Survey shows most Motuekans oppose amalgamation

September 7th, 2011
[by David Armstrong]

A broad survey of Motueka residents has established that the majority oppose the proposed amalgamation of Nelson and Tasman councils, a result which will be submitted to the Commission designing the union plan.

The Motueka High School year 10 Community Issues class this term tackled the contentious issue, and ended up interviewing an impressive 387 voting-age people - mostly locals - in High Street over four class periods in August.

This is by far the most comprehensive survey on the topic to date, adding weight to anecdotal evidence of the town's opposition to amalgamation.

The class researched the topic and said in their final report that they "found plenty of useful information in the Motueka Online website". They then drafted a questionnaire to cover the main items of contention, conducted the interview and tabulated the results.

The outcomes were presented this morning by class representatives, Benita MacLean and Cody Golding (pictured above), to Community Board chairman David Ogilvie and TDC councillors Eileen Wilkins and Barry Dowler, along with representatives of the media.

Four out of five people interviewed were aware of the planned amalgamation poll, and most sourced their knowledge of the poll from newspapers, the TDC newsletter and word of mouth. Seventy-five percent of them believed that they understood what the amalgamation proposal involved.

On the big question 53% stated their opposition to amalgamation, 21% supported it, but 26% were still unsure about their position on the issue. Fifty-seven percent believed they were now well enough informed in order to vote on the issue of amalgamation, with 43% recognising that they needed more information.

Parallel but related questions were asked about the role of community boards now and by implication under some new local government structure. A solid fifty-eight percent supported the strengthening of the role of community boards, presumably as outlined in the amalgamation proposal.

Just under half of those interviewed thought an amalgamated council would not give our region a stronger voice, and 43% did not believe it would improve regional facilities. Fifty-three percent believed an amalgamated council would be more disconnected from the people it served, and 47% believed it would not provide a better local government system than under the Tasman District Council.

Doubtless disappointing for the community board members present, a hefty 67% said Motueka needs a more effective community board, and a majority support the strengthening of the role of community boards. They suggest giving boards more responsibility principally in the areas of pathways, reserves, pensioner cottages, the aerodrome and halls - all areas which are currently controlled by the TDC.

This suggests an inconsistency of reasoning: people want more powers for local communities via the community board, but oppose the mechanism (amalgamation) which guarantees that this will happen. In other words, people have been unhappy with TDC's refusal to date to delegate powers to community boards, but nevertheless wish TDC to remain in charge.

Class teacher, Bruce Reid, said they hoped the survey "will increase people's awareness of the issue and the subsequent poll scheduled for March 2012". He pointed out one other interesting fact: in 2008 a similar survey showed observation that 62% opposed amalgamation. This has decreased to 53% three years later. "Is this a trend?" he asked. "Only time will tell."

Click here to view the survey questions »
Click here to view the survey results »

Comment by Trevor Norriss:
[Posted 9 September 2011]

Your penultimate paragraph in your article ... is misleading and incorrect. In the article you argue that "people want more powers for local communities via the community board, but oppose the mechanism [amalgamation} which guarantees that this will happen."

You then go on to claim that "people have been unhappy with TDC's refusal to date to delegate powers to community boards, but neverless wish TDC to remain in charge". The plain facts are that the TDC has already delegated to the Motueka Community Board ALL the powers "guaranteed" in the Local Government Commission Draft Scheme, plus a few additional ones [negotiated with the board]. This happened some time ago and the council decision was widely reported. The delegated powers are in place and being acted on. TDC does not "remain in charge".

Your claim that TDC has refused to delegate powers "to date" is wrong, and those unfortunate comments continue the subtle bias towards amalgamation that you seem to display periodically. I trust that you will now publicly acknowledge that your claim is not correct.

You might also care to report that when the same range of delegated powers were offered to the Golden Bay Community Board, that body did not take up the full offer. The Golden Bay Board turned down the offers to decide their own community grants, and to manage their own community halls and decided that it was better off leaving those powers to the council because they had the good sense to recognise that their community and ratepayers got a better deal if the council remained in charge.

The Local Govt Commissions "DRAFT" scheme on which submissions have closed states a period of time that these delegations [the ones they specified] must remain in place. It is my personal view that it would be better to have these delegations reviewed annually so that council and the Community boards can add or delete to these on an annual basis as is in the Motueka Community Boards submission to the Local Govt Commission. You do not need to amalgamate councils to achieve this. Hope this helps clarify the issue.

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

[ Return ]
[ Other news articles ]

We wish to thank these local community-minded businesses who generously sponsor our site. They recognise the value of supporting this community asset, and in return Motueka Online is pleased to use and recommend their services whenever appropriate.

Ray White Motueka, Parkes Automotive, Motueka Floral Studio, Nelson Building Society