submissions was concerns at the loss of local identity and weakening of local democracy. Other frequent themes were a preference for the status quo, a concern that the costs of change were too high, and that there was not sufficient evidence of a need for change. 7 of the 8 Community Boards that submitted (from across the Hutt, Kapiti, Wellington and South Wairarapa districts) opposed the draft. The table below summarises a sample of the submissions from community organisations, including all Community Board submissions. Table 6- Summary of selected submissions from Community Boards and Local Community Groups Name of organisation Key points on Proposal Preferred option/amendments? Kapiti Coast Grey Power (Kapiti Coast District) Neither supports nor opposes Concern at degree of uncertainty around costs and benefits Potential for loss of local voice and impacts on rates of those on fixed incomes Benefits from amalgamation can be achieved through in specific areas Martinborough Community Board (South Wairarapa District) Opposes the proposal Concern over loss of local knowledge and involvement Status quo with continued progress toward shared services Mount Victoria Residents Association (Wellington City) Opposes a single council Local democracy/decision making will be sacrificed Concern Wellington City residents will pay for the debts of other councils Greater co-operation between locally based bodies A regional council that is more considerate of local views Paraparaumu/Raumati Community Board (Kapiti Coast District) Opposes the proposal Acknowledge need for change in governance Concern over accessibility to decision makers Keep the status quo, keep community boards acting as a voice for local communities and stronger cooperation between councils Petone Community Board (Hutt City) Opposes the proposal Insufficient public support Costs of change too high Economic development functions could be combined without amalgamation Scope for increased shared services Pukerua Bay Residents Association (Porirua City) Supports the proposal Strikes a good balance between improved regional efficiency and maintenance of local identity Amalgamation should be done soon but need more detail around planning powers of local boards. Local boards should develop their own plans.
Tawa Community Board (Wellington City) Supports but recognises proposal may not succeed Makes sense from a strategic and regulatory perspective LGC propose an alternative plan more acceptable to region at large Wainuiomata Community Board (Hutt City) Opposes the proposal Believes there is a high level of community opposition Status quo Support in community for more shared services Otaki Community Board (Kapiti Coast District) Opposes the proposal Opposed to changes that will result in the loss of the local community voice Status Quo or further explore how the status quo can be more efficient and effective with greater shared services. Makara-Ohariu Community Board (Wellington City) Does not support the draft proposal in its present form. Concern that the present proposal does not give sufficient recognition to “Communities of Interest”. No specific suggestion Featherston Community Board (South Wairarapa District) Majority opposed to the proposal Summary of views of businesses and business organisations Overall, there is support for the proposal from the businesses and business organisations with 54% of submissions identified as coming from this group supporting the proposal. This support was strongest among businesses and organisations identified as based in Wellington City, or as having a regional or national focus, as compared to the submissions from more local businesses in other districts. It was notable that there was little support for the draft proposal from businesses identified as based in the Hutt Valley, and that the Hutt Valley Chamber of Commerce also submitted in opposition to the proposal. The submission from the Wellington Employers Chamber of Commerce provided valuable data on the results of surveys of members undertaken by the various Chambers across the region. This showed that: The Porirua Chamber members’ poll showed 75% support for change to the structure of local government, 35% support for the proposal and 26% opposition; The Kapiti Chamber members’ poll showed 65% support for change to the structure of local government, 47.5% support for the proposal and 20% opposition; The Wairarapa Chamber members’ poll showed 79% support for change to the structure of local government, 65% support for the proposal; The Wellington Chamber members’ poll showed 62% support for change to the structure of local government, 46% support for the proposal;
The Hutt Valley Chamber submission reported that its members' poll, differently worded from those above, found that 58.7% felt negatively towards the proposal and 41.3% positively. Business organisations that supported the proposal tended to support the idea of a ‘one stop shop’ for businesses, and as leading to the streamlining rules and district plans. However, there is some concern around commercial rating issues, and the possibility that some parts of the region may need to subsidise other parts of the region. A selection of the submissions from business organisations is summarised in the table below. Table 7- Summary of submissions from Business Organisations Name of organisation Key points on Proposal Preferred option/amendments Business NZ Supports the direction of the proposal In favour of greater economies of scale and improved decision making around local government services. Local government funding needs to be more rigorously addressed The role of local government needs to be established on a principled basis and properly circumscribed. Hutt Valley Chamber of Commerce Opposes the proposal but