Super City Survey Adds Spice to Transition Agency Discussion Document

Published in the New Zealand Local Government magazine

On the same day that the Auckland Transition Agency (ATA) gathered senior managers from the Auckland local authorities to hear its plans for the Auckland Council structure, Brookfields Lawyers released the findings of its independent survey of the views of local government insiders on the transition process.  The timing of the two events was purely coincidental, but it gave the news media a handy hook to compare the proposals against expectations.

Mark Ford, Executive Chairman of the ATA delivered a message about the proposed structure, with a degree of reassurance for some of those working in the existing local government organisations in the Auckland region.  The survey would suggest that in terms of the dissemination of information it came not a moment too soon.

Brookfields commissioned the survey by Sydney based Julian Midwinter & Associates because it wanted to better understand what industry insiders were thinking so as to enable it, and in turn its clients, to be better informed.  The survey went to over 1000 individuals who were invited to respond to both 'tick the box' questions, and to supply comment on particular issues.  Linda Julian, the survey organiser, said she was impressed by the effort made by many respondents to add value to the survey by providing extensive and considered commentary.

The respondents to the survey were positive about the benefits of reorganisation in a number of areas, most notably planning, transport and infrastructure.  But funding of infrastructure and services remains a concern, with only limited support for models such as Public Private Partnerships.  Expectations are high for a streamlining of all planning and regulatory controls in one city-wide one plan process.  However the full benefit of the reorganisation is unlikely to be felt in this area until the current district and regional planning documents are amalgamated, and some respondents feared little in the way of new planning initiatives would occur for 2 – 5 years.

Doubts about the ability of the new structure to meet the needs of local democracy continue to be of concern to respondents, just as they were to submitters to the Royal Commission on Auckland Governance and the Select Committee that considered the Local Government (Auckland Council) Act in its Bill form.  In fact that Act, with its two-tier decision-making structure, paves the way for considerable autonomy to be given to local boards in relation to activities in their local areas.  Even so just over half of respondents thought that local boards would not be effective in providing local democracy.  One has to wonder if this response is not a legacy of the rather mixed acceptance of the role of community boards throughout the region.  In any event it would seem that local boards, once elected, will have to prove themselves in order to convince a considerable body of doubters that they can provide value to communities.

However the issue that caught the attention of many recipients of the survey results was the expectation that both rates and charges would rise with the implementation of the Auckland Council without any corresponding increase in the number or quality of services.  It is not clear whether this expectation arises from a recognition that the cost of transition will ultimately be borne by the Auckland Council, or from a belief of those in the existing local government organisations that their own models of efficiency and effectiveness are not matched by each of their fellow authorities.  However it should be of some concern to the architects of the reorganisation that those in the industry who might be expected to best understand the impact of reorganisation are expressing this view. 

The ATA Discussion Document addressed one of the issues arising from the survey to some extent.  Respondents to the survey indicated that they were not receiving sufficient information about the transition, and appeared reliant on sources of information other than the ATA.  Those employed in local government at present were understandably concerned to know something of what the future might hold for them.  In this respect the Discussion Document does provide some insights.  In particular it offers some expectation of job security for those involved in the provision of direct services to the public.  For example staff working in libraries, community centres, swimming pools etc.  Those facilities will remain and will continue to be staffed as they are at present, at least during the transition period.  This is not to suggest that they might not become part of a council controlled organisation or outsourced by the Auckland Council at some later date.

Beyond that limited indication of likely job security the Discussion Document makes it clear that staff whose primary functions relate to strategy, policy and planning are likely to be involved in significant change.  However there is an expressed commitment to maintain or improve current service levels and activities, and it states "a prudent approach will be taken to staff reduction where services are reorganised to minimise the loss of institutional knowledge and skills and to maintain staffing flexibility".  It goes on to set out the protocols applying to the transfer to similar jobs in the new organisation, and to those instances where appointments are to be made to new or significantly amended jobs.  There are certainly no guarantees for existing staff, but there is plenty to chew and worry over for those so inclined.

The Discussion Document also sets out a draft-wiring diagram for the upper echelons of the management structure of the Auckland Council.  Although it states that the structure will reflect "a change to the governance model from what we have been used to in Auckland" there is nothing startlingly new about the groupings of activities generally.  There has been a suggestion that a new 2nd tier of management has been inserted, but in fact it appears that all that is proposed is that there are three broad divisions (Operations, Planning and Finance) rather than the six or more commonly found at present.  Beneath that tier is the usual range of senior managers simply re-distributed, with functions ranging from Customer Services to Democracy Services.  There is of course a new Mayoral office created by statutory direction, and an Office of the Chief Executive containing organisational support roles such as Risk and Assurance, and Human Resources.  But the latter is not new, having being tried already in some of the more recently restructured organisations such as Manukau City Council.

ATA is currently inviting feedback from local government organisations and their employees, and no doubt this will be forthcoming.

For more information, please contact:

Linda O'Reilly
Partner
t: +64 9 979 2167
e: Linda O'Reilly

Last updated: November 2009

The contents of this publication are general in nature and are not intended to serve as a substitute for legal advice on a specific matter. In the absence of such advice no responsibility is accepted by Brookfields for reliance on any of the information provided in this publication.