gdc response to solgm discussion papers two, three and four · 2012-08-20 · that solgm produces...
TRANSCRIPT
Attachment 6
GDC Response to SOLGM
Discussion Papers Two, Three and Four
n-263321
Attachment 6
Response to SOLGM Discussion Papers Two, Three and Four
Introduction
The Gisborne District Council welcomes the opportunity to provide a response to SOLGM’s
Efficiency Taskforce Discussion Papers. In summary Gisborne District Council largely supports the
recommendations in Papers 2 and 3 and…
Paper Two: Consultation and Decision-making
Recommendation Council Position Comments
Decision making – Options for Discussion
Recommendation One:
That sections 77-79 of the LGA be replaced with a single
decision-making provision that sets out a series of principles, and
operates in a manner similar to section 82.
SUPPORT
Guidance on Significance
Recommendation Two:
That good practice guidance be prepared on significance
policies and the assessment of significance in general
SUPPORT
The Role of the Mayor
Recommendation Three:
That proposals to make the Mayor responsible for ensuring
effective engagement and establishing processes not proceed.
SUPPORT
Constraining Legislative and Judicial Expectations
Recommendation Four:
Limit the duty to consult to only those situations covered in the
Local Government Act and other legislation.
SUPPORT
Recommendation Five:
Remove port company shares, airport company shares and
social housing from the definition of strategic asset.
SUPPORT
Choosing Consultation and Engagement Processes
Recommendation Six:
That the special consultative procedure be left in place as an
option only, while allowing councils to employ another
technique or techniques subject to:
SUPPORT
(iii) a minimum level of protection for the community, and
(iv) a defined set of avenues for judicial challenge.
An Engagement Policy
Recommendation Seven:
That local authorities be required to adopt an engagement policy.
STRONGLY
SUPPORT
“Crediting” Previous Consultation
What would crediting consultation look like?
Recommendation Eight:
That the Taskforce reject “crediting” of previous consultation as
an option. SUPPORT
GDC supports rejecting the idea
of ‘crediting’ previous consultation
for the reasons set out in
paragraphs 84. and 85 of SOLGMs
discussion paper.
n-263321
Recommendation Council Position Comments
Summaries
Recommendation Nine:
That the Local Government Act be amended to require
separate summaries if and only if the related statement of
proposal is more than 4 A4 pages in length.
SUPPORT
Good Practice Guidance
Recommendation Ten:
That SOLGM produces good practice guidance: SUPPORT
(i) To support the sector’s understanding of any change to the
consultation and decision-making provisions.
(ii) To build awareness of consultation techniques that have
succeeded especially in engaging with “hard to reach”
groups.
Paper Three: The Accountability Cycle
Recommendation Council Position Comments
Community Outcomes
1. That the community outcomes be renamed Council’s
strategic objectives (or similar).
NEITHER SUPPORT
NOR OPPOSE
2. That the requirement to disclose the results of any monitoring
community outcomes in the annual report be repealed. SUPPORT
3. That councils be required to monitor their progress towards
their council objectives and to report on the results of this
monitoring at least once every three years.
SUPPORT
The Long-Term Plan – Role and Purpose
4. That a requirement to plan long-term remains a part of the
accountability cycle.
STRONGLY
SUPPORT
5. That the statement of purpose for the LTP be amended to
clarify that the LTP is a strategic document. SUPPORT
Long-Term Plan Development
6. That option 4: Reducing the size of the LTP (aka the Iceberg
model) be the basis for the future development of the LTP. SUPPORT
7. That activity management planning be made a legal
rather than a practical requirement.
CONDITIONAL
SUPPORT
Activity Information
8. That the requirement to disclose significant negative effects
be removed from the LTP. SUPPORT
9. That a common understanding be reached as to the
meaning of the phrase “in detail for the first three years and
in outline for the years thereafter”.
SUPPORT
Non-Financial Performance Information
10. That the term major aspects of levels of service be
amended to read major levels of service (or similar) SUPPORT
11. That requirements to disclose performance information
remain in the LTP “as is”. SUPPORT
12. That the sector develops a “good practice” set of measures
across those services commonly provided by local authorities. SUPPORT
n-263321
Recommendation Council Position Comments
Capital Expenditure
13. That, consistent with the move to mandatory AMPs,
requirements to disclose all capital expenditure be
removed from the LTP, and be replaced with a requirement
to disclose significant capital projects only.
SUPPORT
Assessments and Waste Management Plans
14. That the requirement to disclose variations from the Assessment
of Water and Sanitary Services, and the Waste Management
and Minimisation Plan be removed from the LTP.
