Latest News

URGENT ACTION NEEDED – BY YOU

No Taxation without Real Representation.

The Royal Commission proposals for an Auckland Council place all power in the hands of a tiny group of people who will be far removed from the concerns of ratepayers who are likely to face substantial rate increases.

The proposed electoral seats – two from each of the four urban constituencies and one each from the two rural constituencies – will have wildly different representation ratios ranging from one elected member for 54,000 population, to one member for 193,500 population. Those ratios are just for the SuperCity Auckland Council. [Well-known blogger David Farrar calculates the represenatation ratio for the three Maori seats would be one member to 30,000 population on the Maori roll]

Furthermore, the proposal for half the basic membership to be elected at large leaves the way wide open for a well-funded special interest group to dominate the proposed Auckland ‘SuperCity’ Council

That is the council which will have the absolute power to set rates for the whole region – and to spend them wherever in the region it chooses, and it is apparent that plenty is intended to be spent in making the Auckland Central Business District the heart of the new World-Class City/Region.  

The proposed so-called local councils are merely branch offices of the SuperCity council.

These local councils will be ‘given’ funds by the SuperCity council to look after local parks, local roads and community groups – but all subject to SuperCity approval.

The local councils will be totally powerless – especially when it comes to setting and allocating rates – they will be low level branches of the Auckland Council monster.

The people we will elect as our representatives on local councils will be, at best, toothless tigers – easily able to be devoured by the powerful beasts in the remote Zoo which will be called the Auckland Town Hall.

Representative democracy is intended to be Government of the people, for the people, by the people.

What the Royal Commission has recommended is certainly Government of the people – but government at a high level of decision-making, far away and out of reach of those who are governed.

Government for the people?  It is clearly more government for big business than for the 1.4 million individual citizens of Greater Auckland.

And, with almost half the members of the Auckland Council being elected at large - plus 3 exclusively Maori seats - can it be truly said to be government by the people?

 I don’t think so.

It promises to be a government dominated by an elite group who will be able to afford the high costs of getting elected.

The report makes it perfectly clear that the proposed governance system is one advocated by the business lobby groups EMA and NZCID – together with the power hungry ARC.

These three groups advocated that only a SuperCity could provide the infrastructure needed to make Auckland a world-class city.

But just weeks before the report was released the Government announced that it would fund the electrification of rail, and would take over ownership of the rail system. - thus removing a heavy burden from ratepayers.

Prior to that the Government had promised more central funding for key regional roading projects.

And then, almost on the day the report was released the Government announced its $1.5 billion plan for broadband rollout.

These are the three major pieces of infrastructure which the three lobby groups said could only be achieved by a SuperCity council.

But the government did not need to deal with a SuperCity council to step in and support the Auckland region with these three massive infrastructure projects.

So why the rush to move immediately to set up a SuperCity council?

I suspect this is to give the SuperCity enough power to increase rates to meet the inevitable increase in the cost of staging the Rugby World Cup in two years time.

And after that we will see a drive to introduce the SuperCity concept to the other metropolitan areas of New Zealand – especially Christchurch and Wellington and even Dunedin which could engulf Otago and Southland.

The Royal Commission report could well almost certainly lead not only to higher council rates all round, but also a massive redistribution of wealth right across the region. – that wealth being assessed by the notional sales value of a ratepayer’s home, or the property in which commercial operations carry out their business, or the acreage of a farm –irrespective of the actual returns a farmer gets on the production from that land.

Under the Royal Commissions proposals all those ratepayers will have the democratic rights to fair representation decimated almost completely.

We, the people, need to have time to consider the implications of the huge report and how it will affect us all in terms of our own well-being and that of our local communities.

Action is needed NOW to say slow down – let’s have good look at all this.

Send a letter, email, text, or make a phone call to your local MP, or any MP or Minister you know –

With this simple message;-

No Taxation without Real Representation. Give the people more time to consider the proposals of the Royal Commission on Auckland.

