33.1. Moving from the current local government arrangements in Auckland to the unitary model proposed by the Commission will involve significant change. The Commission has considered carefully how this change might best be managed in order to achieve a successful transition, enabling the benefits of reorganisation to be fully realised.
33.2. It is very important that existing Auckland councils continue to operate effectively during the transition period. This is particularly the case in the current fiscal environment, and as Auckland, along with the rest of New Zealand, prepares for the Rugby World Cup in 2011.
33.3. The Commission’s approach to transition is based on the understanding, conveyed to it by Government, that necessary changes should be in place in time for the next local body elections in October 2010. Immediately following these elections, it is proposed that the Auckland Council be established and the Auckland Regional Council (“ARC”) and the seven territorial authorities in Auckland be formally dissolved. Boundaries and wards for the Auckland Council and local councils will need to be determined no later than six months prior to the election date.
33.4. The anticipated 18-month time frame for the establishment of the Auckland council is ambitious but achievable. The deadline of October 2010 must be met. The main advantages of achieving reform over this time frame will be to maintain focus and momentum for change. Existing council staff will be concerned about their future. The public will want to know that council services will continue to be provided at usual locations and that democratic processes are to be maintained. For these reasons, it is essential that the whole process is well managed and the transition work gets under way quickly.
33.5. It will be important that the Government moves swiftly to form an Establishment Board and Transition Management Group and that the Establishment Board, in turn, moves quickly to address the Commission’s recommendations.
33.6. It will also be important that the Minister for Auckland and the Cabinet Committee for Auckland (recommended in Chapter 15, “The Elected Auckland Council”) be in place to oversee the transition.
33.7. This chapter commences with a brief discussion of the principles that have guided the Commission in developing its proposed transition model. It then discusses, in turn, the alternative models available, the preferred transition option recommended by the Commission, and the detail of how the transition is to be successfully achieved.
33.8. At its core, the process of transition will involve
In order to realise the benefits of reorganisation, early action must be taken to re-engineer services in order to improve service quality and achieve efficiencies, prepare for a tighter financial situation, and to begin shaping a new organisational culture. The transition should establish the groundwork for a transformation in working practices and culture for the Auckland Council.
33.9. The Commission has identified six key considerations in managing the transition:
33.10. These considerations have led the Commission to conclude that it will be necessary to appoint to the Establishment Board highly experienced and competent people, recognising the magnitude and importance of the task at hand.
33.11. The Commission also wishes to underscore the importance of providing stability to existing council staff. The Commission expects that current council staff will form the nucleus of the new organisation. Current staff have a record of service to the people of Auckland, and represent a valuable resource of technical expertise and local knowledge. One of the Commission’s reasons for adopting its proposed model was to maintain stability in the council workforce, to minimise both the personal impacts of reorganisation on council staff and start-up costs for the new organisation, and to enable key services to be delivered as usual during the transition. It is desirable to settle staffing arrangements expeditiously, to avoid putting existing staff through a long period of uncertainty, with the consequent risk of lowered morale and performance.
33.12. As contemplated in its terms of reference, the Commission has considered a range of alternative transition processes, drawing in particular on its discussions with officials and leaders in Melbourne, Brisbane, and Toronto where reorganisation exercises have been undertaken in the past five to 10 years. Those exercises involved both successes and failures. The Commission has also reviewed New Zealand’s 1989 local government reorganisation, and considered the approaches taken to public sector restructuring in the 1990s through to the present. There is a wealth of experience on which to draw.
33.13. The Government must decide on the level of central government direction and involvement in any transition, the role of an independent establishment body, and the extent of involvement of existing Auckland councillors and officials. Overseas and New Zealand experience is instructive.
33.14. It is the Commission’s assumption that the Government will not wish directly to undertake the transition process, but will instead wish to appoint a body with sufficient independence and skills to be able to move the change process forward without delay. The Government will need to oversee the transition process to ensure successful completion. Proposed monitoring and oversight by the Government is discussed below.
33.15. The Government will also have specific responsibilities, including securing the timely passage of legislation, assisting (through the Local Government Commission) with setting boundaries, and preparing for local body elections. This will require careful coordination by the Government of its policy processes to ensure necessary decisions are made promptly and efficiently, and a close working relationship between the Establishment Board and the Secretary of Local Government. Legislative delay will be an important risk to be managed by the Government in the transition process.
