ECan’s representation proposal defended
Environment Canterbury councillor David Caygill says giving South Canterbury an extra seat is not an ‘‘urban versus rural’’ issue, but an issue of fairness.
At Thursday’s Local Government Commission hearing in Christchurch, several appellants spoke against ECan’s proposal to grant South Canterbury two councillors as gerrymandering as it would give the region a greater ratio of representation than the Christchurch area.
It was also argued that meant South Canterbury breached the representation ratio.
However, Caygill told Stuff yesterday that it was not as black and white as this arrangement appeared.
‘‘Several submitters to ECan’s hearings were aware that the 10 per cent tolerance is not absolute,’’ he said.
‘‘They argued, as I would argue, that effective representation does ‘‘require’’ that the South Canterbury constituency, as drawn, be represented by two councillors not one. There would be no fairness issue if the boundary was shifted north to include the Ashburton District. But that would do violence to communities of interest.’’
Caygill said changing South Canterbury’s boundaries would also likely require consequential changes to the other constituencies outside Christchurch, which would result in them all being very large in area.
‘‘The proposed (and present) South Canterbury constituency is already large in area.
‘‘Parts of the constituency are further away from Christchurch than any other: Twizel, for example, is twice as far from Christchurch as Kaikoura. And much of South Canterbury, most obviously the Mackenzie Basin, is special in character and generates a great deal of work for ECan councillors.’’
ECan’s representation proposal has two councillors each for North Canterbury, South Canterbury and Mid Canterbury, while Christchurch has eight councillors across four wards.
At the hearings, Keir Leslie, of Concerned Canterbury Citizens for Fair Representation, suggested that Mid Canterbury could be merged with North Canterbury to form one constituency with three councillors.
However, Caygill said there was no appetite for changing the boundaries among the public.
‘‘We tested that boundary at the public hearings. No-one supported moving the boundary further north to the next Territorial Authority boundary, the Rakaia River. ’’
Caygill acknowledged that its proposed representation model did in fact over-represent South Canterbury, but not by a large margin.
‘‘Once again, the Local Government Act requires that we consider both ‘‘fair’’ and ‘‘effective’’ representation,’’ he said.
Caygill said ECan was not keen to drop representation for South Canterbury down to one councillor, because the two-councillor model would help ‘‘share the load’’
‘‘In our view this arrangement may also, in some small way, help to break down the barriers of stereotype and prejudice that ‘urban versus rural’ often seems to generate.’’
In October, ECan will host its first full elections since 2007.
The Local Government Commission will make its decision by April 11.