The Independent Rates Inquiry report

A brief overview by David Thornton organiser of the NoMoreRates.com campaign.

The report of the Rates Inquiry represents a significant victory for the NoMoreRates campaign and its ratepayer supporters by accepting our repeated contention that the present rating system is unsustainable and, “for a significant section of the population – especially superannuitants - rates will be unaffordable in ten years time”.
But the report goes even further by pointing the finger at councils which “are showing insufficient financial restraint and paying inadequate attention to the equity and affordability of their plans”
The report proposes a variety of measures for funding councils which would enable a modest reduction in the amount councils need to raise from rates.
However many of these measures will require stringent financial appraisal to examine some possible pitfalls – such as the proposal to remove the Uniform Annual General Charge, and a proposal to remove business differentials.
Ratepayers calls for more Government [taxpayer] funding are accepted with proposals that part of the GST on water rates be put into a special fund to help pay for water services provided by councils
The report does say that these new funding methods must not be used as an excuse to spend more – “they must be used to replace rates” - thereby reducing the rating burden on residential ratepayers.
The report makes it absolutely clear that the responsibility for change lies mostly with councils who must have the determination to hold or reduce current rating levels and to exercise restraint on expenditure.
So the pressure now goes on local councils to use the report as a basis for action to address the rating and funding problems as the number one priority.

All of this leads to the absolute necessity for voters to be very careful about who they vote for in the forthcoming election.

[Declaration of interest – David Thornton is standing for election to North Shore City Council, Harbour Ward] More Information

The full report is on www.ratesinquiry.govt.nz Further commentary from David Thornton on the 96 recommendations in the report is now available here on the NoMoreRates website as of Thursday 6th Sept. Click here to view.

Media releases below from NoMore Rates on the release of the report.

Your comments, suggestions and questions are invited. MEDIA RELEASE
3 September 2007
Statement from David Thornton.

The report and recommendations from the Rates Inquiry represent a significant victory for the NoMoreRates campaign.

The report confirms our contention that the rating system is not sustainable – a view the report upholds by saying that the rating system will not be sustainable in ten years time. NoMoreRates called for alternative sources for local council funding and the Report agrees and sets out a range of other sources of income. We called for more central government funding – and the report agrees, recommending that government provides more funding for water infrastructure and the cost of major urban roads. NoMoreRates called for less reliance on rates for councils funding – and the report agrees saying that the proportion of revenue from rates must be reduced. NoMoreRates called for Crown-owned lad to be subject to rates – and the report agrees, saying all Crown-owned land except Conservation land should be rated. NoMoreRates called for restraint on council expenditure – and the report agrees. NoMoreRates pointed out that consultation on council spending plans was basically a waste of time – and the report agrees, saying that a council's discretion to ignore submissions should be removed. NoMoreRates proposed that Infrastructure Bonds should be used to fund major projects – and the report agrees. NoMoreRates called for measures to take into account ‘ability to pay’ – and the report agrees, calling for investigation into the affordability of rates to low income households.

The challenge now is to ensure that councils take up the recommendations in the report and pressurise central government into making necessary legislation changes and providing the additional funding recommended by the Inquiry. MEDIA RELEASE
3 September 2007
Statement from David Thornton.

RATES INQUIRY REPORT SUPPORTS RATEPAYERS CONCERNS BUT SOME PROBLEMS REMAIN.

CHANGES NEEDED URGENTLY FROM NEWLY ELECTED COUNCILLORS.

I welcome the report of the Rates Inquiry which has obviously taken on board many of the ideas and concerns put forward by NoMoreRates supporters and ratepayers generally over the last few years.

I also welcome the clear message the report gives to local councils that they need to be much more diligent in reaching their spending decisions and that all expenditure needs to be critically examined before funds are committed.

One alarming item in the report is the conclusion that expenditure forecasts in councils 10-year Long Term plans [LTCCPs] are probably understated.

This could be bad news for ratepayers unless some of the recommendations for alternative funding sources are introduced as quickly as possible.

