I hereby give notice that an ordinary meeting of the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee will be held on:
|
Date:
Time:
Meeting Room:
Venue:
|
Thursday, 5
June 2014
9.30am
Reception
Lounge
Auckland Town Hall
301-305 Queen Street
Auckland
|
|
Regional Strategy and Policy Committee
OPEN AGENDA
|
MEMBERSHIP
|
Chairperson
|
Cr George Wood, CNZM
|
|
|
Deputy Chairperson
|
Cr Anae Arthur Anae
|
|
|
Members
|
Cr Cameron Brewer
|
Cr Mike Lee
|
|
|
Mayor Len Brown, JP
|
Kris MacDonald
|
|
|
Cr Dr Cathy Casey
|
Cr Calum Penrose
|
|
|
Cr Bill Cashmore
|
Cr Dick Quax
|
|
|
Cr Ross Clow
|
Cr Sharon Stewart, QSM
|
|
|
Cr Linda Cooper, JP
|
Cr Sir John Walker, KNZM, CBE
|
|
|
Cr Chris Darby
|
Cr Wayne Walker
|
|
|
Cr Alf Filipaina
|
Cr John Watson
|
|
|
Cr Hon Christine Fletcher, QSO
|
Cr Penny Webster
|
|
|
Cr Penny Hulse
|
Glenn Wilcox
|
|
|
Cr Denise Krum
|
|
(Quorum 11 members)
|
|
|
Barbara Watson
Democracy Advisor
29 May 2014
Contact Telephone: (09) 307 7629
Email: barbara.watson@aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
Website: www.aucklandcouncil.govt.nz
|
TERMS
OF REFERENCE
Responsibilities
This committee will deal with all strategy and policy
decision-making that is not the responsibility of another committee or the
Governing Body i.e. strategies and policies associated with environmental,
social, economic and cultural activities. Key responsibilities will include:
·
Final approval of strategies and policies not the responsibility
of other committees or the Governing Body
·
Setting/ approving the policy work programme for Reporting
Committees
·
Overviewing strategic projects, for example, the Southern
Initiative (except those that are the responsibility of the Auckland
Development Committee)
·
Implementation of the Waste Management and Minimisation Plan
·
Operational matters including:
o Acquisition and
disposal of property relating to the committee’s responsibilities
o Stopping of
roads
o
Public Works Act matters
Powers
(i) All powers necessary to
perform the committee’s responsibilities.
Except:
(a) powers that the Governing Body
cannot delegate or has retained to itself (see Governing Body responsibilities)
(b) where the committee’s responsibility is limited to
making a recommendation only
(ii) Approval of a
submission to an external body
(iii) Powers belonging to another
committee, where it is necessary to make a decision prior to the next meeting
of that other committee.
(iv) Power to establish subcommittees.
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
ITEM TABLE OF
CONTENTS PAGE
1 Apologies 5
2 Declaration of Interest 5
3 Confirmation of Minutes 5
4 Petitions 5
5 Public Input 5
6 Local Board Input 5
7 Extraordinary Business 5
8 Notices of Motion 6
9 Low Carbon Auckland: A proposed action plan and governance
options 7
Note: Due to its size, Attachment B is provided in a
separate Attachments Agenda
10 Providing quality policy advice to elected members 63
11 Strategy and Policy Forward Programme: Quarterly Monitoring
Update 75
12 Commercial Sponsorships Proposed Policy 87
13 Submission to Ministry for Primary Industries on Further
Temporary Closure of Umupuia Beach, Manukau, to the Harvest of Cockles 103
14 Consideration of Extraordinary Items
PUBLIC EXCLUDED
15 Procedural Motion to Exclude the Public 107
C1 Stormwater Land Acquisition - Flat Bush School Road 107
C2 Stormwater Land Acquisition - Ormiston Road, Flat Bush 107
C3 Stormwater Land Acquisition - Barry Curtis Park Vicinity, Flat
Bush 108
1 Apologies
At the close of
the agenda no apologies had been received.
2 Declaration of Interest
Members are
reminded of the need to be vigilant to stand aside from decision making when a
conflict arises between their role as a member and any private or other
external interest they might have.
3 Confirmation of Minutes
|
That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:
a)
confirm the ordinary minutes of its meeting,
held on Tuesday, 13 May 2014, including the
confidential section, as a true and correct record.
|
4 Petitions
At the close of the
agenda no requests to present petitions had been received.
5 Public Input
Standing Order
3.21 provides for Public Input. Applications to speak must be made to the
Committee Secretary, in writing, no later than two (2) working days
prior to the meeting and must include the subject matter. The meeting
Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application that does not meet
the requirements of Standing Orders. A maximum of thirty (30) minutes
is allocated to the period for public input with five (5) minutes
speaking time for each speaker.
At the close of
the agenda no requests for public input had been received.
6 Local Board Input
Standing Order
3.22 provides for Local Board Input. The Chairperson (or nominee of that
Chairperson) is entitled to speak for up to five (5) minutes during this
time. The Chairperson of the Local Board (or nominee of that Chairperson)
shall wherever practical, give two (2) days notice of their wish to
speak. The meeting Chairperson has the discretion to decline any application
that does not meet the requirements of Standing Orders.
This right is
in addition to the right under Standing Order 3.9.14 to speak to matters on the
agenda.
At the close of
the agenda no requests for local board input had been received.
7 Extraordinary Business
Section 46A(7)
of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended)
states:
“An item that is
not on the agenda for a meeting may be dealt with at that meeting if-
(a) The local authority by resolution so decides; and
(b) The presiding member explains at the meeting, at a time
when it is open to the public,-
(i) The
reason why the item is not on the agenda; and
(ii) The reason why the discussion of the item cannot be
delayed until a subsequent meeting.”
Section 46A(7A)
of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (as amended)
states:
“Where an item
is not on the agenda for a meeting,-
(a) That item may be discussed at that meeting if-
(i) That item is a minor matter relating to the general
business of the local authority; and
(ii) the presiding member explains at the beginning of the
meeting, at a time when it is open to the public, that the item will be
discussed at the meeting; but
(b) no resolution, decision or recommendation may be made in
respect of that item except to refer that item to a subsequent meeting of the
local authority for further discussion.”
8 Notices of Motion
At the close of
the agenda no requests for notices of motion had been received.
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
Low Carbon
Auckland: A proposed action plan and governance options
File No.: CP2014/10608
Purpose
1. This report
outlines public feedback received on the draft Low Carbon Auckland Action Plan.
The report seeks endorsement of a finalised Action Plan and consideration of
governance arrangements to support effective implementation.
Executive
summary
2. This report was
considered at the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage Committee
meeting on Wednesday 28 May 2014, the resolutions of which will be tabled at
the meeting on Thursday, 5 June for endorsement by the Regional Strategy and
Policy Committee.
3. The draft Low
Carbon Auckland Action Plan was released on 7 April for the purpose of
informal public feedback. Feedback was received from 178 respondents. Overall
74 per cent of respondents broadly supported the aims and aspirations of the
plan. A report summarising the key points of feedback and proposed revisions
to the Action Plan is presented in Attachment A. Overall four key issues were
raised:
· Widespread
support for the overall vision, but concern that the targets were too low and
unambitious.
· Concern
that several actions pre-empted the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan and the use
of mandatory language in a non-statutory document was inappropriate.
· Consideration
that the introduction of sustainable building standards, point of sale
requirements and streamlining of consent processes for
buildings that demonstrate best practice sustainable design is inappropriate,
unworkable and would pose potentially perverse impacts on economic growth.
· Opposition to the promotion of electricity over the direct use of natural gas for specified residential and commercial uses on the
basis that electricity is less carbon intensive. Some respondents argued that
the underpinning analysis is erroneous and limited in
the scope of factors it considers.
4. The changes we are proposing in
response to these key issues and other feedback are shown in the revised Action Plan at Attachment B. These changes are supported and
recommended by members of the Low Carbon Auckland Steering Group.
