KEY POINTS:
If Mike Lee gets his way the Auckland Regional Council will be smack in the centre of Auckland's transformed power structure. Funded by a regional fuel tax and regional development contributions it will take ownership and control in a staged fashion of infrastructure services currently undertaken across the
seven Auckland territorial authorities.
Lee supports the work that fellow ARC councillor Michael Barnett has led to form the Metro action plan after months of consensus building among Auckland's competing city councils, senior business people, academics and community players.
But he believes it's now time for the Metro Project champions and the Auckland business community to turn their attention to "focus more on exporting and getting out to open new niche markets in places like China and India than worrying about who gets to run the city".
The ARC is promoting a package of reforms that would see a strengthened regional council (read ARC) drive strategy to integrate funding and delivery for transport, water and economic development across the Auckland city-region. The strengthened council would roll under its wing entities such as Auckland Regional Holdings (owner of Ports of Auckland), Watercare Services, a regional economic development agency, regional civil defence and emergency management, urban renewal projects and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority.
Other key elements of the ARC's package include:A new Regional Sustainable Development Forum;
A national policy statement on population, growth and development that would guide the ARC's infrastructure planning along with a bigger dollop of central government funding for implementation;
The preservation of existing democratically elected councils and community boards.
The ARC wants legislation introduced so that the enhanced regional authority can be setup for the October 2007 elections.
From the start it would undertake the ARC's existing functions including governance of ARH and ARTA, own Watercare and have powers to levy regional fuel taxes to fund transport, and, regional development contributions for growth-related regional infrastructure.
A regional forum would provide the interface with the territorial authorities.
But leading business players who worked alongside the four mayors to form their scuttled plan for a Greater Auckland Council are still lobbying for a more radical approach.
The mayors' scheme was put to one-side when Waitakere's Bob Harvey found out the hard way that the only turkey voting for an early Xmas would be him if he tried to disestablish his city's power base for the greater good.
Helen Clark's government - concerned that Auckland lacks the right governance structure to deliver against the Metro action plan and ready the city to host the 2011 Rugby World Cup - has kept the heat on.
Top officials from Auckland's seven councils and the ARC have been working with project leader Brian Roche since September to examine future governance options for NZ's most important city-region. Roche - a partner with PriceWaterhouse-Coopers - and senior officials from the eight councils have distilled three options that must be responded to by next Monday in time for a proposal to be refined to go back to central government next month. Legislation will be introduced next year to ensure any changes to the governance structure are made in time for the 2007 local body elections.
The three options range the gamut from a status quo voluntary co-operation mechanism, to a mid-way point structure which will require individual councils represented on a regional assembly to "give effect" to agreed policies, to a plan to beef up a multi-functional authority to run most regional infrastructures.
Deloitte chair Nick Main, who is a member of the Committee for Auckland, and, Auckland International Airport chief executive Don Huse are among those lobbying Roche directly for an 'Option three Plus' alternative. Main says there are doubts whether the ARC has the capacity to drive sufficient momentum to underpin Auckland's future growth.
There are pluses and minuses to all three options. In particular, the ability of councillors on the respective territorial authorities to operate collaboratively across city-region boundaries in the common good is limited by their 'oaths of office'.
These oaths require them to execute and perform in the best interests of their own region or district all power, authorities and duties imposed on them through the Local Government Act.
Despite the obvious goodwill which enabled officials to work collaboratively on the options paper, the councillors face the difficult prospect that decisions taken in the best interests of the Auckland region might disadvantage their own district.
Who gets to run Auckland?
Three options are on the table as local politicians decide what will be the most efficient method to govern Auckland into the future.
Option One: Voluntary Cooperative Decisions and Delivery
A regional development forum comprising representatives from central, regional and local government produces One Plan for Auckland. Each council retains its own independent sovereignty but commits to work more closely together on cross-regional issues. The eight councils could jointly own and govern transport and water authorities, and fund an upscaled AucklandPlus to develop the regional economy.
The voluntary participation model is criticized as leading to a lowest common denominator - a 'do nothing' or status quo result.
Option Two: Shared Binding Decision-Making
A new regional assembly formed from regional and local government representatives produces One Plan that agencies are required to "give effect" to. Transport and water strategies would have a similar focus. The Auckland Regional Economic Development strategy would be binding on councils. AucklandPlus would be owned by a regional authority and act as a conduit for NZ Trade & Enterprise funding.
The model is still at odds with legislative requirements that elected members of the eight councils operate in the interests of their own bodies.
Option three: Multifunctional Regional Authority
The authority could be led by a regional leader elected at large (similar to a Lord Mayor) or by the regional authority. It would own and operate a number of services currently carried out by individual councils. The authority would levy and collect fuel taxes, run transport infrastructure and water services through direct subsidiaries and own AucklandPlus which would undertake the functions of the current local economic agencies. The model is criticized by the business sector that believes it will simply result in more functions being transferred to the existing Auckland Regional Council which does not have sufficient competencies to run the show.
