 |
 |
 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|||||
|
Leader's LetterJuly 2005
The Burden of Pesky RatesAs local government spokesperson, I am regularly asked to explain why rates have that pesky habit of going up every year, and why ratepayers are often called upon to fund projects in their communities that many of them may not use. In a high tax, low wage economy such as ours, yet another rates demand just adds to the burden of all the other taxes that we have to pay. Direct or indirect, and be they called taxes, rates, levies, or charges, they all have one thing in common - they are unavoidable. What many people don't realise is that central government legislation often imposes significant costs on councils. For example, the Local Government Act 2002, which was heralded by the government as a new era for our district, regional and city councils, requires more extensive consultation and community engagement than many councils had hitherto conducted. While this is a positive approach in a democratic society such as ours, it also costs money. Good councils should always be engaging with their communities anyway, and the Act's heavy reliance on a rigid and formal consultation process, as for the Long Term Community Consultation Plan, does not necessarily guarantee its effectiveness. It's plain that many ratepayers are aggrieved with the actions of their councils all over New Zealand, despite the mandatory consultation requirements of the Act. Other government legislation impacts financially on councils as well, two recent examples being the Dog Control Act and the Prostitution Reform Act. The implementation of these Acts has been a costly exercise for many councils with regard to planning, consent and compliance. The Local Government Act 2002 and the Resource Management Act are also by government intention, demanding a higher level of consultation with Maori. There is a mandatory obligation that councils do that. It's not an option. The transfer of roles and responsibilities by central government to local government has not been accompanied by a matching transfer of resources or tools to enable these activities. Therefore councils are left to fund the transfer from existing and limited funding sources - rates. New Zealand First believes that a review of the legislative burden that central government has placed on local government, and the impact of this on ratepayers, is necessary. The time has come to consider the questions of why rates are imposed, how rating systems are devised, and who benefits from these rates. The infrastructure and services under which we live in our various districts and towns are the result of past decisions and past spending. Councils believe that present ratepayers have a duty to fund their portion of infrastructure for now and for the future. Ultimately, the role of local government must be aimed at achieving the best return for ratepayer and taxpayer money, based on the world-class provision of core local government services. Councils need to constantly bear in mind the interests of those that they are there to serve. We should all expect efficient day-to-day practice and effective decision-making from our councils. Jim Peters MP
|
|
|||
|
|
||