33.16. At the other end of the spectrum, it is assumed that the Government will not wish to task existing councils with managing the establishment, given their direct interest in the outcome, and the magnitude of changes to be undertaken in a short period. The Commission considers that a focused independent body is more likely to be able to achieve the change required and to generate consensus for it. In Toronto, the use of existing councillors to oversee transition to the amalgamated City of Toronto is believed by some to have contributed to inadequacy in preparations made for the new organisation.
33.17. There are a number of examples in New Zealand and overseas of reform processes led by independent establishment bodies – the course recommended by the Commission. The New Zealand-wide local government reorganisation scheme of 1989 was prepared by the Local Government Commission (an independent statutory body), and resulted in a reduction in the number of territorial authorities in Auckland from 44 to seven.2 The independent and “top-down” approach taken enabled reform to be implemented quickly and effectively. The final reorganisation scheme – relating to the whole of New Zealand, not just Auckland – was completed in 12 months. The independent commissioner overseeing the transition, Sir Brian Elwood, worked constructively with the existing cities and boroughs and the public to implement the changes without political bias. At the council level, transition committees were formed comprising a mix of political and managerial representation. The Local Government Commission retained the right to appoint a voting member of the committees as a method of ensuring progress with decision making or to break a stalemate.
33.18. Between 1994 and 1996, the Victorian State Government drove a reform exercise that reduced the number of metropolitan councils in Melbourne from 79 to 31, and the non-metropolitan councils in the rest of Victoria from 290 to 47. The aim of the exercise was to rationalise the number of local councils and provide them with adequate scale and capacity to achieve cost savings. In this sense, the reform paralleled the 1989 reorganisation in New Zealand rather than being directed, as the Auckland exercise is now, to addressing problems including regional fragmentation.
33.19. Amalgamation of councils in Victoria was achieved by disbanding existing councils and appointing commissioners (three for each new council) and interim chief executives to establish and run the new council. This occurred over an 18-month period and, as one commentator told the Commission, provided an unprecedented opportunity to change business practices, and rationalise and update systems and infrastructure, without officer or political interference. The Commission has concluded that this approach, and the effective suspension of local democracy, would not be acceptable in Auckland. It notes, however, the importance of using the opportunity provided by a reorganisation to transform working practices and systems, and of ensuring the Establishment Board has adequate powers to achieve this.
33.20. In Queensland a number of small, largely rural, councils were recently amalgamated with larger councils as a result of a review by the Local Government Reform Commission. The reform involved significant boundary changes, which reduced the number of councils in Queensland from 157 to 73 at the council elections in March 2008. The aims of reform included improving the financial viability of a large number of small councils,3 and facilitating greater regional collaboration. Consideration was not given to enlarging Brisbane City Council because, with a population of around one million, it was considered already to have sufficient scale to deliver services effectively.
33.21. The Queensland State Government appointed seven independent Commissioners to determine the boundary changes. A number of local transition committees were established to guide the change process for the amalgamations. These committees were composed of a mix of councillors and council management. The role of the committees was to oversee the transition of staff, inform the community of the changes, and approve transition action plans that were required to be prepared in the lead-up to the elections for the new adjusted councils.4 Those to whom the Commission spoke in Brisbane said that the changes were for the most part well managed, it being generally recognised that amalgamation was necessary and desirable.
33.22. The Commission noted the Queensland legislation put in place to support the transition work programme.5 Given the recent and readily accessible nature of the Queensland reforms, their legislation, policy, transition plans, and protocols may be useful to those charged with the implementation of the Auckland transition process.6 Of particular note are certain caretaker provisions that apply to the appointment of interim chief executives and temporary executive appointments. These may be of interest to the Establishment Board as it considers mechanisms that will allow council management to be in place for the newly established Auckland Council at the date of establishment, without compromising its ability to make decisions on the final executive structure.7
33.23. Equally instructive is the transition process followed in Toronto in 1998, when the City of Toronto was created from the amalgamation of two tiers of government (regional and local) and seven municipalities. The City of Toronto now covers an area of 641 square kilometres, and serves a population of 2,503,281.8
33.24. A number of people with whom the Commission met in Toronto spoke positively about the outcomes of amalgamation, noting that it has provided the city with critical mass and the ability to speak with a strong voice at provincial, federal, and international levels. However, most were critical of the circumstances and manner in which amalgamation was achieved.
