Priority One's submission on the Government's Head Start process for local government reform

This submission summarises views shared by Priority One members, and reflects a cross-section of business perspectives from across Tauranga and the Western Bay of Plenty. Those views are not uniform on every detail of reform, and members have different perspectives on the final preferred structure. However, there is strong alignment on the problems any reform must seek to solve and the principles that should guide future decision-making.

The consistent message from members is that local government reform should not be treated as an institutional exercise or simply a process of redrawing boundaries. It should be focused on creating a system that is simpler, faster, more accountable and better able to plan, fund and deliver the infrastructure and services required to support long-term growth.

Members consistently identified fragmented decision-making, duplication across council functions, inconsistent planning and consenting processes, rising costs, unclear accountability and slow infrastructure delivery as barriers to business confidence, investment and productivity.

As one member put it:

“The Western Bay of Plenty does not have a growth problem – it has a governance and delivery problem. Reform must create a single, accountable system capable of planning and delivering at pace.”

Priority One encourages both councils to approach the Head Start process constructively and with ambition. The test should not be which existing institution is protected. The test should be what structure best enables housing, infrastructure, jobs, productivity, environmental stewardship, strong local voice and long-term regional resilience.

Submission

This submission does not seek to present a single fixed position on behalf of every member. Rather, it summarises the common themes that emerged from member feedback and offers a business-orientated perspective on the outcomes reform should seek to deliver.

From that feedback, four problems stand out that need to be solved through any proposed change being considered.

What came through most clearly was that members want reform to start with the seeking to solve the practical barriers businesses face every day.

First, the current system is too fragmented for the scale of the region’s growth challenges. Growth, transport, housing, water, industrial land, energy, environmental management and economic development do not stop at council boundaries. Yet businesses are often required to work through different planning rules, consenting processes, engineering standards, fees, priorities and timeframes depending on where they are operating. That creates cost, delay and uncertainty. It also makes it harder for the region to present a clear, coordinated proposition to central government and private investors – that this is a region they should view with confidence and back with belief and capital.

Second, infrastructure delivery has not kept pace with growth. Members pointed to congestion, uncertainty around infrastructure sequencing, limited industrial land supply, consenting delays, energy constraints and a lack of clarity around when key enabling infrastructure will be delivered. The Western Bay has strong fundamentals – population growth, export strength, port access, horticulture, logistics, professional services and an evolving city centre – but those strengths are being constrained by delivery systems that are too slow and too complex. The recently signed Regional Deal is regarded as a positive step forward, bringing greater certainty to several key infrastructure projects and demonstrating that our local government can work together and with foresight to achieve positive outcomes.

Third, there is too much duplication and not enough clear accountability. Members identified overlapping council functions, repeated processes, multiple approval pathways and duplicated capability across city, district and regional structures. Businesses do not always know who is responsible for decisions, who is accountable for delays, or how priorities are being traded off. This weakens confidence and affects investment, development feasibility, hiring decisions and business expansion.

Fourth, value for money must improve. This does not mean simply cutting cost. Businesses understand that a growing region must invest. Many members are prepared to support investment where it is disciplined, transparent and clearly linked to outcomes. What they are less willing to accept is rising rates, development contributions and compliance costs without a corresponding improvement in infrastructure delivery, service quality, speed, certainty and economic impact.

Structural options

One member’s comment was a pithy summary of business sentiment on the approach to thinking about future local government structure:

“Look outward to the opportunity, not inward to protect current thinking and institutions.”

That sentiment reflects the spirit in which Priority One believes this process should be approached. The Head Start process should start from first principles: what governance model will best enable the Western Bay and wider Bay of Plenty to plan, fund and deliver for the next 20 to 30 years?

Member feedback shows support for simplification, consolidation and better alignment. Some members favour a Tauranga and Western Bay sub-regional unitary authority because it would align the fastest-growing urban and rural parts of the sub-region with infrastructure, housing, transport and land-use decisions.

Others favour a wider Bay of Plenty unitary authority because the regional economy operates well beyond Tauranga and Western Bay boundaries, particularly through the port, horticulture, forestry, freight, logistics, tourism, geothermal opportunities, energy and the wider primary sector.

The common thread across all comments was the status quo is not fit for the future; and any reform must create a system that is simpler, faster, more accountable and more capable of delivering growth-enabling infrastructure.

All options should be tested against a practical business question: will this make the region more investable, more productive and better able to deliver?

Some members noted that there was an important balance to be struck between the benefits of scale and representation.

If a sub-regional model is pursued, it must have enough scale, financial strength, capability and regional alignment to avoid simply recreating fragmentation at a new boundary. If a wider Bay of Plenty model is pursued, it must protect local responsiveness and avoid becoming too distant from the communities and businesses it serves.

Design principles

The final structure matters, but the design principles matter more. Based on the summarised member views, Priority One believes any Head Start proposal should be built around the following principles:

Integrated growth and infrastructure planning
Land use, transport, water, housing, industrial land, energy, environmental management and economic development should be planned together, with clear sequencing and delivery accountability, and with business recognised as having relevant expertise to contribute constructively to better outcomes if given the chance to participate in planning forums.

Faster and more predictable consenting
Businesses need consistent rules, transparent timeframes, fewer duplicated approval pathways and a stronger customer focus.

Clear accountability for outcomes
Responsibility for infrastructure delivery, planning decisions and regional growth outcomes must be visible, measurable and understood.

Protection of local and iwi voice
Reform must achieve scale without losing connection. Iwi and urban, rural and coastal communities must have fair representation in any new model. Without that, the ability to move forward will be constrained by a weak mandate.

Financial transparency and discipline
Ratepayers and businesses need to understand where money is spent, what outcomes are delivered, and how debt, assets and liabilities will be managed fairly.

A stronger partnership with central government
The Western Bay Regional Deal shows the value of a coordinated regional approach with the Government. Future local government structures should strengthen the region’s ability to speak clearly and credibly to Wellington.

A focus on outcomes, not institutional protection
The test should be what structure best enables housing, infrastructure, jobs, productivity, environmental stewardship and long-term resilience.

Conclusion

The Western Bay does not lack opportunity. It has growth, capital, talent, export strength, growing iwi enterprise and economic strength, and national significance.

What the region needs is a governance and delivery system that amplifies that opportunity, gives businesses confidence to invest, and gives communities confidence that growth can be well planned and well delivered.

Done well, reform can give our region the scale, clarity and confidence required to be what it should be: New Zealand’s most productive, investable and well-governed region.

That should be the ambition guiding this process.