Hard News: Imagining Auckland: no thanks, actually ...
130 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Newer→ Last
-
I've read the executive summary report (which was sent to me as, wearing my elected rep hat, I am on a Community Board, the best in the city, Eden Albert).
Speaking as a private citizen, the Local Councils are kind of a Community Board 'supersized' so that it represents an entire region e.g. Auckland City. They will operate in a similar manner to current CBs, except the populace will have less represenation.
There is no referendum on this matter. It's up to the Government of the day as to what it choses to do with the recommendations. Usually they shelve them, but unfortunately for this government they have the business roundtable, the Employers and Manufactuers Assoc. and the Transport (Roads Everywhere) Assoc. all breathing down their necks. Let's remember, it was these kind folks that *wanted* this report.
Still speaking as a private citizen, the 'savings' are well, laughable. 2.5% savings. Is that all? At that rate I'm not interested in the pain of change. I would be at say 7-10% range, but anything below that and transaction costs (redundancies, increase in pay, new systems etc) outweigh any savings. Expect the Business Inc to magically inflate that 2.5%.
The report ignores, conveniently, the very real work going on in terms of the region starting to work together; the Regional Growth Forum, the One Plan strategy, regional agreement around public transport and the need to pay for it from fuel tax. Finally, local authorities are starting to behave nicely with each other as they've realised they can go further co-operating than bickering.
It's no big stretch to get agreement on one rates bill for example, and probably makes good sense to combine all treasuries into one subsidary organisation that serves all councils. Other areas of obvious co-operation will come to the fore over time.
Speaking still as private citizen, I'm underwhelmed by the report. All that for 2.5%? I'm off to get a latte.
-
Coming from a person who is new to all this OAI stuff I really think it is a great resource. The problem with having a lot of experience with OAI requests is that you sometimes lose the perspective of what it _should_ be like as opposed to what it _is_ actually like.
It is good to step back, leave the baggage at home and take a fresh look at it. Ask the question again "Why is this so hard?"
-
Even more useful would be to use their apparent geospatial background to add geotagging to the requests and responses. A Google Earth layer for accessing official information that relates to your locality?
Good idea. All of the data they get is made available on Koordinates which is pretty cool. Anyone can download the results. Sam from Zenbu is also using the data to add to their site where they also make the data freely available.
Cool stuff and only more to come. If we try and work with the various departments to open up data we should start to get somewhere.
-
The problem with having a lot of experience with OAI requests is that you sometimes lose the perspective of what it _should_ be like as opposed to what it _is_ actually like.
Not really. You write to the Minister or appropriate official, and in about a month (20 working days, plus many are a day or two late) you get some answers. Sometimes they grant themselves an extension, sometimes they redact material, sometimes they withold on spurious or non-spurious grounds. But most of the time, you get the information you're after, for free.
For all my bitching and complaining, that has been my overwhelming experience. Its not painful, unless the Minister is particularly sensitive about something. And then you write a polite letter to the Ombudsmen, and they take a look at it.
It is good to step back, leave the baggage at home and take a fresh look at it. Ask the question again "Why is this so hard?"
Because they're talking to local government. That's a whole different ballgame, in part because they didn't have n years of training and culture change to prepare them for the Act - meaning they do not share the public service's culture of openness. Plus they are more sensitive to costs, and less sensitive to democracy, and so charge as a matter of course.
-
I wonder if the powers-that-be are afraid of a Ken Livingstone taking up the Greater Auckland mayoral chains? If that happened, would they just do what Thatcher did in the 1980s and put it out of its misery?
-
For all my bitching and complaining, that has been my overwhelming experience. Its not painful, unless the Minister is particularly sensitive about something. And then you write a polite letter to the Ombudsmen, and they take a look at it.
I'd tend to agree, but I come from a public sector background (and I understand you have a smattering, yourself, I/S?) and know where to look. The first hurdle is knowing where to send the request. I knew of one that got bounced around 4 departments once, not because it was sensitive but because even the agencies didn't know who was best placed to deal with it. Local government is just as bad, especially around the boundaries.
Anything that helps people get information about how they're governed is a plus in my book.
-
It is difficult, living south of the Bombay Hills, to discern what benefits there might in a super-charged Auckland. I guess we need any benefits better explained...and lordy, lordy, Auckland does not need a Lord Mayor to muster the serfs.
To digress once again (but it has to be said), weren't the Chiefs magnificent once again on Saturday night! They really are playing beautiful rugby and there is nothing to compare with their backline.
-
so is it worth the thousands they cost and the mountains of reports they generate to keep them running just so they're there to yell at when the once in a blue moon issue that finally raises some parish pump passion comes about?
Well, yes. I have been to a Community Board meeting, and, tedious though they are, they provide an opportunity to participate, even if only the loopy, the obsessives or the deeply concerned come along.
until the public at large shows it's interested in what they do - and election turnouts show they don't give an arse - I can't see what their point is outside of the feel good 'see we really care.'
