Surely Three Waters comes down to a captain's call?

Monday, 4 October 2021

Timaru District Mayor Nigel Bowen, seen here at a council meeting in February, says Local Government New Zealand have not been an effective advocate for councils over the three waters issue.

OPINION: The overwhelming rejection of the Three Waters reform model, by councils across the country, has dealt a major blow to the Government’s grand designs.

The radical proposal for all council water assets and services to be hoovered up by four mega-regional entities, with a multi-layered co-governance and operational board structure, has demonstrably failed to gather any semblance of a mandate.

But one of the biggest casualties from this beleaguered model could well be the body that purports to represent the interests of territorial councils – Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ).

How could a representative body with a core role of advocating for the interests of its member councils and the power of local representation trample all over its central purpose, in such breath-taking fashion?

* Mackenzie council fires salvo in submission on Three Waters reforms

* Timaru council votes to leave Local Government New Zealand

* Councillors call for cancellation of LGNZ membership over water reform stance

* Local Government New Zealand calls for halt to ad campaign for water reforms

Jake McLellan: “As a council, we’ve been disappointed with our representation on LGNZ for some time.”

There is profound dismay that LGNZ blithely signed a heads of agreement with the Government, in July, in exchange for a $2.5 billion cash support package to sweeten the sell to councils. Signing that agreement without the engagement or consent of its member councils was a flagrant breach of good faith.

The Timaru District Council has formally led the backlash, with last week’s unanimous vote to immediately withdraw from LGNZ and demand its annual $55,000 membership fees be returned.

LGNZ’s president, Stuart Crosby has expressed his disappointment at Timaru’s stance, claiming that his body “supported our members with extensive expert and technical advice and to create direct channels for feedback to central government on the reforms”.

Next week, Christchurch will vote on whether to remain within LGNZ’s tent. City councillors Sam MacDonald and Jake McLellan have crossed the political divide to mount a joint Notice of Motion that could trigger Christchurch cancelling its annual $130,000 membership of LGNZ.

In recent weeks, Crosby has argued that LGNZ was opposed to any Government plans to make the water reform compulsory, yet the heads of agreement specifically states that LGNZ would not actively oppose an all-in legislative approach.

McLellan accuses LGNZ of being “managers of councils, not communicators of our position. As a council, we’ve been disappointed with our representation on LGNZ for some time. They’re simply seen as junket organisers for elected members not true representatives of councils.”

Mike Yardley: “Mahuta certainly didn’t exude a compromising demeanour in Parliament last week, lashing out at councils and accusing them of failing to inform their communities ...”

Like McLellan, MacDonald believes the depth of feeling around the council table is enormous and the motion will be successful. “The council has contractual obligations with LGNZ so the staff need to work through what needs to be terminated.”

So what would LGNZ need to do to sway councillors’ thinking? MacDonald insists LGNZ would need to cancel the heads of agreement as a start, “and formally apologise to its members over its mishandling of the water reforms – and the effective silencing they have agreed to by way of this agreement”.

Further afield, the Waimakariri Mayor, Dan Gordon, is opposed to withdrawing his council’s membership, attempting to broker a conciliatory resolution.

“I have written to the LGNZ President in the strongest terms to express our council’s concerns and request that he call the sector together to have a discussion about the way forward.”

A word of advice for LGNZ. Swiftly rescind the heads of agreement.

Meanwhile, speculation swirls as to whether the Government will read the room and jettison this beleaguered reform model of four mega-entities or pull rank and compel councils to opt in, in the next few months.

Last Monday, Canterbury mayors met with Local Government Minister Nanaia Mahuta. Timaru District Mayor Nigel Bowen says “her every indication was that the reforms would be made mandatory by Christmas”.

Gordon concurs. “I’m not confident they will step back. However, it would be a real shame, given the constructive and detailed feedback they’ve received.

“I have reminded her of the good faith in which councils entered this process and asked that similar good faith be shown regarding the councils’ ability to opt out.”

Mahuta certainly didn’t exude a compromising demeanour in Parliament last week, lashing out at councils and accusing them of failing to inform their communities, while doubling-down on the virtues of an ‘all-in’ legislated approach.

Surely this will come down to a captain’s call for the prime minister. How much political capital is Jacinda Ardern prepared to burn on this ropey reform model?