5. The multi-faceted nature and
sheer breadth and scale of the Action Plan and the
complex issues it addresses requires new ideas, a systems thinking approach and
collaborative action. Collaborative action should involve multiple partners
operating in a dynamic environment where new technologies and opportunities
will arise at pace. This in turn demands an innovative approach to the
governance architecture for implementation.
6. Attachment C
presents analysis of three governance options to support Auckland’s low carbon,
energy resilient transformation. We consider that collective action
facilitated through a ‘self-organising network’ of partners via action-focused
teams (Option 2b) will enable the greatest capacity for innovation while
leveraging skills and revenue generation from those best placed and
incentivised to provide them. The self-organising network of partners would be
unified by a common agenda (set and overseen by a ‘partnership’ governance
group) and supported by an independent, third party backbone organisation. A
phased process is outlined whereby the model would be self-financing within 12
months.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Regional Strategy and
Policy Committee:
a) adopt
the Low Carbon Auckland Action Plan (Attachment B)
b) endorse
the self-organising network (Option 2b) as the ideal end state governance
arrangement for effective implementation of the Low Carbon Auckland Action
Plan, and the establishment of a cross-sector stewardship group (Option 2a)
as a transition step
c) delegate
authority to the Chief Planning Officer and the Committee Chair to make any
final editorial changes to the Low
Carbon Auckland Action Plan.
|
Feedback
on the Draft Low Carbon Auckland Action Plan
7. LCAAP was released for informal
public feedback on 7 April. Feedback was received from 178 respondents.
Overall 74 per cent of respondents supported the aims and aspirations of the
plan.
8. A summary table of the feedback
and our response to that feedback is outlined in Attachment A. Recommended
revisions to LCAAP are shown as tracked changes in Attachment B.
9. Overall four key issues were
raised by respondents:
Targets are too low and unambitious
10. Despite widespread support for
the overall aims and aspirations of the Action Plan, there was some concern
that the headline target and key policy-specific targets were too low and
unambitious.
11. There was strong
support for more aspirational targets in the following areas:
· Public
transport, cycling and reduction in transport-related fossil fuel consumption;
· Energy
efficiency and renewable energy generation;
· Wider
application of Greenstar or equivalent ratings to include all new houses;
· Waste
to energy generation from sewage and landfill gas.
|
Our response:
|
Support minor enhancements to
targets related to the uptake of solar photovoltaics by 2020 and removal of
the lower range of targets relating to the reduction in vehicle kilometres
travelled.
Targets will be reviewed and
updated periodically to ensure they remain relevant and drive continuous
improvement.
See Attachment B for
revised narrative text page 71 and revised energy and transport targets on
pages 74 and 75.
|
Pre-empting the Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan
12. There was
concern from a number of corporate submitters that some actions, notably
sustainable building design standards, may pre-empt the outcomes of the
Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan (PAUP) process. Several respondents regarded the
use of mandatory language in a non-statutory document as inappropriate and
should be amended accordingly.
|
Our response:
|
Reword key
actions and narratives in Section 6 (‘Transforming our built environment and
greening infrastructure’) to remove mandatory language or the
pre-empting of the outcomes of the PAUP.
See
Attachment B for revised narrative and Actions 1, 6 and 7 on pages 46 to 47.
|
Opposition to buildings standards,
streamlining the consent processes and point of sale requirements
13. A small group of corporate-sector respondents were opposed to:
· The
introduction of buildings standards for commercial and
industrial buildings, stating that such provisions were impractical and unreasonable, and should be voluntary.
· The
introduction of an obligation on developers and/or landlords to disclose the energy
and water performance and design standards of commercial and industrial
buildings at the point of sale, rent or lease. These respondents believed such
provisions would impose an unreasonable burden on developers, with no economic
justification.
· Streamlining
the consent process for buildings that demonstrate best practice sustainable
design. This was considered inappropriate and unworkable and to have a negative
impact on other desired outcomes such as economic development.
|
Our response:
|
The narrative notes that provisions in
relation to buildings standards and disclosure at the point of sale, rent or lease are dependent on
the PAUP outcomes.
Revise provisions that streamline the
consent process for buildings that demonstrate best practice sustainable
design to place focus on the removal of barriers.
See Attachment B for changes to the
narrative and to Actions 6, 7 and 11 on pages 46 to 47.
|
Opposition to promoting electricity
over the direct use of gas
14. Several
submitters from the energy sector were opposed to proposed provisions to
promote electricity over the direct use of natural gas for specified
residential and commercial uses. These provisions were included on the basis of
independent analysis that concluded that electricity is less carbon intensive.
15. This analysis
was undertaken on behalf of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Authority
(EECA). Several submitters believed it oversimplified some assumptions and
calculations that relate for example to ‘time of use’ and the carbon intensity
of the associated electricty generation. They also believed that the analysis
did not adequately consider broader issues of energy resilience and
affordability. These submitters cite an alternative report commissioned by the Gas Industry Company[1]
that presents the direct use of natural gas as the most GHG efficient option
based on a different set of assumptions.
|
Our response:
|
Revise narrative (pages 36
to 37) and Action 5.5 to read:
Investigate and promote the most appropriate,
GHG-efficient energy options for heating water, heating and cooling living
spaces and for cooking in Auckland.
Delete Action 5.7:
Promote the use of renewable electricity for heating
and cooking at residential and commercial premises.
Carry out a peer review of
analysis by end of 2014.
|
Governance
Options
16. As discussed with the Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee at its meeting in February 2014 this report seeks
consideration of governance arrangements to support the effective
implementation of the Low Carbon Auckland Action Plan.
17. LCAAP sets out a 30-year pathway
and a 10-year plan that will guide the first stage of the city’s
transformation. The multi-faceted nature and breadth and scale of Low Carbon
Auckland and the complex issues it seeks to address requires new thinking and
collaborative action by multiple actors operating in a highly dynamic
environment. This in turn demands an innovative approach to the governance
architecture for implementation.
18. We have taken a
‘first principles’ approach to determine appropriate governance models to
implement and catalyse a low carbon, energy resilient Auckland. The model needs
to:
· oversee the implementation of the LCAAP
· mobilise social change
· enable innovation
19. Attachment B
presents detailed analysis of three governance options. A summary of findings
and recommendations are presented below.
Option 1: Auckland Council ‘Goes it
Alone’
20. In this option the current
Steering Group would be reconfigured to lead the implementation of the LCAAP.
This group would meet on a regular basis as ambassadors with responsibility to
champion the effective implementation of LCAAP. This option would involve
Auckland Council staff providing project management of LCAAP implementation and
secretariat support to the Steering Group. There would also be some costs in
relation to communications, marketing and general
administration.
21. Auckland Council would remain
largely responsible for setting the agenda and strategic direction of the
Steering Group. Membership of the Steering Group would be voluntary.
22. While this option would provide
council with clear line of sight across actions, the LCAAP would be perceived
as a Council initiative and its reach and impact would be limited in scope to
overseeing LCAAP implementation.
Figure 1: Auckland Council ‘Goes it Alone’ (Option 1)
Option 2a: A Partnership Approach (Recommended as a
transition step to Option 2b)
23. In this option
Auckland Council would be one partner in a collective approach governed by a
‘Stewardship Group’ of senior leaders from different sectors. The group
would commit to a common agenda to ensure the effective implementation of
LCAAP.
24. In addition to
implementation of the 112 actions in LCAAP, the Stewardship Group would
actively look for innovative flagship projects to support and invest in. Leaders
would therefore be selected with regard to their ability to enable innovation
and mobilise social change.
25. The Stewardship
Group would make governance decisions together and all members would share the
cost of resourcing the stewardship group and flagship projects. This
approach is in line with the collaborative governance approaches Auckland
Council has adopted in implementing key strategies including Thriving
Communities and the Economic Development Strategy’s shared agenda.
26. In this option,
Auckland Council would provide the same level of commitment as option 1. However
its role and mandate would be modified in line with the expanded role and
strategic oversight capability of the Stewardship Group and the flagship
projects it chooses to implement. The Stewardship Group would drive the
development of business cases and identify sources of funding for these
projects.
