Auckland is falling behind other similar cities and needs to “shift gear” or it will not prosper. Video / Jason Oxenham
Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
/
Duration 0:00
Loaded: 0%
0:00
Stream Type LIVE
Remaining Time -0:00
1x
Chapters
descriptions off, selected
captions settings, opens captions settings dialog
captions off, selected
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
End of dialog window.
This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button.
Herald NOW: World’s busiest airport is closing
UP NEXT:
Autoplay in
4
Disable Autoplay
Cancel Video
Auckland is falling behind other similar cities and needs to “shift gear” or it will not prosper. Video / Jason Oxenham
NOW PLAYING • Auckland at risk says new report
Auckland is falling behind other similar cities and needs to “shift gear” or it will not prosper. Video / Jason Oxenham
Opinion by Simon Wilson
Simon Wilson is an award-winning senior writer covering politics, the climate crisis, transport, housing, urban design and social issues. He joined the Herald in 2018.
Simon Wilson is an award-winning senior writer covering politics, the climate crisis, transport, housing, urban design and social issues, with a focus on Auckland. He joined the Herald in 2018.
Emigration provides the context for this report. Of the record 52,500 New Zealanders who left in the year to March, many came from Auckland and 39% were aged 18-30.
The report has some difficulty coming up with answers. For starters, it doesn’t acknowledge we’ve been talking about better transport, better tech, better education and all the rest for years. This isn’t new, but it feels like we’re stuck.
Then there’s the jargon. The report is stuffed full of language like “harnessing the value of place” and “the collaboration that drives successful spin-out and scale-ups is not as habituated”.
Why do they do that? Perhaps because it disguises the lack of a sharper analysis.
The report says we lack long-term planning, but we already knew that. It declines to say why. It calls for leaders with “fit-for-purpose urban vision”, but doesn’t say what this might mean.
Overseas, a non-partisan approach to strategic planning has emerged. Not here.
Too many of them prefer not to think long-term, because there are few votes in it. And instead of removing these issues from the political arena so we can progress, they use them as cudgels to batter each other with.
Politicians will line up to endorse this report, although it should make them feel uncomfortable because it’s their short-termism and bickering that have done the damage.
In a revealing passage, the report correctly identifies the need for good leadership, but buries it in jargon: “If Auckland’s to continuously succeed it needs to do what many of its peer cities are already doing and other larger cities have been doing for some time, and that’s shifting to third cycle approaches, change by orchestration rather than change by edict, you might say”.
In government and at council, we need our politicians to be Auckland heroes: leaders who make change happen and not just insist grumpily that it must.
Comments