I have some sympathy for you here, Alan. We've seen the wider populace move when Banks pissed everyone off. The response from him is a 'wiser, gentler' approach to doing the same thing, but by being non-confrontational he doesn't mobilise the great majority who don't support him.
You're right, of course. Most people don't care enough about what goes on in their backyard until it directly impacts them in some way.
So... how to beat the grey rinse set from the Eastern suburbs who vote to minimise their rates and bugger the development of the city.
The result? - Cit-Rats get to put off essential maintenance yet again.
Of course, the Herald could help a bit by examining in a little more detail some of the shenanigans that go on at Council and the implications for the decisions being made.
And what about the use of new technology? Why don't they put a page up on the website for interested citizens to apportion budget as they would like. Bet that would make for interesting reading!
-
A really helpful contribution would be if they could adapt What Do They Know from the MySociety folks to New Zealand.
I'll second that. It's a fantastic idea which provides a good public resource both of stuff that's been dug up, and areas people are looking into.
Even more useful would be to use their apparent geospatial background to add geotagging to the requests and responses.I'll fourth or fifth that. It needs an intelligence ontology built around it - but that wouldn't be hard. At a simple level it's a question of adding some tags.
Anybody interested in having a go with me?
-
I think I would rather go the other way for Local Government. It seems to me that all the things that we now appreciate were done by the smaller councils like Mt Eden, New Market, or over on North Shore councils like East Coast Bays. These are councils that were small and active and built most of the Infrastructure that we are still using eg libraries, swimming pools sports grounds.
So if there is going to be a change I think I would like to go back to smaller councils reflecting their own area. I realise that some activities need to be shared to reduce costs but that could be worked out with a modified ARA.
Also I really do not care to hand over our sewage and water to WaterCare Service. I cannot think of a worse body to look after these services. -
what benefits there might in a super-charged Auckland
Something like 50% of NZ's tax revenue comes from north of a line drawn across the Bombay Hills. The great fear is that an UberAuckland would want more control of that.
The best example is the petrol tax thing - as has been commented (but not above the fold I notice) Auckland generates over 40% of road tax revenue, but gets about 30% of the spend.
But the childish argument that Auckland is "paying" for West Coast (and Wellington!) roads is manipulated, reversed and apparently well received.
If I were really cynical I'd say that has nothing to do with the politicians, more the staff who surround them (based in...)
Places like Canberra, Ottawa and DC all ended up where they are because of the need for perceived neutrality of location. NZ doesn't have that need any more - putting the capital on a fault line just because that's where the trains all terminate is a tad obsolete...
I suspect losing control of the money might be seen as an issue to people who seem to lie awake at night in fear of those nasty Aucklanders taking control... :)
-
I'd tend to agree, but I come from a public sector background (and I understand you have a smattering, yourself, I/S?)
The closest I've come to working in the public sector is being employed by an labour-hire sweatshop to process student loan applications one year. It gave me a firm understanding of why I loathe WINZ, and I quit at the first opportunity (24 hours notice cuts both ways, arseholes).
and know where to look. The first hurdle is knowing where to send the request. I knew of one that got bounced around 4 departments once, not because it was sensitive but because even the agencies didn't know who was best placed to deal with it.
If in doubt, send it to the Minister. It'll take longer, but postage is at least free :)
Local government is just as bad, especially around the boundaries.
And to pull this thread back on topic: will SuperAuckland lead to better outcomes for LGOI&MA requests?
Somehow, I doubt it.
-
It is difficult, living south of the Bombay Hills, to discern what benefits there might in a super-charged Auckland. I guess we need any benefits better explained
Well, for one thing it'd simplify rating by having a single council that sets and collects rates. At present there's Auckland Regional Council plus whichever of the "city" (including the districts) councils happens to be in charge of the area in which your property is located. All the city councils use different rating formulae, and they're different again from ARC's. It's a quagmire.
Then there're the complexities of "fair" compensation for regional amenities. Auckland City Council wears an awful lot of annual expense for things like MOTAT and Auckland Zoo, because they're located in Auckland City. They're clearly regional resources - as witnessed by how far schools travel to bring their pupils to visit - but other councils object, strenuously and bitterly, to having to actually contribute to their upkeep. There was even a central government statute in the works to try and force the other councils to pay their bit, which seems very draconian for something that should, by rights, be easily resolved.
Auckland's inter-council relationships are dysfunctional, to say the least. There's lots of parochialism between the different cities, much of it driven by the ratepayers themselves. Take the rivalries and bitchiness that exists between regions (especially Auckland and any of the regions south of the Bombay Hills), and then drop that into a sprawling urban area that has people on opposite sides of a street in different local authority boundaries, and you're beginning to get some idea of what the problem is. It's the rest of the country "paying for Auckland's roads" (don't get me started), but it's people in spitting distance of each others' houses who pay rates to different bodies and then have those rates go to maintaining the same road but in different stretches. Shambles is the politest adjective that springs to mind.
