What’s the purpose of local government?

Okay, it’s exam time.

Take a moment to consider for yourself… What is the purpose of local government?

If you’re like most local government officials, your answer probably talked about being a provider of local infrastructure. This includes “hard” infrastructure like freshwater, stormwater and sewage infrastructure. But also “soft” infrastructure like arts or cultural infrastructure.

However, Peter McKinlay from the Local Government Think Tank argues that this ignores what the Local Government Act actually says about the purpose of local government. 

We’re interested in Peter’s work because he believes councils are missing opportunities to make their lives easier by working differently with communities.

And that starts with the true purpose of local government.

To find that, let’s look to the Local Government Act for an answer.

“By” - the little word that changes everything

Let’s start with section 10 which sets out the purpose of local government.

10 Purpose of local government

(1) The purpose of local government is—

(a) to enable democratic local decision-making and action by, and on behalf of, communities; and

(b) to promote the social, economic, environmental, and cultural well-being of communities in the present and for the future.

So it talks about enabling democratic local decision-making and action BY, and on behalf of, communities, and of promoting community well-being.

That one word - by - is key. This was added in 2002 and has remained despite several amendments to the purpose section. 

It means that elected members don’t just exist to make decisions and take action on behalf of their communities. It means they also exist to enable communities to make decisions and take action themselves.

This is a big shift in thinking - and one that’s easy to miss in everyday council activity.

But few councils are making the most of this opportunity

Peter suspects few local authorities have closely considered the impact of what section 10 says about enabling decision-making and action by and on behalf of communities.

The entrenched view is that councillors are elected to make decisions on behalf of their constituents. This is the concept of representative democracy - where councillors say to themselves “We were elected to make decisions for the communities - and that’s that.”

But that is inconsistent with the purpose section’s requirement to enable local democratic decision-making by and on behalf of communities. 

Why the mismatch? 

Peter believes it’s because of the sequencing of legislative change. In the 1980s, the only public document most councils would produce was a bare-bones Annual Plan. There was no requirement to consult or engage with residents. 

The current consultation provisions were introduced in the late 1980s and were a huge step forward. This includes the “special consultative procedure” that’s required for certain decision-making processes such as a Long Term Plan. 

By the time the current purpose provisions were introduced in 2002, consultation practice was well-entrenched - and the purpose section did little to change that.

And current consultation processes aren’t serving anybody that well

If you’ve got to this point in this article, you probably agree that current consultation practices could be improved. You probably agree that putting out a formal proposal, allowing a month for submissions, and then going through a series of hearings is insufficient to give communities an opportunity to make their views properly known. 

The timeframe is inadequate for any community organisation which works through a committee or board structure, and it’s not long enough for the council to have a proper dialogue about what it has in mind.

Plus, by the time your council goes to statutory consultation, there’s often little you can do to substantively change your proposals. If you consult on your Long Term Plan in April and the law says you must adopt the LTP in June - that leaves you little time to make real changes. 

In other words, the statutory framework doesn’t work for communities who want to take local issues seriously.

How can your council ‘hack’ the current consultation provisions?

Peter believes there are two key opportunities for councils to strengthen their engagement with communities within the boundaries of the Local Government Act.

Let’s first talk about pre-consultation

A number of councils are moving away from short consultation timeframes by going down the path of pre-hearing consultation. This is where you go out a year before to ask what your communities think the big issues are.

This can allow your council to present material through informal public meetings, print, public open days and other media. Much of this has been strongly influenced by the practice developed through the International Association for Public Participation (IAP2).

This then gives you time to adapt your thinking to what you hear before you invest valuable resources into the details of your priorities.

The other way is by asking communities how they want to engage and be consulted

In 2014 the Local Government Act was amended to require councils to adopt a Significance and Engagement Policy. Section 84AA(c) says this must say how the local authority will respond to community preferences about engagement on decisions relating to specific issues, assets, or other matters, including the form of consultation that may be desirable.

This seems to require councils to enable communities to express their preferences about engagement. (The only other alternative would be for councils to assume those preferences based on past experience, but that is not exactly robust.)

But if your council is yet to talk to the community about their engagement preferences - you’re not alone.

In fact, we often see councils writing up engagement strategies and ratifying them without having any kind of conversation with their community. (I’m sure you can pinpoint the irony.)

Can you see the opportunity here? Engaging the community to understand their preferences for engagement will not only strengthen your obligations under the Local Government Act; it will also strengthen your understanding of how communities truly want to be engaged.

This article is Part 1 of 3 articles written in partnership with Peter McKinlay of the Local Government Think Tank and McKinlay Douglas. Peter is a big-picture thinker with his eyes on the horizon looking at where we might be heading with local governance in New Zealand. We’ve enjoyed Peter’s questions and opinions - which challenge ideas we might take for granted - and wanted to share them with you.

You can read Part 2 here, which explores the difference between consultation and engagement - and why you need to get the distinction right.

You can read Part 3 here, which explores common misperceptions about community engagement and shows the powerful reality of investing in integrated public engagement.