Published today by The Post and on the Stuff website, it shows the vice president of Local Government New Zealand, Rehette Stoltz, speaking to journalists.
It illustrates a report which the headline writer apparently did not read.
The online version of the report is headed…
Local Government New Zealand won’t state position on rates capping
On Page 2 of The Post, the headline somewhat more disapprovingly declares…
Local Government NZ refuses to state rates capping position
But readers who venture beyond the headline will learn the LGNZ can’t refuse to state its position because it doesn’t have one. Not yet.
We can only wonder if the headline writer(s) got as far as the first paragraph of the report, which says:
Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) cannot take a formal position on Government’s rates capping proposal until it meets with mayoral representatives, its vice president says.
Gisborne mayor Rehette Stoltz explained that the organisation had not yet sat down with members ‒ many of whom were elected on campaign promises to keep rates low.
What she did know is that all mayors wanted to “keep as much money in people’s pockets”, but it was a matter of how that balanced with what the community needed to thrive.
The report explains that LGNZ is a membership organisation made up of councils from around the country.
It has a national council, made up of mayors, which acts as the governing body. Its role is to set and guide policies for LGNZ and ensure they are being achieved.
Oh – and the caption beneath the picture?
It says
LGNZ vice president Rehette Stoltz, pictured left, says the organisation cannot take a position on rates capping until it has spoken to members.
Shouldn’t that have twigged the headline writers(s) to take a different tack with their summations of the report?
The rates issue was bound to come up for LGNZ consideration after the Government agreed to press ahead with a rates cap to help councils keep rates increases under control and reduce pressure on household budgets.
The model sets a target range for annual rates increases, based on long-term economic indicators like inflation at the lower end and GDP growth at the higher end.
The lower end of the range is designed to ensure councils can maintain essential services, while the upper end balances the need for sustainable growth with keeping rates increases affordable.
Local Government Minister Simon Watts said
“Analysis suggests a target range of 2 to 4 per cent per capita, per year. This means rates increases would be limited to a maximum of 4 per cent,” Mr Watts says.
“A minimum increase is necessary so councils can continue to provide essential services like rubbish collection, council roads maintenance and the management of parks and libraries.”
The cap will apply to all sources of rates – general rates, targeted rates and uniform annual charges – but will exclude water charges and other non-rates revenue like fees and charges.
Councils will not be able to increase rates beyond the upper end of the range, unless they have permission from a regulator appointed by central government. Permission will only be granted in extreme circumstances, such as a natural disaster, and councils will need to show how they will return to the target range.
“These new rules will be a big change, and many councils will need time to adapt, which is why there will be a transition period starting from 1 January 2027,” Mr Watts says.
“From 2027, councils will be required to consider the impact of rates caps on their long-term plans and report on areas of financial performance, like the cost of wages and salaries, council rates as a percentage of local house prices and estimates of local infrastructure deficits.”
“Targeted” consultation with stakeholders to finalise implementation, local considerations and legal details started on December 1 and runs until February 2026.
Relevant legislation will be enacted during 2026 and be law from 1 January 2027. This will be the start of a transition period, allowing councils to integrate the cap into their long-term planning. During this time, councils will report on financial metrics while the Department of Internal Affairs monitors progress and provides guidance.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
4 comments:
Can't wait to see how much they put up rates next year before the 'cap', nor how many councils take advantage of the many 'exceptions' after that time
The government is pushing hard for a rates cap. Perhaps it would do the same and have a spending cap of its own. Yeah, the pigs are still on the runway.
A rates cap will cause distortions and in the long run will be a disaster.
What will pay for our strong bridges, economy-driving roads, council infrastructure, libraries? All these masculine icons of man require masculine money to build and maintain? Rates cap sounds like a load of liberal wishy-washy nonsense.
Post a Comment
Thank you for joining the discussion. Breaking Views welcomes respectful contributions that enrich the debate. Please ensure your comments are not defamatory, derogatory or disruptive. We appreciate your cooperation.