why local government should be kind to the new government coalition

This must seem a remarkably strange proposition given the way successive central governments, including National led governments, have treated local government. Let me make the case.

First, the incoming prime minister has made it very clear he wants to turn around the previous government's extensive centralisation; for him it seems local matters.

Next, looking carefully at various policy statements from both the National and ACT parties, there seems to be little evidence of any in-depth understanding of what makes local government work and why it really matters. this is a tough one. It's easy to think you understand local government especially if you come from a business background. The problem is that beneath the apparently similar surface lives a very different beast.

Let's look at some practical examples. Christopher Luxon has spoken favourably about localism which for him clearly includes devolving significant central government services to local government with the no doubt laudable intent of getting closer to the recipients of those services. His main justification is one of improving efficiency and effectiveness. Let's look at the closest parallel; local government in the UK which is responsible number of major social services. UK local government is in crisis and so are its services. Why? Because central government as part of its austerity program dramatically cut the funding provided local government to support those services without reducing any of the service obligations. What is inevitably discretionary funding, i.e. funding which can be cut on the whim of central government, is inherently risky.

In the New Zealand context there is another risk as well; it may be possible to devolve a service but the political responsibility would almost certainly remain with central government. it is inevitable this would see frequent and often intrusive ministerial intervention.

Taken together these factors suggest devolution is not only a risk for local government; it presents a serious risk of loss of political credibility for central government.

The necessary act of kindness? Patiently and empathetically explaining to central government why devolution of services is simply the wrong way of trying to get closer to the recipients of those services. Local government will need almost to take central government by the hand and show ministers and officials how working through local government, and with strong empowered communities, is by far the better way of tapping into the local knowledge and networks needed to ensure services take into account local needs, circumstances and preferences. For an insight into what this could mean in practice have a look at https://www.lgthinktank.org.nz/our-choose-localism-strategy.

For another example consider three waters. Assets will remain in local government ownership but "a National government will set and enforce strict water quality standards and require councils to invest in the ongoing maintenance and replacement of their vital water infrastructure…"

Councils are currently facing a perfect storm of impacts which are going to cause major blowouts in operating costs. It's not just inflation and the increasingly complex operating environment; it's how the obligation to fund depreciation is playing out - as asset values increase through inflation, so does depreciation and dramatically. There are currently well-run councils whose first iteration of the long-term plans they are now preparing suggests rates increases in the order of 25% up to and including 35% or more.?

For many, especially low income households, rates are already a significant financial burden. Local government will need yet again to explain to central government the fundamental problem behind under-investment in three waters infrastructure is local government simply lacks the necessary revenue base (and by the way central government it would help if you pay rates on your property). It may be necessary also for local government to help central government understand this problem doesn't go away simply by councils transferring assets and operations to some form of arm's-length entity which has balance-sheet separation. That simply means a lower rate bill will be offset by a water invoice. The kind of burden which this approach will place on ratepayers/water consumers is the stuff through which governments lose elections.

Next is the larger question of how central government gets community buy-in for a number of the major challenges it's going to face over the next few years ranging from reducing emissions (overall, as a society our response to the challenge of climate change is we all want to go to heaven but none of us want to die) to managed retreat, to dealing with a range of health challenges such as obesity, loneliness (yes this is a serious health issue), to restoring social inclusion.

Somehow, and being kind to central government may be the way, it's going to be really important for all of us to understand just how important the local is, and that means decision-making locally about what matters locally. We have no choice but to rely on our existing local institutions including local government, iwi and hapu.

?

Finally, just as local government needs to learn to be kind to central government, so all of us as citizens will need to learn to be kind to local government - it can be great fun bagging the local council for its latest indiscretion. It comes at the cost of undermining the very institution best placed to help rebuild a strong society. Let's all do better at all levels!

?

?