Local elections: Why economic understanding matters more than slogans – Dr Jacqueline Rowarth

Candidates should have a grasp of regional realities. Photo / NZME

THE FACTS

• Voting in this year’s local elections runs from September 9 to October 11.
• All 11 regions and 66 of 67 cities/districts are participating.
• Tauranga is the only exception, having held its election in 2024.

Among the humour and general attention-seeking within this year’s local body elections, there are some serious questions to be asked of the candidates.

Do they have the knowledge and experience to make a difference?

More importantly than some level of higher education and energy, do they have a contextual understanding of the challenges?

Do they know which activities generate income in their region?

Do they have a plan to encourage and enable the sustainable growth of those activities for the benefit of everybody in the electorate?

Of course, there are other questions to ask, but the big one must be the economic viability of the region.

This is far more than standing for “no rates rise”; it is assessing what is needed, the cost and the income streams.

It is far more than standing for environmental protection; it is assessing what is practicable and affordable.

And listening to people with expert knowledge.

The Risk-Monger is a website run by Brussels-based academic and commentator on science, risk and policy, David Zaruk.

In mid-September, in How Did We all Get so Stupid? he wrote: “I had never imagined then that we would get to the point, especially in the United States, where not only do facts not matter, where lack of expertise is celebrated in government health and research agencies, and where MAHA (make America healthy again) moms are dictating policy and sharing their wilful ignorance on science and common sense on mainstream American media news shows.”

Facts do matter, and so does the ability to interpret the facts within context.

At the council table, councillors, just like directors, must know enough about a subject to be able to ask questions that reveal more than a description.

The Australian Royal Commission into banking highlighted the importance of boards getting the right information and challenging management.

This means board members (councillors, directors, trustees) must know something about the organisation and its context.

In the Australian banking report, Commissioner Kenneth Hayne indicated that in a National Australia Bank case, “the board received inadequate information about the seriousness of the issues. When it was apprised of the issues, the NAB board did not do enough to impress upon management the importance of making an appropriate proposal to [the Australian Securities and Investments Commission] in a timely manner”.

The board did not know enough to ask the right questions about implications and timeframes.

In a Commonwealth Bank of Australia case, the board “had not given sufficient attention to the non-financial risks associated with the bank’s compliance failings”.

The board did not understand the context and hence the implications.

Local councils, governed by elected councillors, have a duty to their electorate, but at the moment appear to be creating confusion.

The national government (ie the government of New Zealand) has a goal of empowering the business sector, which includes the primary sector, to fire up economic development.

The importance of the primary sector’s role has been made clear by economists and by the Employers and Manufacturers’ Association, saying Auckland needs government assistance because it doesn’t have agriculture.

Dr Jacqueline Rowarth writes that economic viability must be central to local election decisions.

(Of interest is that Auckland does have tourism, which is the Government’s other big hope for income, but that hasn’t been mentioned in the assistance suggestion.)

Productivity growth within the primary sector is to occur within the current, or reducing, footprint.

The Government has stated repeatedly that the goal of reducing regulation is to enable the desired outcome, but reduce paperwork.

Regional councils, however, appear to have different ideas.

Some of them appear to be driven by environmental goals that will mean food producers can no longer operate.

Industry-good levy organisation Horticulture NZ has tried to make this clear.

Michelle Sands, Horticulture NZ general manager strategy and policy, has explained that current regulations around fresh water mean New Zealand’s fresh vegetable production is in jeopardy.

Similarly, farmers on the Canterbury Plains have met roadblocks, as they have in the Waikato.

In my view, too often, councillors are put in the position of listening to the “experts” they employ and being swayed to a decision, only to find the experts have not understood the implications for their constituents.

Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ) has advice for people considering serving their communities.

Included is: “Effective communication, collaboration and engagement skills are fundamental, along with an open mind. You’ll need to be able to engage with new and complex information and be open to learning financial concepts so you can make sound decisions about your community’s future.”

Financial viability requires an income.

Everybody in governance should know where their money comes from, and think about how to ensure a vibrant future for the region – a viable, sustainable future is a good platform for us all.