Rob Probst

The Coalition Government set a deadline of 90 days for New Zealand councils to come up with an amalgamation proposal for their districts.

It’s a good example of the “Burning Platform”, scenario I’ve heard pitched by managers trying to motivate rapid change.

It seldom succeeds except for annoying employees who have seen it before and know it’s rushed, probably a smokescreen for predetermined outcomes and creates disengagement, (except for the manager telling the story).

Dana Kirkpatrick, our local MP, suggests we come up with proposals that will be evaluated by the Coalition government for approval.

She and her Government suggest the amalgamation will result in productivity and efficiency increases, resulting in reduced costs and residential rates.

Based on what criteria?

What are the categories and quantities of expected savings, implementation costs and risks?

Detailed definition of these requirements, (normally provided by the requesting party), could help councils to produce a plan for cost-benefit analysis.

Without details of expected measurable outcomes it sounds more like a “solution looking for a problem”.

The Helen Clark Foundation issued a Measuring What Matters report in June 2026.

The report calls for a more strategic approach to the use of cost-benefit analysis in New Zealand infrastructure decision-making.

Turns out we’re not very good at doing cost-benefit analysis on infrastructure projects, and probably not good at doing CBA on district council restructuring either?

The Clark foundation director summarised aspects of the report following its launch at Parliament.

“New Zealand spends billions of dollars on public infrastructure every year, yet there is no mandated process to ensure we receive value for money from those investments.

“Over the last five Budgets, fewer than a quarter of infrastructure initiatives assessed by Treasury’s Investment Panel included a cost-benefit analysis of the preferred option. Addressing these weaknesses is both urgent and achievable.”

I believe our local councils should “taihoa”.

When the Coalition provides detailed definition of criteria for a cost-benefit analysis of amalgamation, (demonstrated by prior examples of success or research), we can initiate consultation.

Otherwise, it’s a “haste makes waste” opportunity, another platform that’s going to burn out a bunch of well-meaning participants.