-
good on you Mark, I was beginning to think the wave of disinterest in the subject was going to prove my point.
and you want to talk about inter-city parochialism? that shit goes all the way down.
not only between community boards, but within wards - the passive aggression between the elected boards and the unelected community committees (and why the hell do they exist?) is comedy gold.
-
slarty: email me and let's talk. It doesn't look technically challenging (famous last words).
-
It doesn't look technically challenging (famous last words).
Contact I've had with MySociety about an improvement I suggested to them (not geotagging in that instance) indicates some parts of the back end are pretty challenging.
-
Andrew: if one were reimplementing, I think talking to them about what they've learned would be the very first thing to do.
-
If in doubt, send it to the Minister. It'll take longer, but postage is at least free :)
Ah, but according to the Obmudsman, the Ministers themselves are not subject to the OIA. Go figure.
The other value in a site for OIA is for transparency - seeing what process goes where, and how the machinery of government works. Very useful in a democracy. Also, you can look at what other questions are being asked and perhaps contact the requester if you think their results might be useful to your own queries.
I'd like to see a community grow up around the site, dedicated to keeping government honest. I think an open site that shows progress and procrastination by government agencies in answering OIAs is valuable in itself. If nothing else, it may spur those answering if they know that there are others watching from the sidelines.
-
Anyone serious about having the new proposals adopted needs to seriously address local representation issues, for example by proposing a larger number of 2nd-tier councils than the current six.
What you need to bear in mind however is that the proposal sees water, wastewater and raods go to regional entities. This takes away about 80% of their capital expenditure and 60% of rates income. If the remaining bodies are not reasonably large they simply will not have the critical mass in terms of resources to actually do anything.
I realise that some activities need to be shared to reduce costs but that could be worked out with a modified ARA.
Also I really do not care to hand over our sewage and water to WaterCare Service. I cannot think of a worse body to look after these services..You certainly can share activities to reduce the costs, but how will the people of North Shore, Manukau and Waitakere feel about paying to fix Auckland City's water and wastewater woes once there is s regional water entity?
-
I'd like to see a community grow up around the site, dedicated to keeping government honest. I think an open site that shows progress and procrastination by government agencies in answering OIAs is valuable in itself. If nothing else, it may spur those answering if they know that there are others watching from the sidelines.
Also, the fact that they're neither professional journalists or Opposition MPs puts it in in line with the expectations of the people who drafted the OIA, who envisaged it much more as a tool for the public than the preserve of politicians fishing for a gotcha.
-
not only between community boards, but within wards - the passive aggression between the elected boards and the unelected community committees (and why the hell do they exist?) is comedy gold.
Yes, well I've also witnessed the difficulty Community Boards have in struggling with budgets for local projects and amenities from the pathetic budgets they're given by the Council itself.
On the other hand, you don't really see anyone making a huge effort to take the CBs out into the community - they tend to meet at their chosen venue and I wonder what would happen if they took it out into the streets. Would people take notice then, I wonder?
-
Andrew: if one were reimplementing, I think talking to them about what they've learned would be the very first thing to do.
Stephen - it would be worth talking to the Rob (McKinnon?), who does the NZ version of They Work For You as well, to see what his experience of working with MySociety is. AFAIK MySociety might well be open to tech transfers to a non-profit for free/low cost. OTOH, if the government were to propose adopting their engine to do something useful to improve operation of the OIA, they'd probably seek some recompense. Since the latter would involve porcine wings flapping over Bowen Street, you (and others) have an open run at it.
Mark - there has been considerable wailing and gnashing of teeth by some local authorities in the UK regarding transparency of their replies to requests filed via the site. They've been told to grow up and stop griping. The kind of community you're talking about would be helpful I think.
-
Sue,
the info around funding from media7 was fascinating
From my experience wellington City is extremely lucky to have a city council that supports and promotes the arts as much as it does. They put a lot of money into the arts
-
As a Waiheke Islander I'm quite pleased we are to keep our community board (with enhanced powers, it is rumoured!). Given the fact that over a quarter of all the submissions to the Commission came from Waiheke, we would have erected the guillotines if there were not an acknowledgment that we're not quite Auckland City, or Tamaki Makau Rau.
The devil will be in the detail and the mood of the Government of the day to translate the recommendations into legislation.
I'm less pleased we are going to get our local version of London's BoJo. JoBo anyone? -
You certainly can share activities to reduce the costs, but how will the people of North Shore, Manukau and Waitakere feel about paying to fix Auckland City's water and wastewater woes once there is s regional water entity?
Of course, Watercare (and it's rates revenue) already covers all of those local councils, it will simply be extending it's asset footprint down to the last mile. And picking up retail-type functions.
Post your response…
This topic is closed.