Stuart Nash: Learn from Aussie merger mistake

Stuart Nash.

"In July, Residents Association South Sunshine Coast argued that the council was spending more on one Maroochydore street than the entire capital budget for the old Caloundra City Council area. In its latest newsletter it has highlighted Mayor Mark Jamieson's own discretionary spending budget of $50,000 as an example of the disadvantage. The association says that 91 per cent of the money was spent within the boundaries of the old Maroochy Shire."

This is a classic example of how forced amalgamation doesn't work for local communities. A bit of history. On March 15 2008, the three councils that make up Australia's Sunshine Coast (Maroochy " population 150,000, Caloundra " population 90,000 and Noosa " population 50,000) were forcibly amalgamated by Australia's Local Government Reform Commission.

In its 2007 report recommending amalgamation, the Reform Commission noted that all three councils were "functioning councils with moderate to strong financial performance", it noted, however, that they covered a self-contained region in a geographic, social and economic sense and that the advantages of co-ordinated planning in a high-growth area and the avoidance of duplication of facilities were arguments in favour of amalgamation. The councils opposed the amalgamation, and the commission itself noted that the majority of individual submissions came from this region reflecting a "depth of feeling" regarding the issue. Despite this, all three council were amalgamated. Sound familiar?

On March 9 2013, the residents of Noosa voted to de-amalgamate, and on January 1 2014, the shire of Noosa was re-established.

Not surprisingly, the main gripe of the residents of the newly amalgamated area was that the old Maroochy council area, with the largest population, received by far the most money in terms of the amalgamated council spend, and that the amalgamated council was not governing in the best interests of the region as a whole. When myself, Bill Dalton and others talk about the perils of one large amalgamated region-wide council it has nothing to do with patch protection (my job isn't at risk under an amalgamated council so I have no conflict of interest here), but rather based on evidence of what has happened in other places around the world.

What the residents of the three former Sunshine Coast councils discovered was that they had lost their ability to control their own future, their rates money was not spent in their own area and blind self-interest of the new council inhibited growth and development across the entire region.

As mentioned, it got to the point where Noosa actually de-amalgamated (and my understanding is that the other two will probably de-amalgamate within the next couple of years).

Big is not better, it does not drive greater outcomes, but rather it disenfranchises local communities and creates antagonism and inequality of outcomes where none previously existed. But it doesn't need to be this way, if only we can learn from the mistakes of others, then we can avoid the problems and issues associated with an ill-conceived idea dreamt up by a few unelected business people.

If you haven't voted in the referendum about whether we should merge our councils or not, then there are many reasons why I urge you to consider voting against the merger proposal. Mark my words, if the region amalgamates, it will not be good for the diverse communities of Napier, Hastings, Wairoa or Central HB.

-Stuart Nash is the MP for Napier.

-Business and civic leaders, organisers, experts in their field and interest groups can contribute opinions. The views expressed here are the writer's personal opinion and not the newspaper's. Email: editor@hbtoday.co.nz. -Viewpoints on the amalgamation debate can be submitted for consideration and will be used as long as no council resources, money, time or expertise are used in their preparation.

This is a requirement of the Local Government Act 2002.