Amalgamation of Nelson with Tasman

September 15th, 2010
Chris Salt

I'm opposed to amalgamation and I rest my case on 'high' principles. Making a thing bigger (by amalgamating) is often cited as creating more 'efficiencies'. The point that is missed in all of this is that representative government was never instituted to create efficiencies or improve processes. It is not a business. It is first and foremost a democratic institution designed to reflect the people's will.

Democracy means [in the Greek] 'power of the people'. As you make representative institutions larger, by their very nature, they become more distanced from the people they serve. Becomming bigger also means representatives need to rely more on unelected officials to manage things. As they become less accessible to ordinary people they become more accessible to special interest groups, especially those with power and influence.

There is a perverse inverse relationship between size and the people's will. Powerlessness sweeps in and ordinary people become helpless onlookers who have to content themselves with making a noise now and then and voting on election days. The only way to mitigate against the risks of size is to balance it with greater people power. The best way to do that is by introducing binding referenda - the Swiss system.

I'm totally against amalgamating the TDC and Nelson. In fact I feel so strongly about this subject that I and some others are trying to kick off a campaign for binding referenda at both a national and local level. Go to www.realdemocracy.co.nz. Become part of 'The Purple Revolution'.

Comment by Geoff Rowling:
[Posted 18 September 2010]

One of the interesting questions that begs an answer is, what guarantee do we have that our community assets won't be sold?

As councils get larger the disjoint with the community grows and those making decisions have no knowledge of the history of how many of our community assets and facilities were built.

I noticed in the Nelson Mail recently an article about a proposal by the Nelson City Council to sell off the marina at Port Nelson. It is more than a bit rich given that much of the marina infrastructure was gifted to them when the Nelson Harbour Board was restructured and the Port Company was set up. The marina was a regional asset that had been built up by the wider community, then taken from them and given to Nelson City. Now they want to sell it!

If amalgamation was to take place how would we go about ensuring our own marina at Port Motueka wasn't sold? For those volunteers that have given hundreds of hours to this project it would be gut wrenching to see it disappear into corporate ownership. We have a great facility that is affordable to use as a result of local input and let's keep it that way.

I am sure this scenario applies to lots of other facilities around the TDC area also.

Editor's Comment:
[Posted 23 September 2010]

The Local Government Commission has called for submissions on the proposal. Details of the process ahead can be read here »

Comment via press release by 'Hands Off Tasman' spokesperson Paul Searancke:
[Posted 6 October 2010]

Hands Off Tasman Spokesperson is challenging Nelson City Councillor and Mayoral aspirant Aldo Miccio to put the facts in behind his claims of savings worth $5million to each Council through amalgamation.

Since these claims surfaced at the beginning of this year, Councillor Miccio has carefully avoided identifying the source of these savings. I have looked through each of his releases and the misinformation supporting his petition and have yet to see the source.

We do agree on one point, that some money could be saved through a joint recycling plant but only through combining the rubbish management as well. Calculations provided by the officials in both Councils who are currently working on this proposal put the savings at approximately half a million dollars per year. An initiative and savings the Councillor is obviously unaware of - all possible without the added costs and disruption of amalgamation.

Mr Miccio said that we would get these facts, and others, prior to having a say on an amalgamation, yet submissions are currently open, and people are being asked for their views on amalgamation with no substantiated facts.

One fact that should be clearly obvious to the original petition signatories now at least, is that this is not a 'look at all options'. The Local Government Commission have clearly stated and confirmed that this is about amalgamation only.

Comment by Valerie Rae:
[Posted 10 October 2010]

I totally agree with the Comment by Geoff Rowling [Posted 18 September 2010] about our marina at Port Motueka being put into corporate ownership, especially if Nelson Council are in control of it as would happen if the amalgamation of the councils goes through.

Of course this may still happen if the amalgamation doesn't go through and Tasman council decide its the way to go, but the port is a great facility and one which needs local support. When the original clubs were set up it was to cater for the average bloke who likes nothing better than taking his boat out for a trip away or a spot of fishing. The two original marinas were built for the non-rich boaties, not for the big city types or overseas people who are looking for cheap moorings for their tax write-offs.

Volunteers from our community spent a lot of hours building the structures and beautifying the area and now there is a serious threat that the rich will take over and the area become unaffordable for locals. We must protect our community assets from those who have their own agendas.

Editor's Comment:
[Posted 10 October 2010]

View this press release item from 'Hands Off Tasman' following the Nelson Mayoralty election

Comment by Sjors Brouwer:
[Posted 18 October 2010]

What would amalgamation mean to Motueka being dominated by a 'big brother'? The amalgamation discussion as far as I have been able to read it, especially in TDC material, has very much been one about Nelson versus Tasman (read Richmond). I assume that the biggest worry is that the population numbers of Nelson are higher than Tasman, thus we would be 'overpowered'.

Now, I wonder what amalgamation would actually mean to Motueka (and similarly to Golden Bay). It could mean that instead of being dominated by a four-fold population from Richmond, we are then dominated by a 10-fold population from NSN-St-Rich.

But it could also mean that Nelson and Richmond will start squabbling and we, the smaller communities will have a bit more breathing space, or that Richmond interests will now need their smaller brothers and sisters from further away, to fight the big Nelson mogul. Which may mean that we won't be dominated as much as is currently the case.

Inviting your opinions on this, and would appreciate it to stay focussed on what it would mean to Motueka: more being dominated, or less?

>> , to be added to the page. [If this link doesn't work, use this form instead]

[ Return ]