Brian Rudman: Frankenstein super city a revolution for public relations reasons

If a camel is a horse designed by committee, then the new local body Auckland's Big Four mayors want to create is more akin to a Frankenstein monster.

"I want a single city," says Dick.

"It's yours," say the others.

"I want a three-city structure," says Sir Barry.

"Done," say the rest.

"I want to be Lord Mayor," says Bob.

"Hear, hear" is the unanimous response.

Which just leaves George, who admits he doesn't really know what he wants.

"No worries," say the rest. "We'll throw that in as well. Pretending we don't have all the answers will look good."

And thus the grand secret plan to reboot Auckland into a 21st-century, world-class city, was hatched. And then the old buffers retired to the mayoral lounge for a giggle over how they would divvy up the spoils of the hated Auckland Regional Council, which had been their real target.

If we needed further proof of the dysfunctionality of the present set-up, it is this latest descent into farce. That Prime Minister Helen Clark and her high-powered entourage of Beehive hangers-on flew north last week to involve themselves in the silliness hints at how desperate their search has become for any diversion from Labour's campaign funding scandal.

The central feature of the mayors' proposal is a Greater Auckland Council. But to create it will mean the abolition of just that sort of body, the existing ARC. The mayors concede as much when they say the GAC "will obviously pick up on a number of the current ARC responsibilities, programmes and expertise ... "

So why indulge in the huge expense and staff upheaval? First, because the existing ARC, "in our opinion, is not able to deliver regional leadership", and second, because the transition "must factually, and in the public perception, herald 'a fresh start' to the governance of Auckland". In other words, a revolution for public relations reasons.

And how phony is a "fresh start" that gives the tired old mayors the chance to be resurrected as appointees to the new GAC?

Apart from scrapping a perfectly good regional framework for the sake of it, the mayors seem determined to create a less democratic and less independent Auckland. The all-powerful GAC is to consist of not only directly elected representatives and the mayors of the neutered cities, but also "direct Government appointees" and the Minister for Auckland. Indeed the anti-democratic impulse goes further in one document, saying that as well as the mayors there will be "directly elected and/or appointed representatives". In other words, these great democrats are actually considering having NO directly elected Greater Auckland Councillors.

Given that this has been cooked up with assistance from businessmen Stephen Tindall and Deloitte chairman Nick Main, every democrat should be very afraid. Particularly when you read the disdain for democracy the mayors displayed in their letter to the Prime Minister.

They oppose a referendum on the issue because not only would it "slow the process down" but worse, shock horror, because "it would ... create uncertainty and could potentially derail the process, or allow for a sub-optimal outcome". In other words, the people might say no.

To think that recently Waitakere Mayor Bob Harvey was berating me for mocking his conversion to "direct democracy". Extolling the "wisdom of crowds", Mr Harvey said it was time to conduct referendums and set up citizens' juries "on matters of significant public interest".

Now, after a couple of secret chats with his mayoral buddies, he's happy to slice up his beloved "Eco-city"and toss the pieces to Auckland City and North Shore without a hint of a by-your-leave.

Auckland needs a One City structure of governance. But not one driven by Rugby Union monstering to get Eden Park redeveloped at Auckland's expense - Jock Hobbs an appointee to the GAC perhaps, or by mayoral animosity towards the ARC, or by the desires of the never-sleeping business lobbyists.

The mayors told Helen Clark they were united in a belief "that speed and urgency is important as a means of overcoming pullback and resistance to change". The former university lecturer in her should have scrawled "Write in English" and "Try harder" and sent it back. Meanwhile the politician in her should begin looking elsewhere for advice on this issue.