Report of Local Government Committee

PART L A CRITICAL SURVEY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY Government has its origin in the general recognition that the well-being of the individual arises from that of the general community and it is justified by its contribution to that welfare. There can be no plea for the existence of Government unless it aids the individual to live a full and happy life. This is true of every form of government. The function of a central Government may be said to be that of providing those services which are national in scope and which do not refer specifically to the individual problems of a locality. In theory there is no reason why a central Government should not administer even these local problems, but such an activity would call for a very great extension of its activities. In the early days of New Zealand's history such local problems were controlled centrally, but with the development of the country and the growth of the population pressure of business on the central Government was so great as to make attention to the details of local problems absolutely impossible. Some form of devolution of responsibility was imperative, and hence quite early in New Zealand's history steps were taken to set up local government authorities, the area of whose jurisdiction was confined to relatively small self-contained communities, and whose functions were to deal with the problems peculiar to those communities. The distinction between what are legitimate functions of the central and the local governments respectively, however, is not something which can bo laid down once and for all. For instance, the problem of the relief of distress was up till 1939 a duty of local Hospital Boards. The depression of the " thirties " showed conclusively that the causes of distress did not always or, indeed, often originate within a peculiarly local area, but were national in scope. To ask the people of a particular area to bear the full cost of relief of local residents might result in serious inequities. To-day, to all intents and purposes, the relief of distress is the function of the central Government. In the early days harbours were generally under the control of the central Government, but with, the development of the country it became evident that effective control could be exercised only within a locality, and so autonomous Harbour Boards were set up to provide this service to the local community. Further changes are likely to occur in the future, both in the further .devolution of responsibility to local authorities, and the reverse. There is nothing sacrosanct about the present, or, indeed, any division of, responsibilities between central and local governments. Government is not static, but dynamic. Certain functions will always be central; at the other extreme others will always be local, but where the line of demarcation as between these powers may be doubtful control should be placed as near the people as possible, providing efficiency is retained. There should be a general trend towards increasing local responsibility and fuller use of local endeavour. The central Government, however, cannot divest itself of the responsibility of providing effective government of New Zealand as a whole. Hence it must provide the machinery to enable local authorities to work effectively. No local authority, as such, has any jurisdiction in New Zealand except that which os delegated by an Act of Parliament. Every activity of any local authority must be authorized, either implicitly or explicitly, by Act of Parliament. No local authority can raise funds, either by taxation or itherwise, unless it is given power to do so by Act of Parliament. Parliament, therefore, has a serious responsibility to see that the enabling statutes within which the local authorities carry on their activities are such as to allow them to carry out their functions as effectively as possible. Local government is not carried on separately from the Government of the country. There is only one structure of government for which Parliament alone is responsible. Hence it is important that Parliament undertakes a review of the structure of local government in the Dominion from time to time, to guarantee that it is carrying out its functions as effectively as possible. There is a tendency to look on local government problems in isolation, and to decide as has been done so frequently in the past, that because a particular problem can be controlled better locally, a special local governing body should be set up to control this new activity with the result that there has been in New Zealand a multiplicity of different types of local authorities, each of which is independent of the other, although many have jurisdiction over the same areas. There is also a tendency to feel that because a particular form of local government has been satisfactory in the past, its existence should be maintained in the future. The changing conditions of economic and social life demand changing governmental forms to cope with the changing problems. While the local authorities themselves have in the past carried out their functions to the best of their ability, the demands of the future frequently require some reorganization if those problems are to be satisfactorily dealt with. For some years it has been evident that the organization of local government in New Zealand is in need of a thorough overhaul, both on its constitutional side and its financial side. This is the origin of the present investigation. From time to time over the past fifty years there have been criticisms of the number of local authorities in the Dominion. People of all shades of opinion have stated that there are too many local bodies, and particularly too many types of ad hoc bodies, and " New Zealand is overgoverned " is a common phrase. The result has been overlapping of functions and a situation approaching a chaos of jurisdictions. It has been felt that the administrative expenses involved have been unnecessarily great to provide for the effective development of local areas. It was against such a background of official and private comment that we were asked to undertake our investigation. CHAPTER lI.—HISTORICAL BACKGROUND A. INTRODUCTORY The history of New Zealand from 1840 to the present day has been marked by a gradual expansion, both of population and of economic development. In 184-0 there were practically no roads ; distances in terms of times were very great, and consequently the power of the central Government under Captain Hobson and his successors, who were located in Auckland, over development in outlying settlements was relatively weak. It soon became evident that if these outlying areas were to flourish some internal means of communication was of vital importance. Hence the first local

I—l. 15