Infighting is robbing ratepayers
The news this week of the amount of infighting at local territorial authorities should make every ratepayer sick to the stomach.
Almost a third of the country’s 78 councils have had to deal with code of conduct complaints since October 2019 when new councils were elected, according to information provided to NZME under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act.
From Invercargill to
Whanga¯rei, the bickering abounds in district, regional and city councils.
External consultants and lawyers appear to be the sole winners, earning in most cases thousands of dollars to investigate each complaint.
The total cost to ratepayers of code of conduct complaints investigated externally was more than $180,000 in the past year. Sure, that figure is a minuscule drop in the bucket of the $3.6 billion outlaid on general public services by councils but it doesn’t account for the amount of time wasted.
Elected officials are placed there to manage $124 billion of our assets, to prudently make decisions on how 11 per cent of public spending is apportioned.
At least half of the complaints investigated in the past year — many made by chief executives or their elected council colleagues — found no breach had been made. Or if it had, it was not material, so no further action was needed.
The example this sets for staff and contractors employed in delivering the council objectives is appalling. It diminishes the credibility of the entire organisation.
Meanwhile, councils are attempting to tackle mammoth tasks such as crumbling or inadequate infrastructure; prepare for the increasing risk of natural disasters; working with central government, iwi and stakeholders to address the increasing impact of environmental issues; preparing for the rapidly growing and ageing population; address the housing supply and quality; promote economic development; and support art and culture to uplift and improve the cultural wellbeing of all New Zealanders.
With about 1600 elected members across almost 80 councils, charged with making important and sometimes farreaching decisions, there are bound to be conflicts of opinion and clashes of personalities. But they are there to serve the communities that elected them — not their own egos or to bully others.
Undoubtedly, some code of conduct complaints will be justified. Such cases are also anathema among a body of people who have sought community backing for a position committed to public service. Such members need to get into line with proper and decent conduct, or get out.