The vast majority of households run at least a notional budget and thereby undertake a simple rationing process that establishes spending priorities. Fixed or unavoidable costs are dealt to first, thereafter we look at discretionary expenditure and afford whatever we can. Those discretionary items that we want but can’t afford are forgone for another day.
If this is how we manage our personal funds, should we expect our Councillors to be equally cautious as they allocate our rates monies in the City’s Budgets? The simple answer is YES, but I believe the answer should properly be NO. I suggest that Councillors should be even MORE CAREFUL with our money than we are with our own.
It seems that the Council’s budget process is somewhat at odds with that undertaken by households. It appears that Officers, after considering what they think Council wants to achieve, prepare an expenditure budget then advise Council how much the rates need to be increased. Expenditure levels are taken as spoken for, the only variable being Income. Interestingly this is the absolute opposite of how household budgets work. This approach is totally unacceptable.
Councillors need high-quality advice and a suite of budgetary choices. Advice they receive should include a range of options on how to deliver a proposed basket of services in a fiscally neutral way, showing both increases and reductions in rates. They seem unlikely to get such policy scope from the current single in-house source. Decision-makers usually gain benefits from independent and contestable advice.
Additionally, the Budget proposals should offer choices for making significant changes to the existing funding allocations, taking into account community feedback. For example, the Pauatahanui Residents Association recently undertook a survey which showed that five of the top six service desires related to the better maintenance of roads. There was no sign of a desire for new sports award dinners, splash pads or any of the other “nice to have items” that seem to attract attention for funding these days. One senses that the community wants core services to be funded and done well, just like households deal with their fixed costs: the “nice to haves” can wait for another day.
I believe that our Mayor and Councillors need outside advice on the Budget, to broaden and better inform their perspectives. They require Community feedback on what services are central to the City’s well-being. In addition, they need to understand what the community would be willing to forgo in order to have good core services. Then Councillors will be in a position to make an informed set of rationing decisions.
What we can be certain of is that Porirua’s rates are too high and that Councillors need to deliver better value for money. That means reducing less critical services in favour of core services. In addition, the law requires the Council to deliver services in a transparently effective, efficient and timely manner. We need to assist our elected representatives to be in a position to lead and overcome the currently undesirable situation of the ‘tail wagging the dog’.
Andrew Weeks
Chairman, Porirua Economic Development Group (PEDG)