33.25. The consensus was that the exercise was rushed and poorly conceived, and that this was something to be avoided in Auckland. Commentators also noted that the amalgamation process was complicated by a financial realignment of provincial and city responsibilities, which occurred simultaneously. As part of the realignment, the provincial
government became responsible for transit, while the City of Toronto became responsible for social housing amongst other things. The realignment weighed more heavily on the city in terms of costs, and it struggled to come to terms not only with rapid amalgamation but also with significant budget pressures. It is understood that these pressures are only now being relieved to some extent by a realignment of responsibilities.
33.26. Lessons from the amalgamation (largely drawn from comments made by officials) which may be relevant were as follows:
33.27. City officials expressed the view that it was better and less disruptive to use one organisation as the core entity into which others are absorbed. This insight may be relevant to aspects of the Auckland transition, for example, the proposal that the best of existing IT systems should be used as the base for the Auckland Council system.
33.28. Conclusions drawn by the Commission from the Australian and Toronto experience included the following:
33.29. Having regard to the considerations set out in paragraph 32.28, and the available alternatives, the Commission recommends that an independent and experienced Establishment Board, reporting to Government, should be responsible for managing the operational establishment of the Auckland Council and the transition from existing councils. This approach has the benefit of enabling a highly skilled group of experts to act quickly and effectively, outside the sphere of local government political influence.
33.30. The Establishment Board will be supported in its work by a proposed Transition Management Group comprising the chief executives of the existing Auckland councils, Watercare Services Limited, and the Auckland Regional Transport Authority (“ARTA”). This group will be chaired by an experienced and independent senior local government manager with no vested interest in Auckland local government, who will report to the Establishment Board. The Transition Management Group will be responsible for ensuring business as usual continues during the transition period and, as agreed with the Establishment Board, will assist with preparations for the Auckland Council (for example, by seconding staff to work on finance, information systems, and planning matters, and taking necessary steps to achieve the smooth transfer of facilities, staff, and assets to the Auckland Council on establishment).
33.31. The model proposed by the Commission is based on the approach commonly taken for public sector reorganisation and establishment schemes in New Zealand. This typically involves the appointment of a board of expert professionals with experience in establishing or merging organisations and enterprises. The board is usually chaired by a person with significant change and commercial management expertise at a chief executive level, which the Commission considers should also be the case for Auckland’s transition. The boards are independent and project-orientated. The most recent example of an establishment board’s work is the successful formation in 2008 of the New Zealand Transport Agency.
33.32. The Commission recommends that the Establishment Board comprise an independent chair and sufficient members to undertake the establishment of Auckland Council. The Commission expects that the role and functions of the Establishment Board will be established by terms of reference and empowered by legislative provisions. It is expected that the chair and Establishment Board members will have significant change-management experience at a senior level, and expertise across a range of management disciplines, including people management, finance, systems, and communications.
33.33. The Chair of the Establishment Board should have knowledge of local government and significant change management experience, particularly in large-scale reorganisations where people and information systems have played a key role. The chair should enjoy a high level of respect and credibility, and would be expected to quickly develop strong, constructive working relationships with Government, council officials, and management.
33.34. The Establishment Board should be Auckland-based and have the budget resources, staff, and legal authority needed to carry out its functions. It should be supported by a dedicated Auckland-based Project Management Office responsible for preparing and managing the implementation plan for the Establishment Board. Because of the short time frame and in order to ensure momentum is maintained, it may be desirable for there to be some continuity in staffing between the Commission, and the Project Management Office.
33.35. Decisions on the resourcing of the Establishment Board are for the Government. Resourcing will need to be adequate to fund the Project Management Office and to contract (through the Programme Management Office) expert consultants to provide specialist work in the areas of finance, systems and processes, human resources, and governance as may be required.
33.36. The Commission recommends that the Establishment Board report to the Cabinet Committee for Auckland through the Minister for Auckland (both to be appointed as a matter of urgency, as indicated above). The Secretary of Local Government will, on behalf of the Government, oversee the process and timeline, ensuring deadlines are met by the Establishment Board and the Government. The Secretary will report to the Cabinet Committee for Auckland through the Minister of Local Government.