27. This model is a slightly more
mature and ambitious approach than Option 1 as it offers greater scope and influence for transformation through the delivery
of flagship projects. However budgets and potential
leverage of the flagship projects would be restricted by the resource within
the Stewardship Group, and could therefore be limited in
numbers and reflect the interests of the Stewardship Group members.
28. This option is therefore viewed
as a vital but interim step for the first 6 – 12 months. The Stewardship Group
could play a key role in overseeing the transition process to the most
effective long-term governance structure.
Figure 2: A Partnership Approach (Option 2a)
Option 2b: Self-Organising Network (Recommended as the
ideal end state)
29. In this option,
Auckland Council is one partner of a much broader network of partners working
collaboratively in self-organising, action-focused teams, participating in (or
leading) action teams that match its interest, skills and expertise.
30. The broader network of partners
is unified by a common agenda set and overseen by a ‘Partnership’ Governance
Group. This group is supported by an independent, third party Backbone
Organisation.
31. The true value of this
‘collective action’ approach is enabled by the leadership, expertise,
innovation and energy generated through multi-organisation partnerships and
networks. Some of these ‘teams’ are already in existence.
Importantly, the network builds on the momentum, leadership, collaborative
partnerships and action. For example it supports and provides the opportunity
to recognise the growing social enterprise sector and the work of organisations
such as Generation Zero, Association for the Promotion of Electric Vehicles
(APEV), Sustainable Business Network and the Sustainable Business Council.
Third Party Coordination
32. In Option 2b
oversight and coordination of the collaborative network, its partners and
initiatives resides outside Auckland Council. These functions are provided
through the establishment of an intermediary backbone organisation. The
organisation would also have responsibility for supporting new action-focused
teams, fundraising for joint projects mediating conflict, helping information
to flow and building the overall capacity to work towards its desired outcomes.
33. The Backbone
organisation would work in partnership with the Partnership Governance Group to
prioritise projects and identify themes.
Self-financing
34. As a network
partner, Auckland Council would commit to co-funding the Backbone Organisation.
The Backbone Organisation would pull in additional investment
to support the action–focused teams.
35. This option
should not require any additional resourcing beyond either Options 1 or 2a.
However, by committing to co-fund a third-party backbone organisation, this
resource and the coordination and secretariat functions would reside outside of
Council.
36. Importantly,
this option is designed to be self-financing within 12 months, generating its
own revenue streams by leveraging external funding (accessed and managed via
the Backbone Organisation).
37. While
coordination and secretariat functions would reside outside of Council thereby
reducing line of sight, this option would empower greater influence and
coordination across a much broader range of activities.
Figure 3: Self-Organising Network (Option 2b)
A Recommended Process of Transition
38. Given the need
to take truly transformative actions to catalyse a low carbon, energy resilient
Auckland it is considered that collective action through a self-organising
network of action-focused teams (option 2b) will allow the greatest capacity
for innovation while leveraging skills and revenue generation from those best
placed and incentivised to provide them. Option 1 and Option 2a are unlikely to
result in the required level of transformation or the required level of
collective buy-in from other organisations.
39. It is
recommended that the committee endorses Option 2b via option 2a as a
‘transition step’ to be completed within 6 months (see figure 4). Taken
together Options 2a and 2b present an innovation road map that can evolve as
the project builds in complexity and as more diverse partners get involved.
This will ensure the effective implementation of LCAAP, provide for
mobilisation within Auckland of wide social change and drive innovation while
being self-financing within 12 months.
Figure 4: Transition of Governance
Functions
Next Steps
40. It is proposed
that the current Low Carbon Auckland Steering Group is reconvened to oversee
the process for establishing a cross-sector stewardship group (Option 2a)
within three months. A key task of the new Stewardship Group will be to
develop the process by which the collaborative partnership model develops into
a self-organising network.
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
41. Local boards
have been engaged at all key stages in the development of LCAAP and officers
have worked to identify the levels of interest and involvement sought by each
local board. A copy of the proposed work programme was sent to all local boards
in early 2012, and a copy of the discussion document and
briefings were provided to all interested local boards in July 2012. An
initial draft Action Plan was workshopped with councillors and local board
representatives on 19 June 2013 and an update was provided on 12 December
2013.
42. In 2014 a series
of briefings on the draft Action Plan were held for interested local boards. This was taken up by Pukatāpapa, Franklin and
Maungakiekie-Tāmaki. These local boards plus Waitematā, Waiheke and
Hibiscus and Bays provided feedback which was supportive of the LCAAP.
Pukatāpapa, Waitematā and Waiheke local boards also stated their interest
in participating in pilot projects. Waitematā Local Board has also
developed a Low Carbon Local Action Plan.
Maori
impact statement
43. A Māori Working Group was
established to assist Council to:
· Identify issues and opportunity areas for Māori
in relation to energy efficiency,
resilience and security and climate change mitigation.
· Identify priority actions for the draft Action Plan.
· Review recommended actions arising from all technical
working groups.
· Provide advice to the Steering Group on the working group’s
recommendations.
44. The Māori Working Group has
developed a stand-alone Māori Action Plan in response to these objectives.
Based on the guidance of the Māori Working Group, the issues, actions and
opportunities of importance to Māori have been woven into the parent draft
Action Plan. The standalone document will form the basis for on-going
recommendations into LCAAP. The Māori Action Plan was reported to the
Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 4 February 2014.
45. At a project governance level,
the Independent Māori Statutory Board was represented on the Steering
Group and the Māori Working Group is represented at Steering Group
meetings.
46. Some Māori organisations
have already indicated a strong interest in being involved in the
implementation of LCAAP. Officers are currently working with a representative
of the Māori Working Group and Te Waka Angamua in seeking to engage
interested iwi on the LCAAP and the Māori Action Plan by holding a series
of face to face workshops during the next two to three months. The aim of this
engagement will be to seek feedback on the Māori Action Plan and to
provide opportunity for broader active Māori involvement and leadership in
the implementation of actions of particular
interest and importance to Māori.
Implementation
47. Resourcing and budget
requirements associated with the implementation of the LCAAP and proposed
governance arrangements as set out in this report will be subject to the
2015-2025 Long Term Planning process. LCAAP will be reflected
in the 2014-2017 Statements of Intent of all CCOs.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Draft Low Carbon Auckland Action Plan - a summary
report on public feedback.
|
17
|
|
bView
|
Proposed Low Carbon Auckland Action plan with track
changes
(Under Separate Cover)
|
|
|
cView
|
Low Carbon Innovation Roadmap: Governance options for
implementation
|
41
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Robert Perry - Principal Policy Analyst
|
|
Authorisers
|
Denise O’Shaughnessy - Manager Strategic Advice
Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer
Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer
|
|
Regional Strategy
and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
Regional Strategy
and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
Regional Strategy
and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
Providing quality policy advice to elected members
File No.: CP2014/10984
Purpose
1. To seek the
support and feedback of elected members in helping the organisation improve the
quality of the advice it provides to decision makers.
Executive
summary
2. It is a core role of the
Auckland Council organisation to provide quality policy advice to support
elected members in their decision making. The Quality Policy Advice (QPA)
transformation programme was initiated to drive quality improvements in our
people and processes and has resulted in the delivery of a number of
initiatives. These include a nine-step policy cycle, a new commissioning
process, the establishment of a Policy Leadership Team, a policy register and
the creation of the Quality Policy Hub.
3. It is important
that elected members play an active role in providing ongoing feedback on the
quality of the advice they receive. This will enable us to evaluate the
success of the initiatives we have introduced. To facilitate this feedback, we
recommend the establishment of a survey in which elected members are asked on a
quarterly basis to consider the quality of advice contained in policy reports
on the agendas of the four committees of the whole. The short survey
(Attachment A) would run as a pilot in the first instance and would focus on
the quality standards established through the QPA programme (Attachment B).
|
Recommendation/s
That the Regional Strategy and
Policy Committee:
a) agree to support a pilot survey on the quality of policy advice
contained in committee reports
b) note that a presentation will be made to the monthly meeting of
local board chairs seeking feedback on the establishment of such a survey for
local boards
c) agree to send a copy of this report to all local boards and the
Independent Māori
Statutory Board for their information.
|
Comments
Background
4. It is a core role of the council
organisation to provide high quality policy advice. In response to feedback
from elected members in the first term of Auckland Council, we made
improvements to committee reports, including adding purpose statements and
reducing the length of the reports. You welcomed those changes which led us to
further examine how we provide advice to you and to establish the Quality
Policy Advice (QPA) transformation programme to drive further improvements.
