Viewpoint – Listening is not the same as hearing

Our local board is about to begin its fourth Local Board Plan, once again heading out to the community under the familiar banner of Have Your Say. On paper, this looks like democracy in action. In reality, many in North Rodney are tired of repeating the same messages they’ve been raising for the past 15 years, with little to show for it.

This consultation process is a statutory requirement placed on council, not a choice. But that does not mean it is beyond critique. When communities consistently say the same things, yet see the same frustrations resurface, it is reasonable to ask whether the system is truly working, or simply fulfilling a compliance exercise. Perhaps it is time for council to ask government whether change is needed.

Once consultation closes, local boards spend weeks working with staff to develop a work programme.

At the same time, deputations are full and public forums are dominated by frustrated residents who feel unheard, sidelined or worn down by delays and inaction. After all this effort, the final programme is sent to the Governing Body, which decides what funding is allocated. This distance between local voice and final decision-making is where much of the disconnect occurs.

When the Mayor was elected, local boards were given a clear direction: stop wasteful spending, reduce red tape and get rid of unnecessary road cones. Few would argue with those goals. Yet council remains deeply siloed, with departments often failing to communicate or understand the different realities faced by rural and urban communities.

Rural areas need staff with relevant experience – people who listen, who support local businesses and who understand local value. A good example is a footpath project in Wellsford. A local contractor submitted a quote around half the price of the council-preferred supplier. That local contractor missed out, the project remains unfinished and Auckland Transport now says it cannot find the money to complete it. This raises obvious questions about procurement and wasteful spending.

I have worked alongside some excellent council staff who go out of their way to solve problems. Unfortunately, too many issues only reach elected members because the system is so tangled in red tape that residents and businesses cannot navigate it alone.

One case involved a local builder who faced an eight month standstill over a minor variation, despite it being properly addressed by a consulting firm. I am told such matters should go through local board staff, yet those same staff are instructed not to give advice. That is not an efficient system – nor a fair one.

It is time to seriously consider a community “right of appeal” to cut through unnecessary red tape and enable sensible decision-making.

Finally, on road cones: When Auckland Transport is eventually brought back closer under council control, there is an opportunity to match good intentions with practical outcomes. Communities are not asking for shortcuts, just common sense, accountability and action.