Local Government Act reforms

UPDATED

### TVNZ News 4:00PM Wednesday October 28, 2009
Proposed changes to Local Govt Act announced
Source: NZPA
Councils will in future have to pay much closer attention to their core functions and produce financial reports that ratepayers can understand, Local Government Minister Rodney Hide announced on Wednesday. He released proposed changes to the Local Government Act which have been signed off by Cabinet.
Read more

****

Do the reforms mean more or less of this:
Garrick Tremain 27 October 2009

****

MMP has a down side in this individual…

### NZ Herald 4:00AM Thursday Oct 29, 2009
Hide opens door to privatised water deals
By Bernard Orsman

The Government is planning to make it easier for private companies to take over water and wastewater services from councils. Local Government Minister and Act leader Rodney Hide yesterday said “flexibility in delivery of water services” was part of changes to the Local Government Act 2002.
Read more

Post by Elizabeth Kerr

10 Comments

Filed under Politics

10 responses to “Local Government Act reforms

  1. David

    Does that mean DCHL will have to put out transparent honest reports that show both good and bad, rather that spun reports pretending everything is smelling of roses?

  2. Are these results, in the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression, really that bad.

    Now an honest answer in context of a GLOBAL RECESSION. Are the results that bad.

  3. David

    All rosy positive puffery from DCHL, but hidden underneath is the fact that what they are paying the council is totally unsustainable (they pay council twice as much as what they actually make), and % debt is appallingly high and growing.

    What’s the global recesion got to do with massive hike in power lines charges from a company in a monopoly situation?

    The point is that if any publically listed company put out the sort of biased information DCHL puts out, you’d dump them as fast as you could.

    How could you trust any company that tries to tell its stakeholders that everything is wonderful when behind the scenes it’s only really made half what it has paid out, and is going further and further into debt?

  4. David

    And of course a change in interest rates of a percent or two could wipe out the stadium funding from city companies, and if they don’t make any money, you can also wipe out the $2m tax saving that the stadium is banking on using as well.

    If that happens (interest rates are already going up this week) where will we get the extra $5m needed each year to fund the interest on the loan?

    With council stupidly over extending the city to this extent, there are real and serious financial risks in every direction you look – interest rates, city companies income, tax credit, contract costs, timing deadlines, recession.

    It’s like someone taking out a massive mortgage that can only be covered if all other factors don’t change for 20 years. Any small increase in petrol, power, food, interest rates, job reduction, credit card fees, or unexpected bills means the whole thing could fall over.

  5. Richard

    David: to suggest that DCHL Annual reports are anything but ‘transparent and honest’ is ridiculous!

    So is your assumption that if the profit is $8.7m and payments to the Council are $19.8m that there is an $11.1m shortfall that must be borrowed.

    If you actually read (and understood) the accounts you would know that the payments made by DCHL to the Council of $19.8m comprised $9.5m dividends and $10.3m of interest reflecting the investment in DCHL made up of both loans and shares.

    I have to note that these odd consipracy theiroies that you propound have only come into play ‘AD Stadium’. You obviously had no problem previously taking the dividend/investment return prior to that.

  6. David,
    Well spoken. You encapsulate the position completely. Pity Richard is not able to come off his pedestal and get his facts right. Whether it is dividend or interest, it still has to come from either profits or cash flow supplemented by borrowing. And as you and I, David, both know that is exactly what is being done. And has been for years. Why else would DCHL’s debt have grown so incrementally without a corresponding increase in total equity?

  7. Richard,
    BF stadium, the interest/dividend rort from DCHL was bad enough. But when the DCC in two foul swoops (stadium and Town Hall /conference centre) lifts the city’s debt by over $160 million. Based on such a tenuous budget it goes into risk territory where no responsible council would venture.

  8. Richard

    Calvin: Ah you emerge from your think tank of own facts. ‘Delightful stuff’ you have been writing on ODT Online.

    Thought for the day after your “sally” on Delta: “Get the facts, or the facts will get you. And when you get them, get them right, or they will get you wrong” – Dr. Thomas Fuller.

  9. Hi Richard,
    So just what is your “sally” on the facts? We would all love to know.

  10. and what’s really depressing is that these local body reforms come from a certified ‘hall monitor’ politician with less than 1% of the population thinking he should even be there.

    That’s a mighty small dog wagging a freaking large tail.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s