Local projects deserve the leftovers
Some of the unallocated $4 billion in the Government’s infrastructure fund should be spent on local projects, to benefit all New Zealanders, says Local Government New Zealand president Dave Cull.
As the younger sibling in New Zealand’s political family, local government is used to getting hand-me-downs. Our funding shoes are a size too small, we’re still wearing beige election stubbies with a key pocket on the front and our policy curfew is every teenager’s worst nightmare.
But like the plucky young kid in the family, when an opportunity arises to tackle some of the big issues affecting the future of the entire family – in this case securing the leftovers from Finance Minister Grant Robertson’s $12 billion to address muchneeded local infrastructure upgrades – we’re not shy of putting on our cousin’s old blazer, shining our too-tight shoes and stating our case.
The minister recently announced about $7b worth of projects, largely in roading and public health. We think the spending is worthwhile, but we also believe there is a strong case for spending some of the remaining $4 billion on shovelready local infrastructure projects that will unlock New Zealand’s environmental, social, economic and cultural potential.
It’s clear New Zealand has greatly benefited from the wide range of skills and knowledge brought by the half a million new arrivals in the past five years, but this population growth has put massive pressure on our roads, three waters, public transport and almost every other form of infrastructure you can name.
So here are a few areas that could benefit from some of Robertson’s leftover $4b. Bear in mind that local government spends around $4b on infrastructure each year, so an injection of roughly the same amount would benefit the lives of every New Zealander.
The first is investment in river management and flood protection. Huge areas of New Zealand rely on stopbanks, dams and weirs which have unlocked billions of dollars in economic value over several decades.
Unfortunately, central government withdrew investment after the 1989 local government reforms, and it has been communities, largely through regional councils, that have continued to invest $200 million a year into these assets.
These schemes are a true public good, providing safety and security to about 1.5 million hectares of our most productive land and more than 100 towns and cities. They also protect central government assets, including highways, the railway network, electricity infrastructure, schools, and hospitals.
The second area is one that has been subject to much more discussion in all communities – waste and recycling. It is time to invest in onshore recycling facilities, particularly for the grades of plastic that no longer have offshore markets, to deliver a true circular economy.
Our transport network perhaps bears the most weight from our population increase. While freight trucks batter local roads, road user charges only trickle back to councils to pay for this damage. With no change to that regime in sight, greater investment into local roads is needed, as well as long-term freight alternatives.
Lastly, but perhaps most importantly, we have to get ahead of the threats to community resilience from climate change-induced weather events. We’ve seen councils at the forefront of defending communities from a range of natural disasters including Tasman fires, the recent South Island and earlier Edgecumbe floods and the Kaiko¯ ura quake.
We think there’s value in central government assisting councils with their work to prepare communities for the increasing array of natural hazards, particularly through adaption measures for wildfires, sea level rise, earthquakes, tsunami, and flooding.
Local government might be the younger sibling, but it’s councils that do most of the household chores. The work may not be headline grabbing, but it is essential. So before the Government invites over anyone else for a party, we think it’s worth it pitching in with its fair share of the pocket money to cater for that party.
Local government might be the younger sibling, but it’s councils that do most of the household chores.