5. Under the QPA programme we have established a number of
initiatives (outlined at paragraph 9) that support higher quality policy
outputs. We have embedded improvements in our people and processes, and we
undertake quality assurance to test our progress.
Feedback from elected
members
6. As the key audience for our advice,
it is important that you play an active role in providing ongoing feedback on
the quality of that advice. This will enable us to evaluate the effectiveness
of the initiatives we have introduced.
7. To facilitate
this feedback, we recommend establishing a survey in which elected members are
asked to consider each policy report on the agenda of the four committees of
the whole: Auckland Development Committee, Budget Committee, Finance and
Performance Committee, and the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee. The
short survey (Attachment A) would be run quarterly via a form included with the
agenda papers. The survey questions would focus on the quality standards
established through the QPA programme (Attachment B).
8. We recommend
that this survey be carried out on a pilot basis initially to provide an
opportunity to assess its effectiveness.
Quality Policy Advice
outputs and initiatives
9. The outputs and
initiatives developed through the QPA programme work in an integrated way to
build policy capability in the organisation and to make continuous improvements
to the quality of advice provided to elected members. They include:
· quality standards (Attachment B) which
all policy advice must meet
· a nine step policy cycle (Attachment C) that staff are
expected to follow when preparing and presenting policy advice. Each step is
overlaid with five “lenses” (engagement, implementation, the Māori Responsiveness Framework, local
and regional considerations, and evidence-based) that ensure appropriate focus
is given to these aspects at every stage of the policy development process.
· a new commissioning process that helps to direct resources to
priority policy work.
· the Policy Leadership Team (PLT), a group of senior managers[2]
who make recommendations to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee which
approves changes or additions to the Strategy and Policy Forward Programme.
· a centralised register of all
policy and strategy which enables greater coordination and linkages to be made
between policy projects, and over time, becomes a policy knowledge base for the
council.
· five capabilities that will be key
requirements for new policy advisers joining Auckland Council and will act as
the framework for learning and development initiatives for existing advisers.
· a mentoring programme for less
experienced policy advisers.
· an organisation-wide peer review system to ensure committee reports
meet the agreed quality standards. This is a further mechanism to drive higher
quality reports and reduce requests for additional information.
· the Quality Policy Hub see http://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesreports/qphub/Pages/home.aspx
containing important tools and information for policy advisers. The hub acts as
a forum for sharing ideas and knowledge, helping to build capability across the
organisation.
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
10. The QPA
programme has been established to improve the quality of advice provided on
both local and regional policy matters. A copy of this report will be sent to
all local boards for their information, and a presentation on the proposed
survey will be made to the monthly meeting of local board chairs.
Maori
impact statement
11. The policy cycle
includes Māori responsiveness as one of the five lenses to be applied
throughout the policy process. Policy advisers are expected to consider their
work through this lens. A companion document on the Quality Policy Hub
provides more detailed guidance on how to apply the Māori responsiveness
goals and drivers (see http://acintranet.aklc.govt.nz/EN/planspoliciesreports/qphub/Documents/guidecompanionmaoriresponsiveness.pdf).
This includes reference to other key documents such as the
Māori Plan for Tāmaki Makaurau. A copy of this report will be sent
to the Independent Māori Statutory Board.
Implementation
12. Implementation
of most QPA programme initiatives has commenced. Roadshows have been held
across the organisation and training of key policy staff in the various
components of the programme is well underway. Further training and initiatives
will be developed as required, and in response to feedback received from
elected members through the proposed survey.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Sample survey
|
67
|
|
bView
|
Quality standards
|
71
|
|
cView
|
Policy cycle
|
73
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Denise O’Shaughnessy - Manager Strategic Advice
|
|
Authorisers
|
Grant Barnes - Manager - Auckland Strategy and
Research
Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer
Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer
|
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
Regional Strategy
and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
Regional Strategy
and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
Regional Strategy
and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
Strategy and Policy Forward Programme: Quarterly
Monitoring Update
File No.: CP2014/10687
Purpose
1. This report provides a quarterly progress update on the Strategy and
Policy Forward Programme. It also responds to the committee’s resolution
(CP2014/00522) that officers propose an approach for making changes to the programme.
Executive
summary
2. The 2014-2016 Strategy and
Policy Forward Programme was adopted in March 2014. A quarterly update on the
development and implementation of items in the forward programme is presented
at Attachment A. This shows that the majority of items in the programme have
either been completed and are being implemented, or are on-track for adoption.
3. A proposed approach for making
changes to the programme has been developed. This approach recommends that
requests for new policies/strategies are assessed and recommended to this
committee using four key criteria: strategic need; legislative requirement;
interdependencies; and alternatives. Using the proposed criteria it is
recommended that the Significance and Engagement Policy is added to the forward
programme.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee:
a) note the
progress on the development and implementation of items in the forward
programme at Attachment A
b) endorse the
proposed approach for making changes to the forward programme
c) agree to add
the Significance and Engagement Policy to the forward programme.
|
Comments
4. The Auckland Council 2014-2016
Strategy and Policy Forward Programme was adopted by this committee in March
2014. The programme is designed to ensure that the organisation focuses on
those areas of greatest strategic priority and is used to drive and guide the
work of reporting committees.
5. A high-level update on
both the development and implementation of items in the forward programme for
the March-June 2014 quarter is presented at Attachment A. The majority of
items have now been completed and are in the implementation phase with the
remaining on-track for adoption. The Parks and Reserves Management Plan
Methodology has been completed since the last committee update.
Proposed process for changing the forward programme
6. The programme has been designed
to be flexible enough to respond to emerging strategic and policy issues. The
committee agreed (CP2014/00522) to confirm an approach for
making any changes to the programme that may be required as a result of new
issues arising.
7. The proposed process for
changing the forward programme aligns with the Auckland Council policy
commissioning process as set out in the “Guide to providing quality policy
advice at Auckland Council” (available here).
8. Responsibility for making
recommendations to committee on changes to the forward programme at an officer
level sits with the Policy Leadership Team (PLT); a cross-council advisory
group sponsored by the Chief Planning Officer.
9. Under the proposed process for
editing the forward programme PLT would review requests for new
policies/strategies and would use the following criteria to inform their
recommendation to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:
· Strategic
need
Is there a clear strategic requirement for adding the item
to the forward programme? How does the policy/strategy relate to the strategic
direction set in the Auckland Plan? Is it a regional strategy issue or local
board priority? Will it contribute to assisting council to meet its commitments
to Maori?
· Legislative
requirement
Is the development of the new strategy/policy required by
law or to help council fulfill its statutory obligations?
· Interdependencies
Are there any interdependencies with, or linkages to,
existing items in the forward programme? Are there any co-ordination,
sequencing or resourcing issues to be considered? At what point will the new
policy or strategy be handed over for implementation?
· Alternatives
Have alternatives been considered? Is a new policy or
strategy required in order to initiate or implement action? Is the proposed new
document able to be implemented effectively? Could the issue be resolved
through, for example, a committee resolution, changes in operational practices
or the implementation of existing policies or strategies?
10. Recommendations
to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee to make changes to the forward
programme would be made on a quarterly basis or in the intervening months if a
decision is time-bound or otherwise urgent.
Significance and Engagement
Policy
11. Using the
above criteria the PLT has recommended that the Significance and Engagement
Policy is added to the forward programme. This policy is a legislative
requirement and has to be completed by December 2014. The policy was discussed
at the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee meeting in March (though not
formally added to the programme) and an update given to this committee in May.
