Jill Greathead - Councillor

Opposes amalgamation.

What is your position on the draft proposal and, importantly, why?

Status Quo for the following reasons:

Culture and behavioural change

It’s cultural and behavioral change that is needed – not structural change which comes at an estimated cost of $21m. Let’s do cultural and behavioral first before we consider any structural change.

Minor cost savings for huge disruption

Huge disruption for the estimated minor cost savings.

Local Government Commission Process

This process is being led by the Local Government Commission (LGC) – not the people of Wairarapa who will pay an estimated $21m for this structural change.

This process should have been a collaboration process as outlined in Twyford's “The Power of Co”.

My experience of amalgamations in the UK

Having experienced similar amalgamations in the UK during the 15 years I lived there, the smaller communities lost their services in favour of the larger communities. This has created a weakened local democracy in the UK.

When smaller is better

I believe we should be guided by the New Zealand Initiative report “The Local Benchmark: When Smaller is Better”.

What is a specific issue (a problem or opportunity) that you believe amalgamation will address and how will it address it?

As I oppose amalgamation I don’t believe amalgamation will address any problems or create opportunities until we have an empowering and co-operative culture.
Co-operation will come from strengthened Shared Services where officials from all Councils as they are expected to perform for the greater good of the Wairarapa people not just their own patch.

What tangible benefits could amalgamation bring for ratepayers and how will amalgamation achieve them?

There will be some costs that can be saved but nothing like the estimated $21m costs of the transition process.

What are the risks of amalgamation, and if any, how will they be mitigated?

Transition costs blowout
That transition costs including IT costs are greater than what is estimated so rates will increase.
Mitigation: A far more detailed analysis of transition costs and a detailed analysis and specification of the IT upgrade is required.
Less diversity, representation, increased apathy and disempowerment of communities
Mitigation: Can’t be mitigated – that is the way it is for reduced local democracy.
Centralisation of facilities and services
Community and sporting facilities are usually built in the largest urban community so the smaller communities miss out.
Mitigation: Ensure that community and sporting facilities are spread evenly around the region.
 
e-max.it: your social media marketing partner