I think we're fast approaching that point now.
Even in Auckland. Our biggest City. Super-City. With the most responsibility. The biggest burden to shoulder after amalgamation.
The turnout with two weeks left to go is 9.2%. Last year it was 35%.
That's not a mandate. It's a vote of no confidence in the entire system.
If you think about it... it's not like kiwis aren't engaged in democracy. We come in national elections at a rate closer to 80 %.
So, you ask yourself, that's the problem with local government? Two things.
1. Too many of them. You axe all regional council, half the number of local ones. And turn the system from Council-Mayor to Mayor-Council. We have 78 local authorities for 5 million people. It's nuts.
Once they get to the council table, the mayor becomes a cuck to whatever loony tune nut-bar has made it on there with a few hundred votes and a dream of rising bikes to work.
People don't vote because the power is too evenly shared. We vote in a guy who's just told the ratepayers group to go "F-off".
Even he struggles to shake things up.
So, we need a better system. Most councils should be put in the bin. And we need a strong Mayor system... where the mayor has veto power over legislation, appoints department heads, and controls the budget.
One man, or woman, one plan. Get it done.
Until then, there's no point in voting for a hodgepodge bunch of do-nothing naval gazers sitting round thinking about what's on the menu for the next ratepayer funded lunch.
Ryan Bridge is a New Zealand broadcaster who has worked on many current affairs television and radio shows. He currently hosts Newstalk ZB's Early Edition - where this article was sourced.
8 comments:
You forgot to add your second point, Ryan. I'm guessing it would be that council agendas and decision making is not controlled by the councillors we elect, but by the unelected fat bureaucrats the slither around council chambers. A drastic overhaul is required.
I am reasonably in touch with daily news and connected with what is happening in NZ and the world, but I have no idea who the councillors i have a choice of are and what they stand for. I have looked at my voting papers and its just impossible !!! How do i decide? A dart??? what a stupid system !!!!!
I like this article. Why - where I live we were given a list of 37 names for us to choose, by numbering 1 to 37 who we wanted on our Council. Problem - many I have never heard of, other than a colourfull flyer in letter box, nothing else to promote "their" case. Their statements in the brochure we got were bland/ had no meaning/ if elected would be forgotten by those elected, we have had the before. The others - perpetual councilor's, who use this as a "job" - and have made decisions on "nicety' rather than rational. Many have had no business experience and that has been reflected in many 'verbal' comments made by those who are in actual business.
A "review" - yup from top down - but not by Wellington Bureaucrats.
“We have 78 local authorities for 5 million people. It’s nuts”
If we had real leadership in this country instead of our current steady as she goes, this would have been addressed. The council model is broken and no longer works, if it ever worked in the first place.
Elections don’t change anything, it just encourages them.
A handful of mainly inexperienced misfits, drawn from community boards with their own political agendas, oversee billions of dollars and cost ratepayers a fortune.
The MP for local government and official Climate Alarmist, Simon Watts, is hardly the person to create change. So Ryan, you shouldn’t be surprised that the general public have largely given up on playing this silly game every three years.
The comments by Anonymous 7.32 apply to myself also. I have a connection with a country town. Until recently both the local paper (now defunct) and the free paper covered Council goings on. But in Auckland a near vacuum. The free paper ceased to cover then died. The Herald covers very little and mainly pet topics on which there are many contributors of comment (ie character housing). A Council newsletter is no longer distributed and is now just a catalogue of frivolous entertainment events. The Council seems unable to fathom how to exclude obvious loonies from the candidate summary. Most Council staff have, by threat of cancellation, been captured by maorification. With the public so out of the picture it has been made prudent and simple for Councillors to also succumb to maori demands. The PIJFund reissued with a new and contrary to original set of conditions could assist.
I agree with all the above and Ryan. I like the Mayor down leadership, not the other way around. ( You can get rid of them at the next election if they’re hopeless)
Like all bureaucracy in this country it needs a complete restructure and a shaking up to refocus on service, not vanity projects and ideology etc behind closed doors, to make up new rules to protect jobs. The bureaucrats left might feel better about themselves, even, if they did something positive.
Bruce Cotterill had some good ideas a while ago in how to redirect the casualties of restructure. We need it. Ms Willis would not have a clue. Her knife has gone nowhere, stayed blunt as.
I’ve voted, have you? Kia kaha democracy
I voted recently and my focus was on a process of eliminating unsuitable candidates.
If there was any hint of supporting certain philosophies, I would draw a big "X" across their profile image.
Certain examples represented here:
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion - X
Unelected representation on council committees - X
Race and ethnicity-based Wards - X
It was quite surprising how that exercise reduced the field of runners.
Post a Comment