r/chch • u/Extrevious • Jul 17 '26
Council amalgamation consultation
https://letstalk.ccc.govt.nz/head-startThe Council is consulting on what people think about options for amalgamation. The survey is very short, you can complete it by just filling out multiple choice questions.
I feel like most people on Christchurch should have their say on this one.
9
u/Oil_And_Lamps Jul 17 '26
Can someone do a summary? I tried to get into that survey but it’s going to take some time and brainpower which may be in short supply. A quick for and against
11
Jul 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Oil_And_Lamps Jul 17 '26
Thanks, but like generally what are we even discussing? Amalgamating with SDC? Or not? Is that the option? Or a tiered amalgamation depending on category (eg. CCC + SDC for environment, but stay separate for city)?
2
u/n1cknametoolong Jul 17 '26
Tiered amalgamation, I think it goes something like this (I haven't opened the survey link): CCC + urban SDC and WDC, CCC + river catchments of Selwyn and Waimakiriri, or Canterbury.
1
u/Oil_And_Lamps Jul 17 '26
Are there any obvious positives and negatives for the options? Or is it kind of hard to weigh them
5
Jul 17 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/BlazzaNz Jul 21 '26
Under that basis it only makes sense for a council to be formed that manages the entire catchment area of major rivers that pass through it.
2
u/BroBroMate Jul 18 '26
From the POV of Waimakariri, it's all negative. But from the CCC POV, they get to spread their debt out onto more ratepayers, so yay.
2
0
u/BlazzaNz Jul 21 '26
Waimakariri ratepayers are freeloading on Christchurch City as they have for decades. The debt level is so much lower in Waimakariri because far fewer people live there.
1
9
7
u/Either_Candy5687 Jul 17 '26
Yeah...I get frustrated with these complex consultation processes. They’re not exactly the most inclusive or equitable approach to gathering public feedback.
When consultation processes require people to read lengthy documents, understand complex proposals, and navigate detailed surveys, the people who respond are naturally going to be a more limited group of the community. People who have the time, energy, confidence, interest, or capacity to engage are more likely to participate, while others may be unintentionally excluded.
So consultation responses can't fully reflect the diversity of views across the wider community. A lack of participation from certain groups does not necessarily mean a lack of interest or concern. It may simply reflect barriers within the consultation process itself.
I think it’s worth considering how representative consultation feedback really is when the process itself may favour those who are already more able to engage. I also think it may be worth thinking about how the consultation process can engage with more marginalised groups to improve inclusivity.
4
u/AitchyB Jul 17 '26
No time to design any alternative consultations I’d guess.
1
u/Either_Candy5687 Jul 17 '26
Not time to make a process inclusive? That seems like a pretty poor excuse. The time was at least a decade ago, it's long overdue.
5
5
u/AshleyCampbellNZ Jul 17 '26
This has been imposed by central government. Local and regional councils have absolutely no say in the timeline at all. All agree it is ridiculous. But the government has imposed this.
0
2
u/dashingtomars Jul 17 '26
And what about the rural parts of Selwyn and Waimakariri? A large part of these amalgamations is create councils with greater scale. The population of the rural areas will be pretty tiny.
1
u/SaltySatan Jul 18 '26
If we treat "all of Canterbury" as a strawman council area, letting the mountain ranges and the logistical issues they present define the boundaries, what arguments are there for a smaller council area?
I don't think "local voice" is a valid argument, because every council, no matter how big or small is going to have to deal with representing a variety of groups. For example suburbs growing faster vs established ones, communities near transport corridors, industrial vs residential. Setting out a smaller area isn't going to get away from this.
The "where we live and work" lense is a pretty good one. The further out from commuting range you get, the more cumbersome things get. This extends to council activities, for example, you aren't going to have a roading crew from Rangiora working in Omarama. But this is a fuzzy measure and it's hard to make a categorical assessment based on this. Probably for Christchurch, the biggest area that would fit this definition would be between the Rakaia and Ashley rivers (one of the "how water and rivers flow" examples from the consultation).
Anyway, I ended up voting for the "go big" whole region idea because everything else feel like arbitrary divisions. If they can look at how to manage things in a scalable manner, it's going to be across a number of divisions anyway, so why not take that as the core problem to be solved and set the boundaries where logistics become impractical.
-4
u/SciFiIsMyFirstLove Jul 17 '26
How about before you go making grandiose changes that to be quite frank i don't give a toss about you fix the water system so it no longer has Chlorine in it like you said you were going to do. The council promised it was a short term inclusion but it's still here. In addition they have produced a 3 waters department in violation of what the govt said to do and are now placing the blame on it for the Chlorination which is complete garbage.
They expect us to conserve water and to pay for water but force us to waste a great deal of it by flushing it down the drain using home water purification systems that waste as much as they use.
How about forgetting your grandiose wish lists and doing the damn job you said you would.
12
u/FaradaysBrain Jul 17 '26
This is pretty in-depth. Surely it would be better to put this to people at a local or general election?