Interest in running for council still lacking despite campaign
Is the attraction of standing for local government waning?, asks Meg Taylor, of Stand Up Wanaka.
LOOKING ahead in May this year, our local government elections presented a brighter future for Upper Clutha representation: a new mayor, four councillors and a reinvigorated community board.
But there was a contrast between the opportunities offered and the apparent lack of interest. Stand Up Wanaka — and Stand Up Upper Clutha — was set up to stimulate participation in Upper Clutha governance, and to do our best to promote a wellcontested election.
To address locals' reluctance to stand, a key part of our campaign was to set up a support structure and connections with local community groups and leaders for all candidates who did come forward.
We are winding up our “Stand Up” campaign at the close of this nomination period, so what did we learn?
On the positive side, there is huge and likely underutilised support out there for local candidates. We often hear dismay at the personal attacks politicians come up against, yet we found a wealth of genuine interest and offers of support from the diverse community groups and leaders we approached. Everyone — including local environmental and community advocates, developers, builders, legal, governance, town planning and media experts — was keen to be involved and make a connection with our council representatives.
On the negative side, it turns out that the reluctance to stand for local government is a nationwide issue. We lost several sitting councillors in the course of the nomination period, including one singleterm councillor. We did succeed in generating more interest, but it was hard work.
In a recent RNZ article, Local Government New Zealand president Stuart Crosby outlined his explanation for the low number of candidates nominated for the upcoming local government elections. He listed three key reasons:
Social media and ugly rhetoric directed at politicians.
Low salary levels.
Council functionality.
“When you start looking closely at the compliance requirements, it starts to make the job look more like ticking complicated boxes than making strategic decisions for your community . . . The job has changed dramatically in terms of scale and complexity, but nobody has asked the question: ‘What is necessary to underpin good governance?' And at the moment, arguably, the governance arrangements for most councils are — for reasons outside the control of councils themselves — quite dysfunctional,” Mr Crosby said.
The first two are straightforward and generally acknowledged. You need a thick skin to be a councillor.
Mr Crosby’s third point on council functionality and decisionmaking is harder to understand and probably much harder to fix.
On the matter of salaries, it is worth noting that we have a very topdown system when it comes to remuneration of councillors versus mayors. In the new term, the Queenstown Lakes District mayor will be paid almost $144,000. Councillors, on the other hand, will receive a base of $40,710. In
Dunedin, the mayor will receive just over $172,000, while councillors start at $64,181.
This is said to be in recognition of the mayor being a districtwide, fulltime driving role. But while this ratio is not dissimilar to that between MPs’ and prime ministerial remuneration, in the case of many local government communities it means the difference between an income that allows for fulltime commitment and one that only represents parttime or supplementary income. This hardly sends a message supportive of diverse and collaborative local community representation. In many southern electorates we have multiple individuals standing for mayor but a lack of councillor and community board candidates.
Amidst the nationwide reluctance to stand for council, time is one of the limiting factors frequently mentioned. People feel that they can’t hold down a business or a job and be a council representative, yet they are being paid as if they can. Families, and women especially, are thin on the ground. There is a child care allowance, however it is little utilised, little understood and doesn’t appear to be promoted by local councils.
The workload is something that Local Government NZ needs to address. It should be possible for our local representatives to oversee strategy and major decisions for our community without feeling they are giving up their lives, families or livelihood.
In the QLDC, an army of council staff (about 500 people) is required to cover the massive financial, compliance and documentation requirements of a fastgrowing district with multiple competing communities. Yet 11 councillors and a mayor working on their own are expected to drive this. What needs to happen to enable councillors to be and feel in charge of strategic decisionmaking? What sort of support structure should they have, and should council officers and staff be doing more to provide this? Do voters increasingly feel that our local councils are becoming institutions run by staff rather than elected representatives?
This is especially relevant in some districts, such as Central Otago or Queenstown Lakes, where a single large council office base is servicing multiple towns and communities. Councillors do not all have equal access to key staff, and the staff lack the experience of living in local communities. Zoom has also arguably made meetings less open to debate and councillors less accessible.
The net result is that local people are reluctant to stand for council and voters don’t feel inspired to vote. Something needs to happen — use it or lose it!
Will we have strong participatory local government in 10 years’ time or will we find ourselves merged into everlarger regional or national entities?