similar situation. In Gore, relationships deteriorated to the point where both mayor and chief executive faced resignation calls. Wellington City Council now has a Crown Observer following an impasse over its long-term plan.
The dysfunction comes at a significant cost. Core infrastructure like water and roading have been neglected while nice to haves like Tākina have been pursued. Rates increased by 12% in the year to September 2024 with more big increases to come. The government is pushing for councils to return to basics. But its reforms will struggle without addressing the core problem: the subversion of democratic accountability by council administrators.
International experience offers some models for reform. The German state of North Rhine-Westphalia (NRW) faced similar challenges with their British-inherited system. Their solution was to combine the roles of mayor and chief executive. Twenty-five years later, these reforms enjoy broad support. They have delivered clarity and accountability. My report recommends considering NRW’s approach.
Alternatively, Auckland's successful mayoral office model could be extended to other councils. This model provides the mayor with staff advice and resource independent of the CEO.
The report also recommends:
- Giving communities direct votes on major projects
- Reforming information access, codes of conduct, and conflict of interest rules that prevent elected representatives from effectively serving their constituents
- Giving elected representatives more power to oversee council bureaucracies.
The question is not whether New Zealand's local government needs democratic reform – it is whether we have the political will to make it happen.
Nick Clark’s research report, Making Local Government Work, was published on 10 December.
Nick is a Senior Fellow, focusing on local government, resource management, and economic policy. This article was first published HERE
3 comments:
There’s a crisis of democracy because Councils keep diminishing the voice of the voters by appointing unelected members to voting positions and paying them courtesy of the very ratepayers the Councils are disempowering. Coming from Tauranga I’m furious with our new mayor and would definitely not want him to have CEO type capacities. I’d say remove mayor & councillor power to appoint unelected persons to voting positions. Seems it makes their lives easier but it’s a disaster for democracy. The other alternatives Nick suggests in the last few paras above are more interesting though.
Given that local body voter turn-out is is on average around 45% and falling, I would suggest that, so long as the rubbish gets collected and the water keeps coming out of the taps, most people do not care who runs their local body. That's not a crisis of democracy. That's the death notice of democracy, written with the consent of the electorate. So here's a thought. Abolish all elected councils and transfer their Governance responsibilities to Central Government. Operational KPIs would need to be established for all local bodies and their existing CEOs should be tasked with the job of delivering them. The CEO would be on a three year contract, renewable only after an independent performance review identified that all KPIs had been achieved. Most voters would never notice there had been a change in Governance, And even if they did, around 55% of them have already opted out of the democratic process so relinquish their right to express an opinion on the matter.
Central govt can't handle the jobs they have let alone asking them to manage local govt. Isn't Central govt control over everything called Communism? I'm sure Dame Jacinda and her band would have loved that
Post a Comment
Thanks for engaging in the debate!
Because this is a public forum, we will only publish comments that are respectful and do NOT contain links to other sites. We appreciate your cooperation.