Awaiting responseI do not support one super council but see merit in amalgamating the territorials and leaving the functions of the environmental responsibilities of the regional council as is .The seperation between resource users and the regulator and consenting authority is essential to assure the public that incidents such as the Clifton sewage problems are dealt with.The umbrage that I.C.C took over the action by E.S,is indicative of the need for this seperate function.

Awaiting response

Hello Kylie

At this point I do not support the combining of Southland Councils I feel there needs to be a lot of consultation around this.  Having voted against the merged board for Health many of the same issues effect the combining of Councils.  The conflicts would need to be addressed by council and the best outcome achieved for the population and the environment.

Kaye Crowther

Hi Kylie

The idea of a Super City reminds me of a Supermarket - supermarkets have been popular for years for their convenience and ability to buy in bulk therefore reducing costs.  But in recent years, people have begun to notice what they\'ve lost - community markets, socialisation and chatter, fresh local produce that\'s sustainable and healthy, reduced carbon footprint and road congestion, growing techniques that don\'t negatively impact the environment and ecosystems, fruit and veges with amazing flavours, the postive feeling of supporting local people, knowledge that\'s picked up by talking to the growers and producers, and taking the time to enjoy the process of shopping, rather than getting in and out as fast as possible. 

There are so many considerations to be taken into account before making a major change in direction such as a \'Supercity\' model, and the ultimate question is - would combined councils be a better outcome than our existing structure/s for the communities they serve?  There is a tendency for people to latch on to a particular successful outcome that another part of the world has experienced, or a report that concludes costs will be reduced, communication will be improved etc. and assume that we would enjoy the same benefit, but there are so many variables between each different situation and often these variables are totally overlooked, not least of which is the difference between groups of people.  We are unique, our region is unique, and our councils are unique with quite different cultures and values within each one.  We need to very carefully ascertain whether significant, net benefits would be realised in our circumstances, or would we be robbing Peter to pay Paul?  I\'m unconvinced on this one and would need alot more carefully sourced and assessed information before making a decision.

Thanks Kylie, I strongly believe we should embrace a Super Southland Unitary Authority. I believe the Southland Councils have only dabbled with shared services as a defence mechanism rather than through a genuine belief in consolidating our resources. Invercargill has a Mayor, 12 councillors, and 6 Environment Southland Councillors representing 50,000 people, there are 136 elected members for Southlands 80,000 people when community boards are added, we have 4 CEO\'s, 4 CFO\'s, 4 Council Chambers, 4 of everything......this is madness, consolidation allows us to keep our best staff longer, giving them career paths and greater variety thus job satisfaction.

Many don\"t realise but Auckland becomes a Unitary Authority after the election, lets do it under our own steam before it is imposed upon us.

I believe conflicts such as Morrisons Beach would be handled better within a Unitary Authority just as they are in Gisborne, Nelson, Tasman and Marlborough and will be in Auckland post the election.

Hi Kylie. Provided that it is never forced on Southland but is brought about democratically, and provided that a comprehensive network of community boards is put in place to protect the local voice and devolve decision-making to the local level where appropriate, I am open to exploring the idea of a unitary authority for Southland.   There will be more gains than losses, including more capacity to recruit and retain high calibre staff, increased efficiences and less confusion at the service end (no more shared services talk, just one council walk!), and more ability to cement the connection between rural and urban Southland.  I do not consider a single Southland unitary authority as simply a joining of the councils that are now in place, but rather the set up of a fresh, extended Council, with a new, wider mandate and greater ability to be responsive to community environmental, social and economic needs.   With this in mind, and with knowledge that the role and responsibility of a unitary authority is set out clearly in the law, I have no fear that the environment will be compromised.  It could be argued that by being responsible for the environment, a unitary authority is driven to ensure that its own environmental performance is never found wonting!  Best wishes, Jackie Kruger

Dear Kylie

Thank you for taking the time to submit your question.

I apologise for the delay in my response getting onto the system. I have tried on numerous occasions, but encountered some technical difficulties so I had to send my answer to the system manager to be uploaded.

If Southland became a single council there would need to be several Community Boards to represent the different areas within Southland and Environment Southland would need to remain a separate entity. However, for Southland to become a combined Council would require government approval and a change in legislation as occurred in respect of Auckland. To gain government approval would require substantive evidence of agreement from the Southland community; this could only be gained through community consultation, most probably a referendum.

It is my view that despite the possible benefits (e.g. eventual economies of scale and a stronger regional voice) it would be excessively costly which the people of Southland would not be willing to pay. Therefore, it is my belief that a single/combined council for Southland is an unlikely prospect within the foreseeable future.

Regards

David Melmoth

I think in the long run a combined approach is a definite way to have a more cohesive and more efficient council system however there will always be a hard transition period if this is to occur. I also believe that there needs to be some really robust models put in place so that if there was one council for our entire region then we would need to insure all parts of the region had a clear voice and an ability to have their needs meet by such a council.  For this we need to look to other councils for innovative modals but also to keep in mind that we don’t necessarily have to go with traditional modals but look to what might specifically work best for our community.

This is an area that I am interested in learning more about and if I am successful in the position of ICC I will enjoy looking into the current systems and also hearing feedback from communities.

I don\'t support a combined council at this time.

This could be a viable option at some future time, but there needs to be much more consultation and a strong will by all parties for it to work before there will be any great chance of a successful merger. There is no point in merging just for the sake of it or because of the enforced Auckland merger.

The problems mentioned should not happen if we had one council and they are an example of a possible starting point for future negotiations.