The policy will improve the engagement process by being clear
when and how council will engage with the community, depending on the
significance of the issue.
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
12. Local boards
have received copies of the quarterly update reports on the forward programme
since its adoption in 2012. Strategy leads are expected to engage with local
boards as early as possible to ensure there is adequate time for boards to
provide feedback. The forward programme helps to provide visibility of
priority strategy and policy work and also helps to ensure that documents are
developed in a more coordinated way. A copy of this
report will be sent to all local boards.
Maori
impact statement
13. Officers are expected to integrate the goals of the Māori
Responsiveness Framework and to consider the Māori Plan for Tāmaki
Makaurau as part of policy development. This is monitored through corporate
performance standards which measure the number of documents on the forward
programme which are drafted in consultation with Māori and include
Māori outcomes. A copy of this report will be sent to the Independent
Māori Statutory Board.
Implementation
14. The
development and implementation of items on the forward
programme requires ongoing resource. Adopted strategies and policies remain on
the programme to reflect their role in implementing the Auckland Plan and the
significant activities associated with their implementation.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Strategy and Policy Forward Programme Progress Update:
March-June 2014
|
79
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Craig Glover - Principal Strategy Analyst
|
|
Authorisers
|
Denise O’Shaughnessy - Manager Strategic Advice
Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer
Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer
|
|
Regional Strategy
and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
STRATEGY AND POLICY
FORWARD PROGRAMME PROGRESS UPDATE: DASHBOARD VIEW
|
|
|
FORWARD
PROGRAMME ITEM
|
ITEM STATUS
|
|
|
1.
Children and Young Peoples’ Strategic Action Plan
|
|
|
|
2.
Community Development Strategic Action Plan
|
|
|
|
3.
Community Grants Policy
|
|
|
|
4.
Community Facilities Network Plan
|
|
|
|
5. Libraries Future Direction
|
|
|
|
6.
Housing Action Plan
|
|
|
|
7. Procurement
Strategy and Procurement Policy
|
|
|
|
8. Economic Development Strategy
|
|
|
|
9.
Alcohol Policy Programme
|
|
|
Alcohol Harm Reduction Strategy
|
|
|
|
Local Alcohol
Policy
|
|
|
|
10.
Smokefree Policy
|
|
|
|
11. Psychoactive
Substances Local Approved Product Policy
|
|
|
|
12. Commercial
Sex Industry Policy
|
|
|
|
13.
Gambling Venues Policy
|
|
|
|
14.
Family and Sexual Violence Strategic Action Plan
|
|
|
|
15.
Sport and Recreation Strategic Action Plan
|
|
|
|
16.
Arts and Culture Strategic Action Plan
|
|
|
|
17.
Public Art Policy
|
|
|
|
18.
Events Policy
|
|
|
|
19. Māori Responsiveness Framework
|
|
|
|
20.
Historic Heritage Action Plan
|
|
|
|
21.
Environment Strategic Action Plan
|
|
|
|
22.
Natural Hazard Risk Management Action Plan
|
|
|
|
23. Waste Management and Minimisation Plan
|
|
|
|
24. Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy
|
|
|
|
25.
Energy Resilience and Low Carbon Action Plan
|
|
|
|
26.
Water Strategic Action Plan
|
|
|
|
27.
Public Open Space Strategic Programme
|
|
|
Public Open Space Strategic Action
Plan
|
|
|
|
Open Space Acquisition and
Divestment Policy
|
|
|
|
Weed Management Policy
|
|
|
|
Open Space Levels of Provision
Targets
|
|
|
|
Parks and Reserves Management Plan
methodology
|
|
KEY
|
|
Adopted
|
|
|
On-track
|
|
|
28.
Regional Pest Management Plan Review
|
|
Minor (<6
months) slippage likely
|
|
|
29. Significance
and Engagement Policy
|
|
Major (>6
months) slippage likely
|
|
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
STRATEGY AND POLICY
FORWARD PROGRAMME: QUARTERLY PROGRESS UPDATE (MARCH - JUNE 2014)
|
|
FORWARD PROGRAMME ITEM
|
ITEM STATUS
|
PROGRESS SINCE LAST
QUARTER / COMMENTARY
|
|
1. Children and Young
Peoples’ Strategic Action Plan
Adopted September 2013
|
|
§ Since last quarter the Youth Advisory
Panel has been supporting the implementation of this document and has
contributed to the council’s submission on plain packaging for tobacco
products and to child and youth friendly design tools for public open space
in the Auckland Design Manual. The Mayor’s Youth Employment Traction Plan
has been launched and a number of youth groups have been active in supporting
local boards to develop their local board plans.
|
|
2. Community Development
Strategic Action Plan (“Thriving
Communities”)
Adopted June 2013
|
|
§ The focus for the implementation of this document is
on the delivery of key actions and supporting local boards to include
relevant principles and/or actions in their local board plans.
|
3. Community Grants
Policy
Expected adoption date:
October-December 2014
|
|
§ A report was presented to the Regional Strategy and
Policy Committee in March where timeframes for the development and
implementation of this policy were endorsed.
§ A discussion document has been produced and
workshops were held with local boards during March and April.
§ A workshop was held with the governing body on 13
May to discuss key elements prior to the draft policy being reported in July
for endorsement for stakeholder and public consultation
|
|
4. Community Facilities
Network Plan
Expected adoption date:
October-December 2014
|
|
§ Phase one (analysis of current state) completed.
Report presented to March Regional Strategy and Policy Committee where the
project purpose, scope and timeframes for delivery of the plan were endorsed.
§ Workshops were held with local boards during March
and April to present the findings on the current state of community
facilities and to seek input on key elements of the network plan.
§ The draft network plan (phase 2) is in development.
A workshop was held with the governing body on 13 May to discuss key elements
prior to the draft plan being reported in July for endorsement for
stakeholder and public consultation.
|
|
5. Libraries Future
Directions
Adopted December 2012
|
|
§ Development of the Te Kauroa implementation plan is
currently underway.
|
|
6. Housing Action Plan
Adopted December 2012
|
|
§ An update was reported to the Auckland Development
Committee in March. Of the actions in the plan 6 were complete, 24 were substantially underway and
5 have commenced.
§ An update on Stage 2 of the document will
be presented to the Auckland Development Committee in June / July 2014.
|
|
7. Procurement Strategy
and Procurement Policy
Adopted May 2013
|
|
§ The Procurement Strategy and Policy are available on
council’s website. A requirement has been introduced for authors of
procurement plans and supplier recommendation reports to advise how the
procurement process is supporting the principles of the procurement policy.
§ A number of guides/tools are currently being
prepared including: value for money (total cost of ownership),
sustainability, local impact and value Te Ao Maori.
|
|
8.
Economic Development Strategy
Adopted
July 2012
|
|
§ A key focus has been the mid-course assessment of
the strategy. This was undertaken by council, central government officials
and business leaders in order to develop a prioritised shared agenda for the strategy’s implementation
over 2014-17. Progress on this shared agenda includes activity to: build the
Auckland business proposition for a business friendly city; support more
Auckland businesses to innovate and grow; raise youth/rangatahi employability; build, retain and attract talent; increase Auckland’s visibility; and support growth and improved performance of Māori businesses
|
|
9. Alcohol Harm
Reduction Programme
Alcohol Harm Reduction
Strategy
Adopted July 2012
Local Alcohol Policy
Expected adoption date:
January-March 2015
|
|
Alcohol Harm Reduction
Strategy
§ A review of implementation is planned for this
strategy. This will take place following completion of the Local Alcohol
Policy.
|
|
|
Local Alcohol Policy
§ Stakeholder and community engagement on discussion
document has been completed.