33.37. Existing councils need to collaborate fully in the transition, and enable staff to understand and engage in the transition process. Chief executives will have a key role in ensuring this occurs, working through the Transition Management Group. During the transition period, chief executives will have dual relationships and accountabilities. They will be responsible to their elected councils for the management of business as usual, reporting on this to the Chair of the Transition Management Group. They will also be responsible to the Chair of the Transition Management Group for ensuring there is collaboration by all staff in the transition process.
33.38. It is expected that the Transition Management Group will
33.39. The Commission proposes that members of the Transition Management Group report, through the independent chair of the group, to the Establishment Board on matters related to the transition, including making it aware of any material matters that may have implications for a smooth transfer of assets and staff to the Auckland Council. The Establishment Board and the Transition Management Group will meet on a regular basis, and will meet from time to time with the mayors of the existing councils.
33.40. The Commission anticipates that the Establishment Board will wish to conclude a Transition Protocol between it and the Transition Management Group to ensure their respective roles are well understood.
33.41. The Commission has been encouraged by the general recognition of the need for change by most of the councils in Auckland. A number of Auckland’s political leaders have reinforced to the Commission a desire to support the reforms. The Commission recommends that the existing councils will continue to operate until the 2010 elections. This will ensure democracy is maintained and that council management remain accountable to current councils for the delivery of business as usual. The Commission anticipates that political representatives will consider it their civic duty to assist in the smooth transition to the new Auckland Council.
33.42. It is expected that councils will continue to make the necessary decisions to enable council business and the delivery of services to proceed as normal. Existing councils will also have an important role in managing the impact of the transition, particularly on staff. The challenge for existing entities will be to champion the benefits of the changes, minimise uncertainty for staff and maintain service stability during the pre-establishment transition period. As part of business as usual, the Commission expects that existing councils will continue work on the One Plan, as this will be an important foundation stone for the development of a spatial plan by the new Auckland Council (as described in Chapter 24, “Planning for Auckland”).
33.43. The Commission expects that during the transition, existing councils will not act in ways that would be inconsistent with the establishment of the Auckland Council or pre-empt decisions more appropriately made by the Auckland Council. It is noted that any significant decisions by existing councils during the pre-establishment period must be made in accordance with processes specified in the Local Government Act 2002.9 While the Commission would not expect existing councils to make major new commitments, equally they should not, during the transition period, run down their assets and revenue base so as to financially disadvantage the new Auckland Council. The Government may wish to consider formalising its expectations (in legislation or by other means) with existing councils. This may include the expectation that councils and relevant council organisations (“COs”) and council-controlled organisations (“CCOs”) refrain from making decisions that could materially affect the creation of the Auckland Council organisation or its future activities, or that pre-empt or constrain future decisions before its establishment.
33.44. Existing councils will be responsible for organising the transfer of assets and staff within the transition plan and framework provided by the Establishment Board. In some areas, for example in the delivery of waste collection and library services, there may be little change. In other areas, for example, IT, finance, and human resources, the changes required to effect transition will be significant.
33.45. The Commission anticipates that staff from the eight existing councils will be carried over to the Auckland Council, at least initially. In addition to the Employment Relations Act 2000, provisions similar to those in Part 2 of the State Sector Act 1998 relating to staff transfers, equivalent employment, restrictions on redundancy payments, and transitional matters, need to be considered for inclusion in the legislation applying to the Auckland Council. These provisions will cover staff transferring, or being given the opportunity to transfer, from existing councils to the Auckland Council, or within the Auckland Council, or between councils and CCOs/COs.
33.46. The principal task of the Establishment Board will be to achieve an operative Auckland Council organisation by the establishment date. A clean break between the roles and functions of the old councils and council entities and those of the Auckland Council is contemplated. Immediately after the October 2010 elections, the Auckland Council will take responsibility for service delivery to the public, replacing the current existing councils of Auckland.
33.47. The development of a detailed transition programme of work is a matter for the Establishment Board. To assist the Establishment Board, the Commission has prepared an outline of the principal work streams for the Establishment Board, attached as Appendix 33.1 to this chapter.
