The "10 reasons why" - assessed
A group of organisations (lead by the Wairarapa Chamber of Commerce) and people are backing the proposed amalgamation and have issued a leaflet with a list of "One Council: 10 reasons why".
Here is our take on those ten reasons.
| Reason | Wishful Thinking |
Evidence Based |
Could it be achieved without amalgamation? | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1. Stronger Wairarapa voice |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Unquantifiable wish. |
2. One strategy for economic growth |
? |
? |
Yes |
South Wairarapa fastest growing district already. |
3. Less red tape |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Less red tape is achievable by councils standardising approaches where possible. There will be different red tape. |
4. Efficient planning and decision-making |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
There is no evidence that bigger councils are more efficient or productive. |
5. Wairarapa is governed here, not from Wellington |
? |
? |
? |
Red herring - why is this even on the list? |
6. Stronger representation |
Yes |
No |
? |
Orwellian doublespeak - stronger representation by reduced representation? |
7. More efficient delivery of infrastructure |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Again, no evidence that bigger councils are more efficient at delivering infrastructure. |
8. Stronger staffing base |
Yes |
No |
Yes |
Again, no evidence that bigger councils have better expertise. Expertise could be shared between councils by each council becoming "centres of excellence" in different areas. |
9. Stronger financial base |
Yes |
No |
No |
The largest council of the three has significant debt. Council revenue doesn't provide surpluses so the only possibility is from cost savings that are "modest" at best and likely unattainable. |
10. Cost savings |
Yes | No | Yes | Transition costs are underestimated. Savings are overestimated - staff cuts impracticable. Shared services and joint contracts have already produced $1m savings at minimal cost. |
In summary
- The vast majority of these "benefits" could be achieved without amalgamation but with the councils taking Shared Services and joint resourcing more seriously.
Why hasn't this happened? With the amalgamation agenda on the table it has been in the interests of some to demonstrate that the Shared Services model doesn't work. - One red herring - amalgamation or not we are governed locally and the regional council services remain. This is not a reason to amalgamate.
- A number of the benefits are based on the "bigger is better" philosophy and that is not supported by case studies or data.
- Where are the case studies and examples that show these points are proven and actually get realised?
- The cost savings reason is built on such flimsy estimates that it is at high risk of never being achieved.
The 10 reasons to support the proposed amalgamation look pretty weak overall.
There isn't a single point of compelling value there.
If these are the best reasons, then it's not a supportable proposition.