SUPPORT
Council Controlled Organisations
15. That LTP disclosures of CCO information focus only on
significant CCOs (as defined above). SUPPORT
Policies on Māori Capacity
16. That disclosures covering policies on developing the capacity
of Maori to contribute to decision-making be moved from the
long-term plan to the local governance statement.
SUPPORT
Financial Strategy
17. That the provisions specifying the content of a financial
strategy be simplified by: SUPPORT
a. removing factors i) – iii) from the list of mandatory
content i.e. letting local authorities and their auditors
determine what issues should be included in the
financial strategy
b. removing references to limits on rates from the financial
strategy, while retaining references to rates increases
and debt
c. removing policies on security for borrowing from the
financial strategy and placing these in the borrowing
management policy
d. removing the requirement to disclose objectives and
quantified targets for investments from the financial
strategy and placing these in the investment policy.
Significance Policies
18. That the requirement to show a summary of the policy on
significance be removed from the LTP. SUPPORT
Financial Reporting
19. That there be a review of the suitability of NZ PBE as a basis
for local authority financial statements not less than three
years after the initial commencement date.
OPPOSE For any review to be successful
and gain traction there needs to
be a whole of public benefit
entity review as opposed to only
Local Government driving the
review and request for change.
20. That the requirements to produce a funding impact
statement for the whole of council, and for each group be
repealed and replaced with a requirement to produce a
GAAP compliant cost of service statement for each group
of activities (or alternatively a GAAP compliant income and
expenditure statement).
SUPPORT
21. That the sector produces good practice guidance on plain
English financial reporting once NZ PBE standards have had
the opportunity to “bed in”.
SUPPORT
n-263321
Recommendation Council Position Comments
22. That the Financial Reporting Regulations specify a common
reporting format for group of activity level statements. This
may mean a separate regulation for territorial authorities
and regional councils.
OPPOSE Council is concerned that little or
no consideration has been given
for Unitary Authorities.
Balanced Budget
23. That section 100 of the Act be repealed due to its unnecessary
duplication of aspects of the test of financial prudence.
OPPOSE
Section 100 provides clarity
around what Council should
have regard for when
considering budgets and rates. It
ensures that Council has a long
term focus and promotes
financially sustainability.
24. That a statement covering observance of the balanced
budget requirement be removed from the long-term plan.
OPPOSE
The statement concerning
balanced budget is useful as it
highlights decisions to not balance
a budget i.e. run a deficit, fund
operations through a reserve, not
fund depreciation etc.
Reserves Disclosure
25. That disclosures around reserves be removed from the long-
term plan. OPPOSE
In the interests of transparency
Council considers that this
disclosure should be retained.
Annual Plan - Purpose
26. That section 95(5) be amended to better reflect the real
purpose of an annual plan. SUPPORT
Consultation on Annual Plans
27. That requirements to consult on an annual plan be
removed except where the annual plan is used as a
vehicle for amendments to the LTP or where there is a
significant variation from an LTP.
SUPPORT
28. That a new provision be added to the Act clarifying that
the purpose of a summary annual plan is to provide the
public with a summary of the intended financial and non-
financial performance for the year.
SUPPORT
Content of an Annual Plan
29. That the required contents of an annual plan be amended
to reflect the amendments made in recommendations 6.
to 25. above
SUPPORT
Annual Reports
30. That disclosures around internal borrowing be removed
from the annual report.
31. That the required contents of an annual report be
amended in line with recommendations 6. to 25. above.
32. That the sector prepares further good practice guidance
on the preparation and use of annual report summaries to
communicate local authority performance.
SUPPORT
The Pre-Election Report
33. That requirements to prepare a PER be retained in the Act,
but that these be reviewed for effectiveness as part of the
Select Committee Inquiry into the 2013 local elections.
SUPPORT
Council questions the value of
this requirement to prepare a
PER.
n-263321
Recommendation Council Position Comments
34. That the disclosure options currently afforded to those local
authorities with populations of 20,000 or less be extended to
all local authorities (i.e. that their Pre-Election Reports can
use financial data from the annual plan for the financial
year preceding local authority elections).
SUPPORT
35. That the requirement to publish funding impact statements
in the Pre-Election Reports be repealed, and replaced with
a requirements to publish PBE compliant Income and
Expenditure statements.
SUPPORT
36. That LGNZ and SOLGM negotiate a recommended
protocol or process through which Chief Executives can
prepare and authorise the Pre-Election Report and inform
their elected members.
SUPPORT