§ The draft policy was presented to the Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee on 13 May 2014. It is expected that the Special
Consultative Procedure (submissions and hearings) for this item will take
place in the second half of 2014.
|
|
10. Smokefree Policy
Adopted July 2013
|
|
§ Implementation plan completed. Implementation will
be rolled out over 3 stages. Implementation of phase 1 has commenced and
this includes most parks and council facilities. Phases 2 and 3 rollout
includes malls, town centres, shared spaces, outdoor dining and beaches with
phase 2 implementation taking place from 2015.
|
|
11. Psychoactive
Substances Local Approved Product Policy
Expected adoption date:
January-March 2015
|
|
§ The recent legislative changes in this area have not
removed the need for council to have this policy in place as council needs to
regulate the location of retail outlets before any products are approved for
sale. Engagement with Local Boards and the Community Development and Safety
Committee on issues and options took place throughout April and May 2014.
|
|
12. Commercial Sex
Industry Policy
Expected adoption date:
July-September 2014
|
|
§ The commercial sex industry policy will
provide direction to members of the commercial sex industry and to the
general public on what the rules that regulate this industry are. This
will not introduce any new rules or regulations but rather it will direct
people to the rules and regulations contained within the unitary plan and
relevant bylaws.
|
|
13. Gambling Venues
Policy
Adopted July 2013
|
|
§ Implementation of this policy has been
transitioned to operations. Given Council now has a regional sinking
lid policy the operational implications associated with this are minimal. A
gambling harm reduction framework is being developed and contributions are
being made towards further legislative and regulatory reforms that Government
is considering.
|
|
14. Family, Whānau and Sexual Violence Multi-Sector Action Plan
Expected adoption date:
October-December 2014
|
|
§ Consultation is currently underway with
representatives of the family, whānau and sexual violence sectors and
key central government agencies. Consultation is focused on identifying key
issues for Auckland and actions to create change.
|
|
15. Sport and Recreation
Strategic Action Plan
Adopted September 2013
|
|
§ An implementation framework is currently being
developed which includes the establishment of a governance structure with
representatives from lead agencies.
|
|
16. Arts and Culture
Strategic Action Plan
Expected adoption date:
July 2014
|
|
§ The draft action plan is due to be
reported to the Arts, Culture and Events Committee for adoption to release
for public consultation on June 18th.
§ Feedback on the draft plan is currently
being sought from Local Boards and from possible lead stakeholders and
partners for proposed actions in the plan.
|
|
17. Public Art Policy
Adopted September 2013
|
|
§ Implementation planning for this policy is currently
underway.
|
|
18. Events Policy
Adopted May 2013
|
|
§ The Events Policy is currently being used in the
assessment of regional events funding applications.
|
|
19. Māori
Responsiveness Framework
Adopted December 2012
|
|
§ A number of programmes are in development including:
the Māori Land Programme, Te Reo, and Relationship Agreements
programme
§ Work is continuing to integrate the Māori
Responsiveness Framework throughout Council.
|
|
20. Historic Heritage
Action Plan
Expected adoption date:
July-September 2014
|
|
§ The action plan has been drafted and presented to
the Heritage Advisory Panel for comment.
§ Actions are currently being reviewed and
consolidated.
|
|
21. Environment
Strategic Action Plan
Expected adoption date:
July-September 2014
|
|
§ Planning for this document is currently underway
with the following in development: analysis of public submissions on the
environment; identification and development of actions and priorities; and
research into appropriate collaborative processes and implementation
structures.
|
|
22. Natural Hazard Risk
Management Action Plan
Expected adoption date:
October-December 2015
|
|
§ An assessment of the current state of hazard and
risk management in Auckland Council is currently being prepared. Work
commenced in June to update Auckland’s current risk profile and to assess
best practice and innovative approaches to risk management. Community
engagement on this area is currently being planned.
|
|
23. Waste Management and Minimisation Plan
Adopted
June 2012
|
|
§ A number of actions have been progressed including
the development of a procurement plan for the changes to waste collection
services. A brief update on council’s work in implementing three key projects
of the plan: Resource Recovery Network, Inorganic collections and Special
community engagement was provided to the Environment, Climate Change and
Natural Heritage Committee in February. The next update to this committee
will be in July.
|
|
24. Indigenous Biodiversity Strategy
Adopted
April 2012
|
|
§ A stocktake of existing work programmes has recently
been completed, a biodiversity research prospectus has been produced and the
development of a communication strategy has been initiated.
§ A workshop of implementation leads and participants
is scheduled for early July to review strategy progress to date. Following
this workshop, an updated implementation report will be developed.
|
|
25. Energy Resilience and Low Carbon Action Plan (“Low Carbon Auckland”)
Expected adoption date:
June 2014
|
|
§ Feedback on the draft action plan and on suggested
text changes and implementation arrangements were reported to the Environment, Climate Change and Natural Heritage
Committee in May. It is expected that the document will be adopted by the
Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 5 June.
|
|
26. Water Strategic
Action Plan
Expected adoption date:
July-September 2015
|
|
§ It is anticipated that the business case and
execution plan for this document will be finalised by July and resources
assigned to begin production shortly thereafter.
|
|
27. Public Open Space
Strategic Programme
Public Open Space
Strategic Action Plan
Adopted
September 2013
Open Space Acquisition
and Divestment Policy
Adopted June 2013
Weed Management Policy
Adopted August 2013
Open Space Levels of
Provision Targets
Expected adoption date:
July-September 2014
Parks and Reserves
Management Plan Methodology
Completed March 2014
|
|
Public Open Space
Strategic Action Plan
§ Most short term actions are in progress.
|
|
|
Open Space Acquisition
and Divestment Policy
§ Policy is informing ongoing
decisions with regard to open space acquisitions.
|
|
|
Weed Management Policy
§ Actions arising from adopted
policy have been assigned to relevant departments within Council.
|
|
|
Open Space Level of
Provision Targets
§ A regionwide network analysis has been completed and
initial draft targets and methodology were reported to the Parks and Heritage
Forum. The refined draft level of provision guidelines are due to be
reported to the Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee in June 2014, seeking
adoption as interim guidelines.
|
|
|
Parks and Reserves
Management Plan methodology
§ Proposal for future reserve management planning
approved by Parks, Recreation and Sport Committee in February 2014.
§ Finalised methodology reported to the Parks,
Recreation and Sport Committee in March 2014.
§ Preparation of a suite of management guidance is
ongoing
|
|
28. Regional Pest
Management Plan Review
Expected adoption date:
October-December 2015
|
|
§ Initial internal consultation with Councillors,
Local Boards, iwi and key teams has commenced.
§ Further external and internal consultation is
planned for the second half of the year with a discussion document being
produced in September/October.
|
|
29. Significance and
Engagement Policy
Expected adoption date:
October-December 2014
|
|
§ Initial scoping has taken place and has been
discussed with local board chairs and the budget committee.
§ Analysis of past feedback and issues identification
activities has taken place during May and June with community and stakeholder
representatives.
|
|
Regional Strategy
and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
Commercial Sponsorships Proposed Policy
File No.: CP2014/11167
Purpose
1. In July 2013 the Mayor requested that Auckland Tourism,
Events and Economic Development (ATEED) lead an exploration into the viability
of leveraging revenue into the Auckland Council group via sponsorship or
commercial partnerships.
Executive
summary
2. A report was
provided to the 5 December 2013 Regional Strategy and Policy Committee meeting
with resolution (number REG/2013/12) noting the work undertaken, agreeing to
the suggested work programme and that a political working group (PWG ) be
established to support the project team investigating a more coherent and
proactive approach to sponsorship and commercial partnerships. One of the key
elements of the work programme was to investigate and report back on policy
considerations.
