Editorial: Sticking with the baker's dozen

OPINION: A cliche used when the subject of wages and salaries comes up is, "If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys".

It sums up the view that the members of the Nelson City Council held about their own roles – if not their individual capabilities – when, in August, they decided to put forward the idea of cutting the council's size from 12 councillors plus a mayor to a mayor and 10 councillors.

The thinking was that the pool of money which pays an unranked councillor $29,500 a year and the four former committee heads, now officially "portfolio managers", $37,000 each, would make being a councillor more attractive when shared between 10 people instead of 12. They thought that this would result in more candidates and, presumably, a higher quality council.

When it came to the vote last week – ironically with only 10 of the 12 councillors present – they could not agree. Five said "do it", five said "don't" and so they decided to stick with the status quo. The mayor (salary $88,000, set by the Remuneration Authority and not part of the payment pool) arrived too late to make the difference. He said he would have supported the change, but was unable to vote.

Conspiracy theorists should note that the division was not along Hands Up/hands down lines. Three Hands Up councillors were in favour, one against; two unaffiliated councillors favoured it, four didn't. The two absent councillors are part of the Hands Up ticket. So much for the silly notion that the Hands Up team is intent on destroying grassroots democracy, or that its members go into meetings with a single, inflexible view. That's one belief that can surely now be buried – though there is bound to be a minuscule minority that will keep attempting to resurrect it.

It was a good decision. Those who supported cutting the council's size no doubt believed that 10 councillors plus a mayor would have not only been a sufficient number to govern the city well, but would also have done so more efficiently. Some of the present council were newcomers to local body politics when elected in 2007 and the number and length of meetings they must attend will have come as a rude shock. They have also found out that if they are to do the job properly, they must work hard for their money, and it would be understandable if they felt that they deserved more than they get.

However, that's local authority politics. Setting aside the mayor's salary package, the other payments are not designed to replace a fulltime income. Being a councillor is not classed as an occupation in its own right and were that to be explored it would require a radical change to how the job is done and a much bigger lift in income than the proposed change would have achieved.

Cities like Nelson and districts like Tasman are best served by representatives who have a passion for the wellbeing of their communities, with all that entails, and a commitment to doing the job for the good of all. A surprisingly large number of candidates with those qualities do get elected. With 13 seats at the Nelson City Council table rather than 11, there's a greater chance that more people like that will fill them.

- © Fairfax NZ News

Newest First

Oldest First

viking   #1   03:27 pm Nov 03 2009

Why try to save the numbers when the combined nelson/tasman option means less overheads!!. classic case of looking afterr number one not the community.After 10 yrs of living in nelson all i saw was self serving entities who were in council for alterior motives - probably why neslon still languishing in debt and will do so for some time. just get on with it and cut out the dead wood!Every other business in nelson has had ot do it ( jobs lost) why not the council.

Ad Feedback