The Inquiry has produced a very wide-ranging set of recommendations which include putting the onus on central government to provide more infrastructure funding.

Following the forthcoming local elections new councils will need to move swiftly to pressurise the government to make new funds available in the shortest possible time.

The statement that the current rating system will not be sustainable in ten years is a real wake up call to councils that they must put their houses in order and look for and implement a whole variety of alternative funding methods.

Recommendations for an International Visitors Environmental Levy and further increases in the Fuel Tax may upset some business sectors but such measures are necessary if the rates burden is to be lifted from residential ratepayers on low and fixed incomes.

While welcoming the general thrust of the report I am sorry to see that the Inquiry Team failed to deal adequately with the real problem which is the inequity of a property tax which ignores the vital ‘ability to pay’ factor.

The recommendations for changes to the valuation system may provide a medium term band-aid but the central issue of ability to pay remains a problem.

There should be some relief if rates as a percentage of total council revenue are reduced to 50% from the present 57% with increased user charges taking up a higher proportion than at present.

The report is a long and sometimes complex document and it is unfortunate that the government is not offering any comment on the recommendations despite having had the document for almost a month.

One thing is crystal clear – major changes are needed and, after the local elections, newly elected councillors will have a major job ahead of them putting right the mistakes of the past highlighted in the report. From The Scotsman May 2007
7th May 2007

From The Scotsman May 2007 – on the Scottish local elections including the Scottish Parliament.

However, council tax, which so clearly affects people's lives, was the front-runner as every party promised to lessen the burden on pensioners and poorer families.

The SNP and the Liberal Democrats pledged to abolish the council tax completely and replace it with a local income tax. The SNP backed a national 3p local income tax, the Liberal Democrats a locally set income tax of roughly the same rate. But Labour ridiculed the tax plans, claiming it would leave a black hole of hundreds of millions of pounds which would have to be found by the Scottish Executive and that hard-working families would be worse off. Labour then produced its plans to reform the council tax.

Labour's opponents derided it for failing to work out its sums before the policy was announced. At his manifesto launch, Jack McConnell couldn't say how many people would be better off and how many would pay more. The Conservatives proposed a straightforward 50 per cent discount for pensioners and Solidarity proposed a Scottish service tax which would hit the rich.

[NOTE – Council Tax in Scotland is the main non-central government funding for councils in the UK and is a property tax similar to rates] Progress on the Rates Inquiry.
19th April 2007

The round of public meetings has continued – but with small attendances, largely due to poor advertising and the holding of daytime meetings. The chairman of the Inquiry said yesterday that evening meetings would not have attracted any more people because they would compete with Coronation Street!

David Thornton made a further brief submission to the Inquiry at a North Shore meeting yesterday and crossed swords with the chairman on the issue of a general review of local government’s role and functions.

He also reported the results of a survey taken at the recent Greypower AGM which showed majority support for a Citizens Tax to partly replace rates. Read this submission. Greypower Federation AGM
16th April 2007

David Thornton today addressed the annual gathering of Greypower’s national body held in Marton in the Manawatu.

His address outlined the history of NoMoreRates and events leading to the Rates Inquiry. He urged everyone to make submissions to the Inquiry before the closing date of 30th April. Read this address. The Auckland Region Nightmare
April 18. 2007

Part of the deliberate ploy to side-line the rates issue is a plan to reorganise the local government structure in Auckland.

The latest plan is to take power away from the city and district councils and greatly increase the power of the Auckland Regional Council – which is to be renamed Greater Auckland Council.

That really is a nightmare scenario as it would give the ARC rating powers over the whole region—a total of half a million ratepayers would be affected, together paying rates of more than $1.2billion.

Worse still is that a re-organisation proposal is going to central government by the end of July with ALMOST NO PUBLIC INPUT.

This is a real challenge to local democracy.

Read all about it on www.strongerauckland.org.nz Your Stories...
We want rates stories from around the country to present to the Independent Inquiry.

Please take a few minutes to tell us what the situation is in your neck of the woods.