Auckland city deal has ‘big hole’ in funding, business group warns
Thursday, 14 May 2026
Auckland’s city deal will not be credible unless the Government sets out who is in charge, how disputes with the city will be handled and how its infrastructure needs will be paid for, the Committee for Auckland says.
The warning comes as Labour leader Chris Hipkins prepares to set out his own vision for the city at a Committee for Auckland breakfast in Newmarket this morning.
The city deal, signed a month ago by Prime Minister Christopher Luxon and mayor Wayne Brown, was supposed to reset the relationship between Auckland and central government.
But it has already become politically contested, with Brown describing it as “underwhelming” and later arguing the Government breached the agreement within days by pulling funding for SailGP without telling the city.
Read more:
Why the fight for Auckland is already under way - how the city will shape the election
Auckland city deal ends ‘Punch and Judy’ squabbling, say PM and mayor
Key commitments in the 10-year plan include both parties contributing $5 million each to relocate Auckland Cricket to Colin Maiden Park, funding for a roof at the Auckland Tennis Centre, and a commitment to “work together” on a harbour crossing and time-of-use charging.
The deal was billed as a way to end years of “Punch and Judy” squabbling between Auckland and Wellington, but its first month has exposed the same unresolved questions over money, power and control.
Rod Marler, partnership director at the Committee for Auckland, said those questions now needed to be answered if the agreement was to become more than a political document.
He said there were many who felt the deal was lacking.
The committee wanted early opportunities identified, funding commitments made, priorities sequenced, and responsibilities clearly assigned across central government, Auckland Council, the private sector, institutions and iwi partners.
The most obvious weakness was funding, Marler said.
“To get this deal credible, there needs to be a clearer pathway outlined as to how Auckland’s growth and infrastructure needs are going to be funded,” he said.
“There’s a big hole there.”
Governance was another unresolved political question.
Marler said the deal needed to clarify who had authority, who would make decisions, how disputes would be resolved, and what control Auckland would have over infrastructure delivery in areas such as transport, urban development and economic development.
The issue goes to the heart of Auckland’s long-running frustration with central government: the city is expected to absorb growth and deliver nationally significant infrastructure, but often lacks the fiscal tools and decision-making power to do so alone.
Marler said the deal also needed to recognise Auckland’s performance as a national issue, not simply a local government concern.
“A strong Auckland is a strong New Zealand,” he said.
Auckland’s productivity, trade, investment attraction, talent retention, innovation and housing supply all had consequences for the wider country, he said.
The committee’s State of the City report last year warned Auckland was falling behind other global cities because of poor planning, weak innovation and a sluggish economy.
“We’re not looking for special treatment,” Marler said. “We’re just looking for the recognition as New Zealand’s largest city. We deserve a package which is fit for purpose.”
He said the city deal created a platform for a longer-term partnership between Auckland and central government, with a 10-year framework that would inevitably span more than one political cycle.
But that meant the deal could not be treated as a project owned by the current Government alone.
“The deal won’t be credible unless it survives more than one parliamentary term,” Marler said.
He said the Government needed to brief the Opposition and seek wider political support, while the committee had also begun talking to opposition and other parties.
Hipkins is expected to use this morning’s event to argue the city deal needs to be honoured and built on.
He is expected to point to Brown’s criticism that the Government breached the agreement within days by pulling funding for SailGP without telling Auckland Council.
Hipkins is also expected to highlight tensions between Brown and Transport Minister Chris Bishop, who this week said a decision on the preferred option for a second Waitematā Harbour crossing would be made by mid-year.
Hipkins is expected to say the city deal was a starting point, but not enough.
Marler said the committee would be watching the next six months closely.
He said the deal needed early progress, not just a long-term framework, if Aucklanders were to have confidence it would deliver.