Taupō District Council resolves not to put in Head Start proposal

The Taupō District Mayor and councillors have resolved today not to put in a Head Start amalgamation proposal.

The council will instead respond to Central Government outlining its concerns about the timing and process of local government reform and the reasons for not submitting a proposal at this time.

In May, Central Government instructed councils they had three months to work with neighbouring councils to put forward proposals for amalgamating together into regional unitary authorities. This is known as the Head Start process and it is voluntary for councils. The Government has signalled that councils who choose not to be involved in Head Start will eventually be amalgamated into unitary authorities through a mandatory Backstop process.

Taupō District Council’s goal has been to look for the best outcome for the people and interests of the Taupō District. It has talked with its communities and iwi partners as well as having discussions with other councils.

On 30 June the Mayor and councillors resolved to do a deep dive analysis into four separate options, including not putting forward a Head Start proposal at all and going into the Backstop process.

The key conclusion of the deep dive analysis was that Taupō District would likely be worse off financially under any amalgamation; and that it could be a sustainable and viable unitary authority on its own.

At a council meeting held today, the recommendation was for the council to recognise that amalgamation discussions involving Taupō District Council require further engagement and exploration. Based on the information presented, now is not the right time to put in a Head Start proposal for amalgamation. It further suggested that Council writes to the Government expressing its concern at the threat of mandatory amalgamation, frustration with the short time frame and its desire for flexibility to work with other councils to present an amalgamation proposal, if required, rather than have an arrangement dictated by Government.

Councillors discussed the various options, as well as the risks of not putting in a Head Start proposal. This was a decision made more difficult because the details of the government’s Backstop process are not yet known.

Some councillors were against the recommendation as it stood while others felt it did not go far enough and expressed frustration that the limited timeframe had not allowed time to thoroughly understand the implications of different scenarios or consult adequately with the community.

During the debate, Deputy Mayor Kevin Taylor described the decision as “a once in a generation change” and said it came on top of an avalanche of other Government changes to councils, including the Resource Management Act repeal, changes to water services, and the introduction of rates caps.

“[This decision] needs to be treated with the respect it requires. This has the potential of derailing the entire [local government] sector with all the other changes that are coming. You simply can’t do it all and not get a bit wobbly around the edges,” Mr Taylor said.

He added that he was comfortable with the council staying as it is for the time being and continuing to explore amalgamation options if they came up.

“To be simply pushed into a decision of this magnitude with the timeline we’ve been given is unrealistic.”

Cr Wahine Murch wanted to not just record the council’s concerns to Government but pushed to do more.

“I want us to not only be writing letters but initiate an active campaign against this flawed process...if we are going to take this approach we need to be strong about it and carry on advocating in person down to Parliament.”

Councillors were in general agreement that the response to Government setting out the reasons for not submitting a Head Start amalgamation proposal needed to be strong and forthright.

The recommendation passed seven votes to six, but councillors noted that they wanted to have input into the final response to send to Government. The draft will be brought to a council meeting on Thursday 6 August.