Michael Barnett: God save Auckland

Our port is a significant economic contributor to the region but it is on the move. Photo / File

Reading the headlines over the past month, we could all be forgiven for interpreting as fake news the horrible headlines describing a litany of unrealised and perhaps unrealisable potential across the region: bloated headcount, salaries and travel expenditure at Council, schools in crisis as teachers quit, unable to afford Auckland's cost of living, threats of curbing immigration to curb house prices — and further feed the skilled labour shortage; the dismal failure of the so-called affordable housing schemes, sewage in the harbour, and now even our beloved Waitakere Ranges may be off-limits because of the disease threatening to wipe out kauri.

What's happened to the plans, the roadmap, to get Auckland moving, growing, and becoming a great region to live, work, play and invest in?

We had ignition. The sign said "Go" and what do you know, we hit a speed bump and had to hit the brakes when we're still trying to catch up and gain real momentum.

Can Auckland, with investment in infrastructure so long overdue, afford to have yet another Stop/Go, Nah/Yeah — or worse a "nek minnit"; "my way or the highway" rerun of committees, working parties, debates, decisions and consultations?

Without wishing to sermonise, the practice of new administrations saying "no go" to projects simply because they were not in their plans cannot prevail, even when there is talk of alternatives.

Uncertainty and ambiguity is the enemy of business and investment.

Tens of millions of dollars and thousands of hours have been spent by major construction firms on tendering, planning and recruiting skilled labour and other resources to build what were confirmed major infrastructure projects.

We also risk losing the thousands of skilled workers who want to make Auckland home to offshore markets where there is continuity and greater security of employment.

This cancellation game is disdainful. Apart from slowing down the pace of progress at which Auckland can transform into a competitive, appealing and liveable 21st century global city, some of those key players with skin in the game may pull out or pull over into a layby.

Ports of Auckland, America's Cup and cruise ships have all made the headlines.

I respect the many views expressed so passionately about our waterfront, including those who want to save the one-kilometre stretch at the bottom of town from boat mooring.

It's a pity their protests do not extend beyond the precincts of the port to the many beaches that are regularly polluted with sewage and waste-water and are screaming out to be saved.

Our port is a significant economic contributor to the region.

Our city is here because of it, but it is on the move. That is known and accepted. It's just not known where. And there certainly isn't a queue of communities nearby lining up to commit the resources to take on millions of tonnes of product, tens of thousands of containers and thousands of truck movements.

On the back of the planned relocation of the port, the city needs to determine whether it wants to retain — or not — the cruise ship visits and continue to reap the benefits of the millions of dollars each visit contributes to Auckland's economy.

We need to do this in an environment of truth, not the poorly constructed myths around alleged pollution and discharges.

If the answer is a strategic "Yes" to cruise ships, Auckland will have to be prepared to make concessions that will optimise the decision and confirm our city as a stopover for a long, long time.

The same goes for the America's Cup.

We have to think strategically and with an eye to the future. We are creating a new venue for events in our harbour city and a legacy that we can economically leverage off for decades to come.

Saying "Yes" makes sense, saying "No" is an option, but like so many things that happen in Auckland, delaying the inevitable and risking losing the opportunity with yet another referral to a committee or round of consultation is camouflage for a lack of belief, commitment and timely decision-making.

My final issue is local government funding. This uses an absurd mechanism that has more to do with the value of a property than the services a council provides — and for it still to be based on a progressive wealth tax in today's world, is unimaginative at best.

I welcomed the advent of the recently approved Long Term Plan and its attempt to address Auckland's problems. But instead of using it as an opportunity to build confidence in Auckland Council and the value it delivers, they've shifted the deck chairs on the Titanic and claimed they've fulfilled the election promises of minimal rates increases and going ahead with plans when there really is a gaping fiscal hole, bigger than the one in Birkenhead.

Auckland's story can be so much better than this. There are some fundamentals we expect Council to deliver.

We know there is overspending on travel and spin-doctoring and that the size of the beast is inefficient, costly and we're paying for it.

The suggested administrative savings are too low; each objective should have clear KPIs and performance measures; greater transparency in rating fairness and service delivery is a must and, also, we have to see a massive lift in the pace and action to deliver the catch-up Auckland needs to be world class.

Show us the sign and make sure it says GO.

- Michael Barnett is chief executive of the Auckland Regional Chamber of Commerce.