33.48. When developing the detailed design for the organisational structure, reference should be made to
33.49. In drafting its report, the Commission has also sought to identify in its recommendations where action is required by the Establishment Board and/or the Transition Management Group. Those recommendations have been collated, and are attached as Appendix 33.3 to this chapter.
33.50. The establishment of Auckland Council’s organisation structure will bring the challenge of merging eight historically different cultures, roles, and remuneration systems into a new, unified whole. The proposed reforms will potentially affect over 6,000 current council staff. The reforms are designed to build a stronger council capability to support a growing Auckland. For that to be achieved, it is necessary to maintain a strong and committed Auckland local government workforce.
33.51. It is expected that one of the highest and earliest priorities will be the implementation of a robust staff consultation process to enable existing council management to work through the key questions and issues staff will have relating to the reform proposal. The Commission recommends that chief executives of affected councils and council organisations run an effective staff consultation process as required in the Employee Relations Act 2000 and engage with council staff as soon as possible after the Commission’s report becomes publicly available. The Commission recognises the wealth of experience and knowledge held by council staff, and consideration should be given to how to encourage staff to give their ideas and input as to the best way the reforms can be undertaken and successfully implemented. There will be a very important ongoing role for members of the Transition Management Group in communicating with staff as the transition proceeds.
33.52. The smooth transfer of existing council staff to the Auckland Council will require the Establishment Board to obtain a detailed understanding of the various current organisational structures, personnel, positions, agreements, human resource policies (including superannuation and benefit schemes), and systems (including remuneration and health and safety). It is expected that this information will be verified through an extensive audit.
33.53. The Establishment Board will need to undertake work on the development of Auckland Council’s organisation structure. This will include defining the key roles and positions, staffing levels, and locations; developing a harmonised set of human resource and remuneration policies; and commencing work on migration to a single human resource information system (including payroll). The Establishment Board will need to implement effective consultation, staff transfer, recruitment, retention, training, and induction processes. Working collaboratively with the Establishment Board, the Transition Management Group will need to co-manage a number of these employer/employee processes during the pre-establishment phase.
33.54. The Establishment Board will need to appoint an interim chief executive who will assume the role until the Auckland Council is in a position to appoint a chief executive. The interim Chief Executive of the Auckland Council will have an important role in assisting the Establishment Board with the development of organisational structure and staffing requirements for the Auckland Council. The interim chief executive will also provide an important link between the Establishment Board and the new council.
33.55. The Commission’s recommendations in relation to CCOs and COs are set out in Chapter 21. The Establishment Board will have an oversight role in relation to the integration of local water network operations into Watercare Services, to be undertaken by the Watercare board and chief executive. The Establishment Board will also need to develop an organisational structure for the new Regional Transport Authority, and to appoint an interim board who will then appoint an interim chief executive. The Establishment Board will need to identify additional CCOs, if any, that will need to operate at the outset of Auckland Council’s establishment, and provide for this.
33.56. Preparing for unified shared services is another critical area of work. Taylor Duignan Barry estimates that the reorganisation, including in the back office and in systems integration, could indicatively bring efficiency gains of approximately 2.5%–3.5% per annum over current expenditure.10 The Commission expects the Establishment Board will take into account the 2.5%–3.5% overall efficiency gain as a reasonable target for the Auckland Council reorganisation to achieve on current baselines. This target (and implementation cost estimates) should be considered in the organisational and process design and reflected in the Auckland Council’s one- to four-year budget horizon.
33.57. At the point the Auckland Council is established, the Establishment Board should be able to provide it with a very clear picture of the assets, liabilities, and staffing arrangements transferred to it. It should have prepared in advance for early consideration and adoption by the Auckland Council, recommended structures, delegations, and policies, and have undertaken preliminary work in a number of areas. This is intended to position the Auckland Council to be operative immediately, but the Establishment Board cannot bind the Auckland Council to any policy, nor is it appropriate that it should do so.
33.58. The Commission anticipates that the complete process of making the change in Auckland local government will take a number of years. Once the Auckland Council is established, the Establishment Board will be disbanded, and responsibility for realising the benefits of reorganisation will pass to the elected Auckland Council and its chief executive. In the short term, it is expected the Auckland Council will need to attend to the following matters:
33.59. The Auckland Council may also need to address residual issues arising from the transition process, for example, the disposal of surplus assets identified by the Establishment Board.
