Ian McLean Spokesperson for the Green Party

Protecting a forest, reducing sedimentation in an estuary, minimising the use of chemical sprays, or keeping the air clean – routinely appear to involve saying 'No” to economic initiatives. We have come to perceive responsible governance as: 'Yes, albeit with conditions”, and interpret 'No” as a failure to support the economy. We have forgotten that economy and wellbeing do not mean the same thing.

An elected council is a group of people given the mandate to protect our environment, create infrastructure, and to look after our social and cultural wellbeing. We hand them a significant budget, and anticipate and expect sensible decisions and responsible governance.

Elected leaders want to be seen to be doing things, especially building things and supporting economic initiatives. Hence, the roads, bridges, tunnels, museums, shopping centres and resource exploitation proposals, which litter the headlines.

They are not experts on everything, and must depend on their advisers (staff and consultants) when developing policy and making budget decisions. Yet those advisers cannot give perfect advice. Here are just some reasons why the democratic process may struggle to fulfil expectations.

First, decisions must be made using projected future outcomes. Crystal ball gazing is necessarily risky, involves significant margins of error, and the haziness only slowly clears with time and hindsight.

Second, it can be hard to distinguish between must-haves and nice-to-haves. Must-haves tend to be fundamental, uninteresting, hidden and costly. While we notice the inadequate sewage system when it overflows, we are unlikely to elect a counsellor who promotes pipelines before playgrounds when it is not raining.

Third, about 30 years ago the investment rules changed and councils began 'future-funding” infrastructure (borrowing). We have consequently been living beyond our means for decades, in the expectation that increasing numbers of people will share the load. Unfortunately, most councils have now reached the limits of their borrowing capacity, the load is weighing heavily on each ratepayer, and we are again limited to pay-as-you-go.

Fourth, amalgamation is being promoted as a mechanism for more efficient governance. However, councils in the Tauranga region already operate planning and cooperative frameworks, such as SmartGrowth, which reduce council costs and promote the economy. Many of the supposed benefits of council amalgamation are already being achieved.

Fifth, the roles of councils in protecting the broader public interest and the environment are being redefined by central government, with an emphasis on economic development and growth. Short-term benefits are being traded against long-term costs. It is unlikely that our children will thank us for these governance decisions.

As a result of past decisions, we are currently oversupplied with infrastructure, undersupplied with maintenance, we have compromised our environment; and we need to rebalance the uneasy relationship between community wellbeing and economic development.

The adjustments required will not be easily achieved, and will certainly not be delivered by governance which applies the 'business as usual” model.

Implication: the next generation of counsellors will need to make hard decisions involving shifting resources away from economic development and towards environmental and human health.

Ian McLean is a spokesperson for the Green Party. He can be contacted by calling 021 547556 or 07 579 4670 or emailing: ian.mclean@greens.org.nz