This page is not a current Christchurch City Council document. Please read our disclaimer.
JOINT CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL/
CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL COMMITTEE
MINUTES OF THE EIGHTH MEETING OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE
Held on Friday 2 May 1997
in the No 2 Committee Room, Civic Offices,
Tuam Street, Christchurch
at 9.30 am
PRESENT:
CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL
Councillor Carole Evans (Chairman),
Councillors Anna Crighton, Pat Harrow,
Dennis O'Rourke (until 11.45 am).
CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL
Councillors Richard Budd, Neil Cherry, Sir Hamish Hay,
Richard Johnson, Diana Shand
APOLOGY: An apology for absence was received and accepted from Councillor Margaret Murray
IN ATTENDANCE: Councillor David Close (from 10.20 am)
1. MINUTES OF MEETING
The minutes of the previous meeting of 14 March 1997, as circulated, were taken as read and confirmed.
2. MATTERS ARISING
Nil
3. DEPUTATIONS AND PETITIONS
Nil
4. CHAIRPERSON'S REPORT
Nil
5. CANTERBURY REGIONAL COUNCIL & CHRISTCHURCH CITY COUNCIL FUNCTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS - A DISCUSSION PAPER
David Collins, Consultant, Gabities Porter Consultants who had been engaged to produce the discussion paper, was in attendance to present his report.
Mr Collins advised that apart from some possible minor adjustments, he had not found anything, that was not already known.
Members were then invited to ask questions or comment on the paper.
The following matters were noted:
* Civil Defence responsibilities had been omitted.
* It was reported that tremendous changes were taking place in Civil Defence Emergency Services Review and it would be appropriate for the work being done, when available, to be referred to the Joint Committee.
* Section 35.2 (c) which referred to the relationship between planning authorities should be further defined.
* A diagram showing the differences between the Resource Management Act and the Local Government Act could be helpful.
* Clause 4.5 Joint Hearings. Clarification was sought as to the parameters that would apply to the matter of joint decisions. There was also the question of where the liability would fall. A legal opinion obtained by the City Council, was to be made available to the Regional Council.
* Clause 2.2 Resource Management Responsibilities - the significance of the Regional Planning Statement and District Plans had possibly been overlooked, the Regional Planning Statement being the premium document. This was unclear at present.
* Clause 4 Management Issues. A question was raised as to if there were any concerns with management issues then they needed to be identified and dealt with.
* It was commented that it was more the way the Act separated functions out, but while there needed to be a change in the mind set of the people involved, generally matters were working reasonably well.
* There needed to be a clear schematic view of the function relationships, as this would be helpful for new members.
* It was reported that Bruce Anderson, ex City Manager, Auckland City Council has prepared a paper on central, regional and local government giving comparisons of New Zealand and several overseas countries, which could be helpful.
* Clause 1.6 Transfer of Functions and Powers. Section 33 (3) provided that a local authority that transfers any function, power, or duty under this Section shall continue to be responsible for the exercise thereof.
* The functions of transferring any authority needed to be explained, there were a whole series of issues that arose from this. Matters of continued responsibility and accountability needed to be clarified through a carefully researched legal opinion being obtained.
* Councillor Harrow said there was a view in the Christchurch City Council that the functions of Air Quality and Passenger Transport should be transferred to the Christchurch City Council.
Members discussed further work being done on the discussion paper, it being noted that the document would need to stand the test of time.
Resolved Councillor Budd/Councillor Harrow
That the discussion paper on functional relationships be revised in accordance with the comments made, by the Consultant in consultation with relative Council officers and be referred back to the next joint committee meeting. Carried
6. CHRISTCHURCH-WEST MELTON GROUND WATER - PROJECT REPORT
Michael Dicker, Ground Water Resources Manager was present for discussion on this report.
In response to a question as to the metering of agriculture bores, it was reported that it was a requirement where there is no water meter, to have a means by which water usage could be measured.
The report was received.
7. NATURAL RESOURCES REGIONAL PLAN - UPDATE ON CONSULTATIONAL DRAFT AIR CHAPTER
Attention was drawn to the further workshop to be held on the 8 May 1997 to discuss:
(i) Method proposed as necessary to achieve appropriate emission reductions for suspended particulates.
(ii) Preliminary analyses of costs and benefits of such methods.
The report was received.
8. PASSENGER TRANSPORT UPDATE
The Joint Committee had before it two reports covering the subjects of:
* Committee membership.
* Public passenger transport strategy.
* Numbers 21 and 24 services - trial evaluation.
* Passenger transport funding.
The wide ranging discussion evolved with points being raised in respect of:
* The view was expressed that the City Council would like to have control of public passenger transport in its entirety, which was supported by the ratepayers perception as to the authority who controlled this.
As a result there was some feeling of frustration amongst some City Council members.
In response it was reported that there is likely to be a major shakedown on the issue of public transport throughout New Zealand, reference being made that in Wellington one operator now owns all the bus companies there.