3. This paper
further updates the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on activities around
leveraging sponsorship or commercial partnerships. It summarises the outcome
of that work and proposes the adoption of an Auckland Council Sponsorship
Policy that sets out guidance and parameters for staff when considering or
entering into sponsorship arrangements.
|
Recommendations
That the Regional Strategy and
Policy Committee:
a) note
that the Commercial Sponsorships Political Working Group recommends that a council group-wide policy would assist staff to enter into
sponsorship agreements in a responsive and empowered way
b) note
that the six council-controlled organisations (CCOs) consulted during the
development of this policy indicated that they are comfortable with the
contents and direction of the draft policy
c) agree
that the attached draft Auckland Council Sponsorship Policy be adopted, in
principle, pending consultation with local boards from May 2014
d) agree that a final Auckland Council Commercial Partnership Policy
be prepared. That this work is supported by the political working group and
approved by the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee
e) agree
that, once adopted, the policy will apply to Auckland Council and its CCOs
f) agree that delegated authority be given to the Chief Executive to
review and approve the Commercial Partnership Operating Guidelines in support
of the Policy.
|
Comments
4. Sponsorships
are already an important part of supporting and promoting the council group’s
activities, but these opportunities tend to be made available in a comparatively
ad hoc and tactical manner. The potential gains to council, sponsors, other
partners and Aucklanders could be further realised with a more strategic and
integrated approach.
5. Commercial
sponsorships have the potential to bring in additional revenue for Auckland
Council projects, thus reducing the cost of providing existing services,
improving services or providing new services. Sponsorship can provide
opportunities for positive brand association and supporting programmes or
activities that contribute to Auckland Council goals and aspirations.
6. Outcomes of a
strategic, integrated approach to sponsorship include:
· enhanced
social and community outcomes for Auckland, including health, education and
environmental outcomes
· partnering on
game changing initiatives to grow Auckland and generate broader ownership of
the “world’s most liveable city” visio
· building
Auckland Council’s brand and reputation through social, product and service
innovation
· generating
new revenue for the council and CCOs, enabling enhanced service delivery
commitments, without increases in rate funding
· increased
utilisation and return on investment for council assets and programmes
· reduced duplication and a council that
is easier to do business with.
7. Discussions
with potential sponsors and across the council group have indicated strong
interest from both groups in an integrated and strategic approach to commercial
sponsorships.
8. A report back
to the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee on 5 December 2013 sought
approval to progress a work programme comprising:
· agreeing on a PWG
structure and establishing a steering group
· investigating and
reporting back on policy considerations
· developing partnership
guidelines
· agreeing on what assets,
rights and programmes are included and not included
· agreeing the financial
model and delivery structure
· finalising a business
case and investment plan for consideration
· developing key messaging
to manage private enterprise and public expectations
· developing and agreeing on the key
success measures.
9. The Commercial
Sponsorships Political Working Group (PWG) was formed as a result of the 5
December 2013 Regional Strategy & Policy Committee resolution. Councillors
Wood (Chair), Brewer, Cashmore, Cooper, Darby, Filipaina, Fletcher, Krum and
Quax and Independent Maori Statutory Board members Precious Clark and Josie
Smith. The PWG has met on three occasions, 6 March, 8 April and 28 April 2014.
10. The first step
in progressing the work programme was to reach agreement on some high level
policy positions to shape the overall approach to sponsorship. This was the
subject of structured discussion by the PWG, which then agreed that formal
council group-wide policy would assist staff to enter into agreements in a
responsive and empowered way.
11. Further work is
underway within ATEED to develop the financial model and delivery structure,
with a view to developing operational guidelines and implementing the new
approach across the council group from 1 July 2014.
Policy Considerations
12. Existing policy
documents, such as the Procurement Strategy and Policy, as well as existing
contract negotiation processes provide some guidance for entering into
sponsorship arrangements, but are not directly applicable. ATEED and RFA have
developed event sponsorship guidelines and a corporate sponsorship policy
respectively.
13. There is,
however, no single council wide, or council group wide, guidance to staff that
provides clear parameters for entering into sponsorship agreements. If a more
ambitious and ongoing approach to sponsorships and commercial partnerships is
to be pursued in the future, then more specific guidance that provides a
clearer mandate to staff and sets out parameters for implementation is
required.
14. While policy
documents are an important part of Auckland Council’s operational culture, some
large organisations reviewed during the discovery phase of the project had no
formal policy in this area because they believed that each project and
opportunity was unique and the implications needed to be explored on a ‘case by
case’ basis depending on who is involved in the partnership, and the potential
value (including social and strategic value) of each collaboration or
partnership.
15. Many other
councils[3]
have developed and adopted formal policies setting out the parameters under
which sponsorship arrangements can be entered into. The benefits and risks of
the differing approaches are set out below.
|
|
Operational guidelines alone
|
Council-wide policy plus guidelines
|
|
Benefits
|
· Provides
greater opportunities for innovation and flexibility
· Minimises
real or perceived political involvement in commercial decisions
|
· Provides
certainty around parameters for engagement
· Enables
agreements to be entered into with confidence
· Transparent
and publicly accountable
· Once policy is adopted, political
involvement is limited
|
|
Risks
|
· May
actually slow down decision making if parameters and delegations are limited
|
· More time
consuming to develop and adopt
· Limited ability to modify policy in
response to changing environment
|
16. International
research shows that it is critical, when working with potential partners, to
get your sponsorship policies and procedures in order, signed off, and
streamlined before you seek sponsorship. Sponsorship is fast moving business
and that any perception of bureaucracy and “decision by committee” are major
deterrents. The Scottish Government “Guidelines on Commercial Sponsorship in
the Public Sector[4]”
stressed the importance of clear policies being adopted by public sector
agencies in this area.
17. On balance, staff views are that the adoption of clear, council
group-wide high level policy on sponsorship will provide an appropriate level
of certainty, transparency and separation between political and operational
decision making in this area. The PWG agreed with this position. Proposed policy positions for inclusion in a draft Auckland Council
Sponsorship Policy are discussed in the following section.
Rationale,
purpose and definitions
18. The introduction
to the policy document sets out the rational for the policy followed by a
purpose statement, which broadly states that:
· this policy outlines
Auckland Council’s approach to sponsorship;
· it provides clear
guidance to all parties on how council, and/or its subsidiaries, will enter
into and manage sponsorship relationships;
· it ensures that any
sponsorship relationships, both inward and outward, are consistent with
council’s strategic direction, as set out in its planning framework;
· it recognises that there are benefits
to sponsors, partners, council and ratepayers from entering into sponsorship or
partnership relationships.
19. This is followed
by a section on key definitions for the purposes of the policy.
Scope and
application
20. This section
sets out which parts of council the policy applies to and the types of
agreements and relationships it covers. The PWG has agreed on the following
scope for the draft policy:
· the policy is intended to
apply to the Auckland Council group, including its council-controlled
organisations;
· it applies to all
sponsorship agreements entered into across the council group.
21. The policy
focusses on commercial ‘sponsorship’ rather than commercial partnerships due to
the wider implications of the term ‘partnership/s’.
22. The policy
document notes that it will be supported by operational guidelines developed to
assist staff in achieving consistency with the policy and outlines the proposed
content of those guidelines. These will ensure that proposals are assessed
according to consistent criteria, that appropriate due diligence is undertaken,
that a process is in place for managing proposals that involve more than one
member of the council group. The guidelines will provide guidance on decision
making, consultation, treatment of differing types and levels or commercial
sponsorship and how any revenue derived from sponsorships will be allocated.
Assets &
programmes
23. Before any
commercial sponsorship programme is initiated, which asset, programmes and
services are available and which are excluded must be clear. Sponsorship is
not generally used to cover the direct costs of core council services,
especially regulatory services. In fact, any services that convey any benefit
or permission to an individual or entity should not be sponsored e.g. licensing
or consenting, so as to avoid any perception of influence.
24. Sponsorship can,
however, play a key role in enhancing existing services or facilities or
providing new services or facilities that would not otherwise be available.
Sponsorship opportunities can also enhance the appeal of existing services and
broaden their reach e.g. provision of healthy food at an event targeted at
disadvantaged children.