33.60. The size and complexity of the overall transition exercise should not be underestimated, as it is intended that the reforms should involve not just structural change, but a fundamental shift in the working practices and organisational culture in Auckland’s local government. It will be important for the Establishment Board to strike an appropriate balance between ensuring the Auckland Council can operate from day one, while ensuring that the leaders and management of the Auckland Council are not pre-empted in setting the council’s future direction and agenda after the October 2010 elections. The Commission has sought to achieve this balance in describing the Establishment Board’s role.
33A Existing Auckland councils should be retained until the October 2010 local government elections, at which time they will be abolished and the Auckland Council established.
33B An independent Establishment Board should be formed to manage the establishment of Auckland Council. The Board will be comprised of an independent chair and a sufficient number of members to undertake the task.
33C The chair of the Establishment Board should have significant change-management experience at chief executive level, with board members having a mix of relevant skills.
33D The Establishment Board should report to a Cabinet Committee for Auckland through the Minister for Auckland.
33E The Secretary of Local Government should monitor progress by the Establishment Board, and report to the Cabinet Committee for Auckland through the Minister for Local Government.
33F The Establishment Board should be required to implement the essential elements of the structural reforms necessary to establish the Auckland Council by 10 October 2010.
33G A Transition Management Group should be formed to support the work of the Establishment Board consisting of the chief executives of existing councils, ARTA, and Watercare Services Limited, with an independent chair. 33HExisting councils should continue to make the necessary decisions to enable council business and the delivery of services to proceed as normal up until the 2010 local government elections.
33I The Government should consider formalising requirements for existing councils to fully cooperate in the transition process, and specifying constraints which will apply to council decision making, including in relation to decisions with major financial implications.
Appendix 33.1: Establishment Board work streams
The Commission has already undertaken the conceptual design for the Auckland Council in this report. Given the limited time available, it is expected that the Establishment Board will build on the recommendations made by the Commission and the guidance provided by it in carrying out its work.
Set out below are the principal work streams the Commission expects the Establishment Board will need to include in its new work programme (work to be undertaken by Government is not included). Unless otherwise indicated, the structures, policies, delegations, and budgets to be prepared by the Establishment Board will be in draft, for early consideration and adoption by the Auckland Council, once established.
Governance and managementAppendix 33.2: Auckland Council organisation: Key functional areas for which provision should be made
| Local Council & Community Board Management | Business Services | Information, Communications, & Technology | Planning, Urban Design, Heritage, Arts | Social Well-Being | Economic Development |
| Rodney Waitemata Waitakere Tāmaki-makau-rau Manukau Hunua City Centre & Waterfront | Customer services Finance & Administration Accounts payable Tax Treasury Budget management Procurement & Supply Management Legal & Democratic Services1 Human Resources Employment Payroll Training & development Health & safety Policy Asset management Assets including property management Library services Fleet management Communications Risk management Internal audit Risk management Emergency management | Information policies and management Technology management (including GIS) Networks & communications Unified service delivery including the shared data & call centre services Knowledge management including archiving Business process improvement | LTCCP Spatial planning District planning Cultural affairs Planning services Regulatory obligations RMA Building RPS Hazards management Harbourmaster Biosecurity Heritage conservation Art & culture advocacy Recreational planning Parks, zoos, stadiums & galleries | Community advocacy & facilitation Policy advice Sport & physical activity Resource allocation & management Intra-council advocacy and integration of social wellbeing outcomes into council policy Secretariat support [SIAG] Regulatory obligations i.e. Alcohol Gambling Environmental health Prostitution etc Other functions to be determined by the Social Issues Board | Tourist promotion Energy advocacy Broadband advocacy Economic development advocacy International investment promotion Industry sector development Skills advocacy Regulatory obligations |
1 Democratic Services encompasses Secretariat & Committee support and policy capacity to service the Auckland Council Committees, Boards, Panels, and Advisory Committees, as required. Notes: GIS, geographical information systems; LTCCP. long-term council community plan; RMA, Resource Management Act 1991; RPS, regional policy statement; SIAG, Social Issues Advisory Group.
