Amalgamation: time near for decision

Press, 4 July 1985, Page 21

Amalgamation: time near for decision

Christchurch residents voting in next year’s local body elections may not be voting for candidates on the existing Heathcote, Waimairi, Riccarton, Paparua, Lyttelton, and Christchurch City Councils. If the Local Government Commission has its way, they will be voting instead for representatives on one or more new councils, set up as part of a restructured local government in Christchurch. Local body reporters JOAN BEGG and KAY FORRESTER summarise the background of the present discussions on amalgamation, talk to the chairmen of the local councils concerned, and look at some of the possibilities for Christchurch under reorganisation.

Christchurch — one city or two? It has been an on-going debate for several years. Should the single geographical area of metropolitan Christchurch be administered by a single local body rather than the five or six it has now? Amalgamation — or its more recent equivalent, re-organisation — is a word that has been batted about by local councillors for several decades. Generally, the bigger councils, such as Christchurch City, have favoured it as logical and more efficient; the smaller councils, such as Heathcote County and Riccarton, have fiercely opposed it, wanting to retain their independence. The matter has been given a new pertinence. Christchurch authorities have an October 1 deadline to come up with a mutually acceptable plan for a restructured Christchurch — or have one imposed upon them by the Local Government Commission.. When the chairman of the Local Government Commission, Mr Brian Elwood, paid Christchurch a visit last month, he made it clear the commission believed local government reorganisation in Christchurch was long overdue. He told the Christchurch councils that they had until October to reach agreement. If a solution had not been reached then the commis-

sion would take over, aiming to restructure before the next local body elections in October, 1986. With the exception of the Christchurch City Council, the metropolitan councils registered objections, to the Select Committee hearing the Local Government Amendment Bill, against amalgamation. Heathcote, Paparua, Riccarton, and Lyttleton even went as far as hiring a public relations officer to publicise their opposition to amalgamation. Those councils have had to do something of a re-think after Mr Elwood’s ultimatum. Brian Elwood said last month that the administration of a restructured Christchurch would centre on the existing facilities of the Christchurch City Council but there would be an entirely new political body. It would not be the present Christchurch City Council taking over everyone else, he added. In the last few weeks the Christchurch City, Waimairi District, Heathcote and Paparua Counties, and Riccarton and Lyttelton Boroughs have had discussions on the possible formats of amalgamation. Brian Elwood has said the Local Government Commission would welcome local solutions to a restructured Christchurch.

Everything, from the status quo to one council centred on the Canterbury United Council, had been suggested, he said. Somewhere between the extremes were two proposals — a one-city Christchurch or a two-city Christchurch. The city council favours a onecity system which likely would take in Heathcote, the city, Riccarton, and Waimairi, and possibly the urban part of Paparua. The Waimairi District Council favours a two-city system, which would retain two separate areas within urban Christchurch. The four smaller councils are eager to retain their identities, perhaps as Riccarton has suggested, in the form of community councils within a larger council. The four smaller councils have said they would poll their residents for views on local authority reorganisation. Opinion on the benefits and disadvantages of amalgamation among residents of Christchurch is mixed. Many now living in the smaller council areas believe their rates will rise under a larger authority and that they will lose their say in the decision-making process. The last local Government Commission plan for amalgamation in Christchurch was drawn up in 1972 as part of the redesigned North

Canterbury local government area. The new Christchurch city in that plan was a 206 sq mile area bounded by a line starting at Blind Bay on Banks Peninsula and running up and along the Summit Road, over Herbert Peak, Gebbies Pass, and Cooper’s Knob, along Kennedy’s Bush Road to the Old Tai Tapu Road to Halswell Road to Quaifes Road to Marshs Road to Shands Road, then across the main South Road and the railway line at Islington to Pound Road to Buchanans Road to Hasketts Road to School Road to Guys Road to Consrvators Road to a Road at the edge of the river reserve to a line from near Willows Road to the Waimakariri River and along the river to the sea. The proposal would have merged Waimairi and Heathcote, and parts of Paparua and Mt Herbert with parts of Rangiora, Eyre, and Wairewa Counties and the Christchurch City area to form the new Christchurch City. The local council objections, then, focused on loss of the local touch of smaller councils, the size of the new city, and whether the larger city proposed would be more economic or efficient. The commission reported, after days of hearing submissions, that it

had come to the unanimous and firm conclusion that the key central urban area should be administered by one municipality, not by three municipalities and seven counties (wholly or partly). The commission also said: “There is no perfect answer to the difficult problem that confronts us.” The proposal was never implemented. The National Government of the 1970 s abolished the Local Government Commission and its controversial proposal and concentrated on legislation that would group local bodies for some activities. The result was regional councils such as the Canterbury United Council. The latest Local Government Commission, reconstituted as a full-time body, was appointed in April.