The Land Transport Pricing Study currently under review could be seen to go hand in hand with the functions of local government, which if followed and Jenny Shipley had indicated this, then there could be enormous decisions for local government to make.
The funding issues would be very significant and therefore it might not be wise to debate the public passenger function at this time.
Councillor Denis O'Rourke advised that in developing strategies public passenger transport was a very important matter and he would wish to flag this as an area of major concern at this time. It may have to be a question of having to judge what future governments might do.
The Regional perspective in the context of Christchurch itself, as opposed to the whole of Canterbury, was different to that of the City Council.
The view of making an input to central government, land transport and passenger transport policies was further supported, rather than waiting for central government to determine.
Councillor Johnson advised that the changes were in respect of land transport pricing and in an issues and options document there would be five options ranging from the status quo right through to an SOE.
Councillor Shand added that what was really significant, was the structure of local government could be further looked at as a result of Transfund reviews and the LTPS.
It was pointed out that the paper is being prepared by Regional Council and City Council staff on the subject.
Councillor Johnson drew attention to the doubling of the population in the next twenty years of Waimakariri District and Selwyn District, leading to the need to deal with cross boundary transport. At present 50% of the two districts' residents travelled into the City by car.
Councillor Cherry enquired as to where the breakdown was occurring, it was something that needed to be solved locally. He could not see any practical reason why both authorities could not work in together as a team.
Regional strategies and plans could be put in place to assist in the process.
Councillor O'Rourke responded by advising that in the long term the present approach was not going to be enough and presented four reasons in support of his stance.
(i) The difficulty of integration in public transport planning.
(ii) The City Council had done virtually all of the roading. There was difficulty in trying to plan ahead with having two organisations involved.
(iii) The public image of public transport - in relation to such matters as civic pride, equity between neighbourhoods and ticketing.
(iv) Investment in infrastructure - the difficulty of the City Council making a major investment in a function that it did not have direct control of ie the central public passenger terminal - buses were seen as part of the infrastructure.
From the Regional Council's perspective Councillor Shand advised that she was still not clear as to the barriers. By having two organisations involved, you could achieve good debate which led to the best decisions being made.
At present the two Councils were working together with new bus shelters and Christchurch was the only city having super low fill buses . Christchurch would become known as the best city.
Councillor Close acknowledged the progress that had been made over the last year and because of this supported the status quo at this stage.
He commented on local decisions being made for local problems, as central government's overall policies had no relationship to the goals being sought. He gave the example of the importing of cheap Japanese secondhand cars and the current low price of petrol, which did not encourage public passenger transport.
Very radical decisions would be required to slow the decline in public passenger transport. Such matters as the cost of upgrading major intersections now ran to $1m and different priority standards rather than the cost benefit analysis method is being used.
There were considerable roading improvements required if traffic flow and growth was to be kept up with, passenger transport utilisation could help stabilise the matter. There was a case of having a single authority control the total function, but central government policies had to be overcome.
Councillor Cherry agreed, but pointed out that we needed to see if we had the power to do this. Simple policies were being implemented in the reduction of CO2 emissions and there were many other things that we had the ability to control which would make Christchurch a leader in solving the car problem.
By doing it together both organisations would be stronger.
Councillor O'Rourke also alluded to the City Council's own problems where one Committee strategies were in conflict with another's such as parking in the central city. Councillor Hay referred to the urban expansion such as Rolleston and Kaiapoi and the need for the means of providing proper access to be dealt with.
Councillor Close suggested that research on public transport versus the development of roading would be helpful, including the likes of the effect of subsidising the bus service to Rangiora, as opposed to spending more money on upgrading Lincoln Road.
It was suggested that Transfund had signalled stop building roads and was now looking at linking public transport closely.
The discussion concluded with Councillor Budd suggesting that the matter was a complex problem, but the divergence of views was a strength and there was now a need to sit down in a forum situation and discuss the issues. There was a clear separation between policy and delivery.
Dr Ian Cumming advised that the Regional Council is preparing a long term strategic plan which included public transport..
SUB-COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP
The report on this subject drew attention to the recommendation from a previous sub-committee meeting for an extra Councillor from each Council to be added to this sub-committee.
The matter was considered, it was agreed that it would be appropriate.
Councillor Shand nominated Council Cherry and this was seconded by Councillor Johnson.
Councillor Evans nominated Councillor Murray and this was seconded by Councillor Harrow.
Councillor O'Rourke nominated Councillor Condon but this was not seconded.
There being no further nominations it was agreed that Councillors Cherry and Murray or Councillor Harrow as a substitute, be the Joint Committee representatives on the sub-committee.
Councillor O'Rourke's vote against the resolution was recorded.
9. NEXT MEETING
The next meeting was scheduled for Friday 13 June 1997.
The meeting concluded at 11.59am.