Appendix 33.3: Summary of establishment recommendationsThe Commission’s recommendations relating to transition arrangements are set out below in a consolidated list, noting the chapters in which they appear.
Chapter 7. Economic Development
7E The Cabinet Committee and Minister for Auckland should begin work immediately with the Establishment Board to lay the ground for the Auckland Council’s work in priority areas, including the Rugby World Cup 2011 and broadband.13
7F As a basis for future decision making by the Auckland Council, the Establishment Board should review whether existing local economic development programmes are delivering value for money. Chapter 9. Promoting Social Well-Being
9G The Establishment Board should ensure the necessary structures and processes are in place to ensure that the Social Issues Board, the Social Issues Advisory Group, and the Auckland Council are able to commence work on their immediate priorities.
Chapter 14. The Auckland Council
14M The Establishment Board should develop the proposed structure of the elected Auckland Council and local councils (including the committee structure and advisory panels and groups).
14N The Establishment Board should develop the proposed organisational structure of the Auckland Council. This will include defining the key roles and positions for council administration, staffing levels, staff locations, and the systems necessary for the Auckland Council to operate on the establishment date.
14O The Establishment Board should review the functions and activities currently carried out by the Auckland Regional Council and seven territorial authorities, identifying those that will continue to be carried out by local councils, and those relevant functions and activities to be undertaken directly by the Auckland Council.
14P The Establishment Board should determine the location of council offices (particularly Auckland Council, and Tāmaki-makau-rau and Rodney Local Councils) and service centres.
Chapter 15. The Elected Auckland Council
15O The Establishment Board should review all current council advisory panels and groups and report to the Auckland Council on which current advisory groups should be continued by the Auckland Council.
15P The Establishment Board should appoint an interim Appointments Advisory Panel. It will assist the Establishment Board toChapter 16. Local Councils
16H The Establishment Board should prepare draft delegations of authority for the Waiheke and Great Barrier Island Community Boards for the consideration of the Auckland Council.
Chapter 17. City Centre and Waterfront
17D The Establishment Board should prepare draft delegations for the City Centre and Waterfront Community Board for the consideration of the Auckland Council.
Chapter 18. Boundaries
18J The Local Government Commission should, by April 2010, finalise all wards and boundaries of Auckland Council including the local councils and community boards.
Chapter 19. Leadership
19D In designing the structure for the Auckland Council, the Establishment Board should make provision for the establishment of an appropriately staffed office for the Mayor of Auckland, with a small number of personal advisers to be appointed by the Mayor.
19E The Establishment Board should appoint an interim Chief Executive for the Auckland Council. Chapter 20. Funding and Financial Management Arrangements
20G The Establishment Board should
Chapter 21. Council Organisations and Council-Controlled Organisations
21G The Establishment Board should review all existing CCOs and COs and exempt organisations in order to position the Auckland Council to make an early decision on which CCOs and COs should be continued and, as part of that review, will
21H The Establishment Board should
21I The interim Appointments Advisory Panel should be used to assist in the recruitment or reappointment of suitable CCO interim board candidates, as required.14
Chapter 24. Planning
24G The Establishment Board should undertake preparatory work on the development of the Auckland regional spatial plan and consider the new planning and regulatory requirements when designing Auckland Council’s organisation and unified service arrangements.
25G The Government should promote legislation to implement the proposals in Chapter 25, by amending as necessary the Land Transport Management Act 2003 and the Local Government (Auckland) Amendment Act 2004, and other relevant Acts.
25H The Establishment Board will oversee the establishment of the RTA and appoint interim directors, who will consult with the Auckland Council on a draft statement of intent at an early stage. The interim board of the RTA should appoint an interim chief executive who will work with the Establishment Board on the design of the RTA organisational structure.
Chapter 26. The Three Waters
26N The Establishment Board will have an oversight role in relation to the integration of local water network operations into Watercare Services Limited. This integration will be undertaken by Watercare Services Limited. Watercare Services Limited should consult with the Establishment Board on the development of a draft statement of intent and agree on appropriate efficiency targets for the integration.
Chapter 27. Information and Communications Technology
27F The Establishment Board should prepare an interim information systems and e-government strategy for Auckland Council, including those elements set out in detail in Chapter 32.
