The government is embarking on a major shake-up of local government that could see Wellington's councils merge into a single super city, a move some leaders are calling 'inevitable'. The proposed reforms would abolish regional councillors and establish new Combined Territories Boards, composed of local mayors, to govern regions and draw up reorganisation plans.
These boards hold the power to reshape the local government landscape. The government has indicated that reorganisation plans could involve anything from shared services to the full amalgamation of territorial authorities into new unitary councils. RMA Reform Minister Chris Bishop acknowledged the reforms are geared towards encouraging the formation of larger councils, stating, “I think that is a fair summation of the situation”.
Further pressure for amalgamation comes from other government policies, including proposed rates capping, the controversial three waters reforms, and significant changes to resource management laws. Local Government Minister Simon Watts says the goal is to “assess how councils across a region can best work together to deliver efficient and effective local infrastructure, public services and regulatory functions”.
'Significant workload' concerns for mayors
The proposal to add regional governance duties to the plates of local mayors has raised alarm bells for Local Government New Zealand (LGNZ). The organisation is concerned the extra responsibilities could compromise the quality and speed of the crucial reorganisation work.
Dr Swiggs said the task ahead is so consequential that it will require a significant amount of extra work for mayors. LGNZ has suggested that regional councillors should be retained until reorganisation plans are finalised, arguing their expertise is vital to the process.
Regional councillors have important insights to contribute to the development of these plans, which would be lost if they are completely removed from the process. We want the right expertise in the room so that the most significant changes to local government since 1989 are successful and enduring.
Is bigger really better?
While amalgamation is often touted as a path to greater efficiency, a 2022 report from the Infrastructure Commission found no evidence to support the claim. The report, which investigated the link between council size and cost efficiency, concluded that larger councils are no more efficient than smaller ones in delivering services.
Peter Nunns, the commission's strategy general manager, said that when comparing spending on services like road maintenance and building consent processing, they found no proof of economies of scale. He warned against assuming that structural change automatically leads to efficiency.
Nunns said that given the lack of evidence for efficiency gains, leaders pursuing amalgamation have a duty to be clear with the public about what the real benefits of creating larger authorities would be. This is particularly relevant as infrastructure performance varies widely, with some jurisdictions like California finding their road quality ranks near the bottom in national reports, demonstrating that scale does not guarantee quality.
Lessons from Auckland's super city
The most significant modern precedent for amalgamation in New Zealand is Auckland's super city, formed in 2010 when eight councils were merged into one. The success of the project remains a topic of fierce debate. Proponents, including Mayor Wayne Brown and former Prime Ministers John Key and Helen Clark, argue it provided a unified voice and strategic direction for a fragmented region. Auckland Council itself claimed in 2023 that it had achieved $2.4 billion in savings since the merger.
However, critics point to less rosy metrics. Research by local government academic Dr Andy Asquith found that while the super city succeeded in creating regional leadership, it failed to increase democratic engagement, and any efficiency gains were “hard to determine”. An analysis by economic advisor Philip Barry revealed that while some initial savings were found, overall spending increased. The number of council staff soon grew to exceed the combined total of the previous eight councils, and household rates have climbed by 85% since formation, averaging 2.16% above inflation each year.
Wellington Mayor Andrew Little has echoed the sentiment that drove the Auckland merger, noting that Wellington is increasingly seen as a single, interconnected region where people live, work, and socialise across current council boundaries. Dr Asquith noted a similar dynamic in pre-merger Auckland, where “few people lived, worked, and played within a single council area”.
A long history of local government reform
The current proposals are the latest in a long history of restructuring New Zealand's local governance. The Local Government Commission was first established in 1947 to address concerns that the country was “overgoverned” with more than 700 local authorities creating overlapping jurisdictions and excessive administrative costs.
The most drastic changes occurred during the 1980s under the Fourth Labour Government, which saw about 850 local bodies consolidated into just 86 multi-purpose authorities by 1989. This period firmly established the commission's role in nationwide reorganisation. The framework was further refined by the Local Government Act 2002, which reshaped the commission's powers and purpose.
With this history as a backdrop, Wellington appears to be a prime candidate for the next wave of change. Recent non-binding referendums in Porirua and Lower Hutt revealed majority support for amalgamation. Early talks between the region's mayors are already underway, with a likely scenario involving Wellington City, Porirua, the Hutt Valley, and potentially the Kāpiti Coast forming a metro-style council, while the Wairarapa councils consolidate separately.
Despite the growing momentum, the fundamental question remains unanswered. With little evidence that a bigger council would be more efficient, Wellington's leaders still face the challenge of persuading the public that a super city would deliver tangible benefits beyond simply redrawing administrative lines.
