KEY POINTS:
REGIONAL GOVERNMENT
The one issue that stood out like a sore thumb was the need to strengthen local government so Auckland can speak with one voice.
The strong consensus was that the Auckland Regional Council lacked enough grunt and teeth.
An empowered ARC or new regional body
was needed to deal with regional planning, a single plan for Auckland and regional infrastructure, such as transport, water services and regional facilities like parks.
Interestingly, the ARC proposed abolishing itself to allow for a new Greater Auckland Authority comprising 24 seats, including three for Maori, based on parliamentary boundaries.
Views on the make-up and extent of powers for a strengthened regional body varied, with North Shore, Waitakere and Manukau councils recommending a mix of regionally elected and locally elected/appointed councillors to harness local knowledge.
Other submitters, such as Auckland Airport, favoured elections on a regionwide basis to stop big issues being hijacked by local interests.
Parochialism surfaced, such as North Shore City Council going bananas at the thought of having to share its new $104 million Rosedale wastewater plant with the rest of Auckland. Noted commission chairman Peter Salmon, QC: "We are never going to get integration if local issues stand in the way."
Possible outcome: A strengthened regional body with real teeth, including the power to plan, fund and implement transport. Vertical integration of wholesale and retail water services. The regional body could comprise about 20 members. The current 13-strong membership of the ARC is probably too small for the big task ahead, and anything more than 25 too unwieldy.
WHERE NOW FOR THE SEVEN CITY AND DISTRICT COUNCILS
If stronger regional government is a no-brainer, the next level down is where Mr Salmon and fellow commissioners, retired public servant Dame Margaret Bazley and rates inquiry head David Shand, really start earning their dough.
Wellington's frustration at timid and self-serving proposals by Auckland's warring councils to meet the complex governance challenges led to the royal commission.
The Auckland "disease" of parochialism, rivalry and distrust between the councils was evident throughout 24 days of public hearings.
Franklin and Papakura district councils had strong local support. The council and citizens of Papakura, population 46,000, impressed the commission with the argument the community was small enough to be accessible but large enough to be sustainable.
On the other hand, Rodney District Council copped a lot of flak. This was not surprising given its chequered history, diverse communities sprawled over an enormous area, growth pains and small rating base.
The big councils were divided into two camps.
North Shore, Waitakere and Manukau wanted to stay as they were or enlarge their fiefdoms, sticking with the three-tier model of regional/council/community boards. North Shore did not want to change the status quo of seven territorial councils, Waitakere wanted to take over part of Rodney and a sliver of Auckland City, while Manukau wanted three cities - northern, central and south.
In the other camp was Auckland City Council, which wanted a single super city for Auckland, the largest council in Australasia.
Auckland City proposed four "area committees" to cover some of the work of the city councils, but they would be little more than subcommittees of the super city.
When North Shore, Waitakere and Manukau had completed their submissions, Mr Salmon delivered a stern message: "I would like to see the big councils expressing a view that put Auckland first. What we get from each of them is expressing a view putting their own territories first."
But he and the commissioners acknowledged there would be difficulties retaining, say, the social dimension of Manukau and the eco city image of Waitakere by breaking up these respective councils.
And wearing his devil's advocate hat, Mr Salmon had a curly question for North Shore politicians: "What would the middle-tier council do under an enhanced regional body and community boards with greater powers?"
Possible outcome: Keeping the current three-tier model is a judgment call that will require the collective wisdom of the three commissioners, whose only hint on the matter so far is that form will follow function.
The best North Shore, Waitakere and Manukau can hope for is severely clipped wings. Auckland City is in a more comfortable zone. Franklin and Papakura could survive under a local guise. Rodney's future is less certain.
GRASSROOTS DEMOCRACY
Mr Salmon has acknowledged publicly the most difficult task facing the commission is keeping the local in local government.
With the exception of Franklin and Papakura councils, a common theme emerged - councils were losing touch with local communities.
Academic Paul Rouse did some research before and after the last big local government shake-up in 1989. He started out thinking amalgamation was a good thing but found smaller councils were more efficient, effective and satisfied the principles of accountability and public access.
East Coast Bays community board chairman David Cooper said boards were the eyes and ears of the community, but there was a strong feeling among many community boards that they were being dumbed down by their political masters, and their funding and delegations needed to be set in law.
Waiheke community board member Tony Sears said that in the past year the board had lost delegations for planning, signs and trees. The board had become a "lame duck", not because members were useless or lazy, but because it was so disempowered by the Auckland City Council.
Many big lobby groups pushing the super city model, such as the Employers and Manufacturers (Northern), acknowledged the need for enhanced community boards to provide a good balance.
The commission showed a lot of interest in what constituted a community of interest and an ideal size for what it termed "community councils".
At a public hearing in Waitakere, Mr Salmon said there was a strong view that local government was best presented in bodies of 60,000 to 100,000 people, and beyond that you risked losing connection with people and built big bureaucracies.
Possible outcome: Whatever happens to the current seven territorial councils will determine what happens at the grassroots level. Despite assurances by the councils to improve the lot of community boards, their track record suggests otherwise.
There is a strong possibility the commission will recommend a more robust structure with powers and delegations set in law. Community councils could also be given the power to set targeted rates for local projects.
SUPER MAYOR
The issue of a super mayor for a new regional body stirred a great deal of debate. Should the mayor be elected at large, or by the council? Should the mayor have executive powers, as happens in London?
The Auckland Regional Council, Waitakere and North Shore councils opposed a mayor elected at large, with North Shore summing up the view of many submitters that it would lead to a presidential-type campaign confined to millionaires or celebrities.
Auckland City and Manukau favoured a mayor elected at large to avoid the situation of backroom deals after the election, although one Auckland City councillor, Graeme Easte, said a "chairman of the board" would have the confidence and support of a majority of his or her peers.
Individual submitters tended to favour the democratic route of electing a mayor at large.
The commission, however, was reminded more than once of Dick Hubbard, elected Auckland mayor overwhelmingly, only to be handicapped by his deputy Dr Bruce Hucker and City Vision.
Several groups, including the Committee for Auckland, pitched for an executive mayor of Auckland along the lines of London to tackle the big issues and be the clear figurehead.
The evolution of Auckland had run its course and it was time for significant change, said Sir Ron Carter, who chairs the lobby group.
Outgoing Local Government New Zealand chairman Basil Morrison said an Auckland super mayor with executive powers would not go down well with the rest of the country. There was enough bad feeling towards Auckland without giving the leader of 1.4 million people more power than other mayors.
Possible outcome: There appears to be stronger support for a mayor elected at large, but Mr Salmon has made a point of saying that popular support for an issue will not necessarily win the day.
The commission will decide what is best based on all the information it gets, but on such a big democratic issue it is hard to see anything other than the mayor being elected at large. An executive mayor is untested ground for New Zealand. Should the commission go down this path, the powers could be limited. The commission could also make recommendations to address concerns about the power wielded by council bureaucrats.