Chapter 29. Civil Defence, Rural Fires, and Resilience
29G At the establishment date of the Auckland Council, the interim chief executive should be in a position to chair the Co-ordinating Executive Group supported by an interim civil defence controller.
Chapter 32. Achieving a High-Performance Auckland Council
32H To give effect to Recommendation 32A, the Establishment Board should review the estimated efficiencies and integration costs identified in the Taylor Duignan Barry report attached as Appendix B, and build relevant savings targets and implementation costs into the Establishment Board’s implementation plan and draft budget of the Auckland Council.
32I The Establishment Board should develop the framework described in Recommendation 32C and in addition should quantify the cost, benefits, and priorities for unified services.
32J In carrying out all the above work, the Establishment Board should draw on the expertise and resources of the Transition Management Group.
Chapter 33. Managing the Transition
33A Existing Auckland councils should be retained until the October 2010 local government elections, at which time they will be abolished and the Auckland Council established.
33B An independent Establishment Board should be formed to manage the establishment of Auckland Council. The Board will be comprised of an independent chair and a sufficient number of members to undertake the task.
33C The chair of the Establishment Board should have significant change-management experience at chief executive level, with board members having a mix of relevant skills.
33D The Establishment Board should report to a Cabinet Committee for Auckland through the Minister for Auckland.15
33E The Secretary of Local Government should monitor progress by the Establishment Board, and report to the Cabinet Committee for Auckland through the Minister for Local Government.
33F The Establishment Board should be required to implement the essential elements of the structural reforms necessary to establish the Auckland Council by 10 October 2010.
33G A Transition Management Group should be formed to support the work of the Establishment Board consisting of the chief executives of existing councils, ARTA, and Watercare Services Limited, with an independent chair.
33H Existing councils should continue to make the necessary decisions to enable council business and the delivery of services to proceed as normal up until the 2010 local government elections.
33I The Government should consider formalising requirements for existing councils to fully cooperate in the transition process, and specifying constraints which will apply to council decision making, including in relation to decisions with major financial implications.
1 One option, rejected by the Commission, would be to replace existing councils with Commissioners, the approach taken in Victoria, Australia, in 1994–96 when council amalgamations were undertaken.
2 Local Government Amendment Act, 1989. Final Reorganisation Scheme for the Auckland Region, Local Government Commission, June 1989.
3 The Queensland Treasury Corporation undertook a financial sustainability review of 105 councils. The review found that 40% of the councils reviewed were in a financially weak or distressed position. Referred to in McGrathNicol Corporate Advisory, “Implications of the ‘weak’ rating as set out in the April 2007 Financial Sustainability Review of Local Governments conducted by Queensland Treasury Corporation”, Local Government Association of Queensland, June 2007 (available at www.lgaq.asn.au/lgaq/resources/newsReleases/FINAL%20REPORT.pdf)
4 See for example the Logan/Gold Coast Transferring Area Local Transition Committee, “Terms of Reference”, p. 3 (available at www.logan.qld.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/5BDA13F1-45FE-45D7-88BA-7E00BDCD690C/0/TALTCLoganGoldCoastTOR.pdf).
5 Local Government Reform Implementation Act 2007 and Local Government Reform Implementation Regulation 2008, Queensland (available at www.legislation.qld.gov.au/LEGISLTN/ACTS/2007/07AC031.pdf).
6 The transitional information can be viewed at www.localgovernment.qld.gov.au/LocalGovernment/StructuralReform.aspx.
7 Local Government Act 1993, section 1129(3) (Queensland).
8 See “Toronto’s Geography” and “Demographics” pages at www.toronto.ca.
9 Local Government Act 2002, section 76.
10 See Taylor Duignan Barry, Financial Analysis: Re-organisation of the Councils in the Auckland Region, February 2009, p. 5 (report appended as Appendix B, pp. –).
11 See Recommendation 15K.
12 Taylor Duignan Barry, Financial Analysis: Re-organisation of the Councils in the Auckland Region, February 2009, p. 6 (report appended as Appendix B, pp. –).
13 See Recommendations 15K on Minister and Cabinet Committee, and 33B on the Establishment Board.
14 See Recommendation 15P.
15 See Recommendation 15K.
| Home | Help | Disclaimer & Copyright | Contact us | newzealand.govt.nz |