supports further consideration of change Concern over loss of local voice/absorbing other areas debts Submitted that there was no real evidence around efficiencies of scale A new structure may exclude the Wairarapa, combine the Hutt regions, and combine Wellington/Porirua Would like to see its business community more involved in debates Kapiti Coast Chamber of Commerce Neutral but most members support some form of change Amalgamation could bring resources/expertise to bear on large projects in Kapiti Wants to ensure any rating system aligns costs and benefits fairly Does not want to see any ring-fencing of debt Retail NZ Supports change to the structure of local government in principle but does not support the proposal Not convinced the proposal would result in savings for business (particularly SMEs) Would like to see effective centralisation of decision making to avoid the unnecessary duplication of business processes The Wairarapa Chamber of Commerce Supports the proposal (in principle) Amalgamation would be a catalyst to improved decision making/strategic capacity Establishment of a Rural Advisory Board Wants to ensure needs of rural community are met effectively
Wellington Employers Chamber of Commerce Supports the proposal Consider the current governance model as suboptimal Concern that Wellington businesses may have to subsidise other regions Suggested that the LGC could present a range of options at the next stage, akin to a referendum. Would like to see its business community to be more involved in the debates Summary of views of Iwi and Māori organisations More submitters identified as from iwi, hapu or other Māori organisations opposed the proposal or were neutral, than supported it. Most of the submissions in this group were from the Wairarapa. Several of these submissions were concerned about preserving valued relationships that have been developed with local authorities, and the about the sort of relationships Māori want with local government in the region into the future regardless of the particular structure that might be in place. Suggestions made included provision for tangata whenua representation on standing Committees, logistical support to enable iwi/Māori to participate, more representation at the local board level, and for the Māori Board to be resourced at the level of a local board (if the proposal were to proceed). Set out below is the feedback from those Iwi and Māori organisations that provided a submission on the draft proposal. Table 8- Summary of submissions from Iwi and Māori organisations Name of organisation Key points on Proposal Preferred option Ara Tahi, the partnership of Tangata Whenua leaders and Leaders of Greater Wellington Regional Council. Standing with council/ councils should least be to the standard presently maintained with GWRC. This currently includes: a formal partnership a joint natural resources committee, one Tangata Whenua member on each of the Council’s standing committees arrangements to enable each Iwi to provide advice to Council logistical support Neutral. Want standard presently maintained with GWRC to be maintained and formalised through appropriate legislation. Kahungunu ki Wairarapa Iwi Authority Standing with council/ councils should least to the standard presently maintained with GWRC a formal partnership, a joint natural resources committee, one Tangata Whenua member on each of the Council’s standing committees Tangata Whenua monitor Council’s performance of Treaty obligations logistical support Neutral. Want standard presently maintained with GWRC to be maintained and formalised through appropriate legislation.
Ngāti Kahungunu ki Wairarapa – Tāmaki Nui ā Rua Trust Seeking changes to relationship with local government post-settlement through the negotiations process and are concerned that any local government reorganisation does not prejudice either the negotiations process or our eventual settlement. Set out concerns about adequacy of key aspects of the proposal relating to Māori participation Neutral Want to provide for broader iwi/Māori engagement that is more permanent. Ngati Kahu Kura Awhitia Opposed to what is on the table but not to combining the Wairarapa councils. Opposed South Wairarapa District Council Māori Standing Committee Opposes the draft proposal on the basis that Tangata Whenua would lose their Mana Whenua. Supports the formation of a Wairarapa Unitary Authority. Te Runanga o Toa Rangatira Inc Ngati Toa does not expect the relationships to be diminished that have been established as part of a formal relationship with local government region resulting from a 2012 Treaty claim. Support a single tier option Want Māori wards to be established as outlined in the LGA 2001. Wellington Tenths Trust Amalgamation would bring efficiencies e.g. reducing the number of plans and improving the regional roading network The Māori Board needs to be resourced in a way a Local Board is. Generally support proposal but wary of the devil in the detail. Want appropriate resourcing for Māori Board Te Pou Herenga o Hiwaru Māori Reservation Oppose the proposal If there is to be change combine Wairarapa territorial authorities Rangitane O Wairarapa Iwi Incorporated Opposed to proposal True partnership with Council not just an advisory group Naenae Māori Committee Oppose the proposal No change Motuwairaka Marae Oppose the proposal supports the current Masterton District Council structure but if there is to be a change, the preferred option is a combining the 3 Wairarapa district councils Summary of submissions from government agencies Only a small number government agencies have provided written responses to the call for submissions. Most did not take strong positions either for or against the specific proposal. These responses are summarised below.