25. Auckland Council
and CCOs hold or deliver a significant range of assets, programmes, rights and
services that are of value to sponsors and partners. The council assets,
activities and programmes considered appropriate to be included as available
for commercial sponsorship opportunities are outlined in the draft policy:
· Events –
community, regional and major events and festivals
· Facilities and assets – libraries, swimming pools, community centres, galleries, function
centres, stadiums, either as entire assets or apportioned e.g. auditoriums
within facilities
· Programmes – literacy, cultural, arts, health promotion, education, community
safety, community development, conservation and environment, business and
sector development, innovation programmes
· Public spaces – parks, walks, playgrounds, beaches, either as entire assets or
apportioned e.g. walkways within parkland
· Infrastructure – digital, transport, water and wastewater, community housing,
social infrastructure
· Supply partnerships – e.g. horticultural supplies, pool supplies, animal food for
shelters, vehicle or equipment supply.
26. Assets will be
categorised into types or classes identifying the decision making, consultation
requirements for each. In some cases seeking pre-approval for classes of
assets to be offered in commercial sponsorship arrangements should be sought.
27. Most councils
that have put policies in place covering sponsorship activities include
guidance on which sponsorship relationships should be ruled out. Such
guidelines are in place to ensure that sponsorship relationships do not compromise
the integrity of the organisation or be seen to promote products or services
that are at odds with the values and goals of the council.
28. Any policy or
guidelines would need to enable staff to confidently enter into sponsorship
relationships by providing an appropriate level of clarity about which
relationships would or would not be acceptable. The PWG has proposed that
rather than providing detailed lists of exclusions, that the following guidance
be provided through the Auckland Council Commercial Sponsorship Policy.
29. As a general
principle, commercial sponsorships must:
· not be inconsistent with
council’s strategic direction, as set out in its planning framework, and its
legal mandate, purpose and policies
· not impose or imply
conditions that would limit council’s ability to carry out its functions
impartially
· not require, or imply,
endorsement of any product or service by council
· deliver mutually agreed
benefits to sponsor/partners and council, on behalf of Aucklanders
· enhance Auckland’s ability to achieve
its goal of becoming the world’s most liveable city.
30. With respect to
explicit exclusions, the Auckland Council group will not enter into sponsorship
agreements with:
· any business or
organisation that will bring council into disrepute, be widely offensive to the
general public, or deeply offensive to a specific group
· any business or
organisation involved in the delivery of products or services that are
considered to be in conflict with council’s social, environmental and cultural
responsibilities to the community
· any business or
organisation that provides direct pecuniary benefits to any staff member or
elected member of Auckland Council and/or its subsidiaries
· any business or organisation that seeks
to limit, on an ongoing basis, general public access to council’s facilities
and/or services.
31. More detailed
guidance will be provided under council’s operational guidelines, including how
the principles and exclusions will be applied and how decisions are made if
there is any doubt as to the suitability of a commercial sponsorship
relationship.
Selection of potential sponsors
32. Sponsors
potentially have a lot to gain from association with Auckland Council’s assets
and programmes. Whenever there is a potential benefit available to one party,
consideration should be given to whether other parties should have an equal
opportunity to access that benefit.
33. Some
commentators in the sponsorship industry, however, are strongly of the view
that tendering undermines the tenets of sponsorship. Their view is that
tendering sets up the appearance that whoever gives the most money acquires the
benefits of the association, rather than focusing on the best fit between the
sponsor/partner and the activities or assets involved. The council policies we
have reviewed have generally used mixed approaches that involve a combination
of:
· regular publication of
sponsorship opportunities, to invite expressions of interest;
· proactive identification
of potential sponsors/partners and direct approaches;
· formal assessment of
expressions of interest against weighted attributes e.g. brand relevance, value
for money, connection with target audiences;
· engagement of external
agents to secure sponsorship.
34. It is important
that staff and potential sponsors/partners work under clearly defined
parameters that protect all parties, including elected representatives. This
applies to any real or perceived conflicts of interest, any real or perceived
ability to influence policy through commercial sponsorship arrangements and any
connection between the council’s exercise of its regulatory responsibilities
and the receipt or granting of sponsorship. The PWG proposed that the council’s
policy position be that:
· opportunities will be
made available, at both local and whole of Auckland levels, for potential
sponsors to have access to the benefits of sponsorship relationships
· where practicable,
sponsorship arrangements will be subject to an open, competitive process
· sponsorship agreements
will be signed off at levels consistent with financial delegations
· sponsorship agreements
will be consistent with the provisions of Auckland Council’s Procurement
Policy, where relevant
· any agreements that require sign off by
elected members will be considered by the Tenders and Procurement Committee.
35. The
identification and selection of potential sponsors and sponsorship agreements
must be consistent with the council’s values, principles and strategic
direction, legal mandate, purpose and policies.
36. Sponsorships
must not impose or imply conditions that would limit council’s ability to carry
out its functions impartially nor require, or imply, endorsement of any product
or service by council.
37. Sponsorships
must deliver mutually agreed benefits to sponsors and council, on behalf of
Aucklanders and enhance Auckland’s ability to achieve its goal of becoming the
world’s most liveable city.
38. The Auckland Council group will not enter into sponsorship
agreements with any business or organisation that a) will bring council into
disrepute or be widely offensive to the general public, or deeply offensive to
a specific group, b) is involved in the delivery of products or services that
are considered to be in conflict with council’s social, environmental and
cultural responsibilities to the community, c) that provides direct pecuniary
benefits to any staff member or elected member of Auckland Council or d) that
seeks to limit, on an ongoing basis, general public access to council’s
facilities and/or services.
Confidentiality
and commercial sensitivity
39. Council’s
activities naturally generate significant public interest and scrutiny and it
may receive requests for information relating to its sponsorship and commercial
partnership agreements. The draft policy recognises that while the public
interest may outweigh any commercial prejudice to our sponsors, there will need
to be processes in place to ensure the interests of sponsors and partners are
also considered and managed. Given the public interest in sponsorships:
· Auckland Council (and/or
its subsidiaries) will reserve the right to publicise the headline value of the
sponsorship and the nature and amount of the benefits although details of
negotiations and the agreement itself will remain confidential
· Sponsorship agreements
will note that all council held information is subject to the provisions of the
Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, and will also include
reference to this policy
· Before any decision to
release information is made, council will consult with the relevant sponsor
regarding issues of commercial sensitivity, and will have regard to any
submission or comment that the sponsor may make.
Consideration
Local
board views and implications
40. Local Boards
will have a high level of interest as key stakeholders and local asset
managers, in any proposal to move towards a commercial sponsorship approach.
Key issues for local boards will be values fit, revenue allocation and decision
making allocation. Council Local Board Services have been consulted along the
course of the programme and have input into the development of policy and
operational guidelines.
41. Local Board
Chairs are being briefed on 26 May, consultation input is being sought at that
meeting. These draft Auckland Council Commercial Sponsorship Policy and
Guidelines form part of that local board consultation programme. A verbal
update will be given of outcomes from that local board chair forum.
Council-controlled organisation views
42. A number of
council’s substantive CCOs are already engaged, either independently or
collaboratively, in sponsorship and commercial partnership activities. This
policy will provide and framework for them to operate within that is consistent
and aligned with council’s values and goals. Consultation has taken place with
the CCOs that would be impacted, during the development of this draft policy.
43. The proposed
approach, draft policy and delivery structure were discussed and agreed in
principle at the Auckland Council group Chief Executive Forum in May 2014.
Maori
impact statement
44. Strategic
sponsorship partnerships present an opportunity for increased investment in,
and visibility of, programmes, events and assets that have significance for
Maori. There are already a number of significant sponsorship partnerships
between the corporate and Maori spheres. This policy presents opportunities
for closer engagement between sponsors and partners and programmes and
activities that target, or which are attractive to, Maori audiences e.g. events,
community programmes, sports and recreation activities. Two Independent Maori
Statutory Board representatives sit on the commercial sponsorship PWG.
General
45. There is no
requirement to consult more widely on the Auckland Council Sponsorship Policy.
The decisions sought in this report are not significant.
Next steps
46. The adoption of
an Auckland Council Commercial Sponsorship Policy will complete the initial
part of the agreed work programme. It will set in place the foundation to
enable the development of operational and partnership guidelines and develop
the financial model and delivery structure. Once this is in place we will
develop key messaging to manage private enterprise and public expectations,
including proposition presentation and marketing format as well as developing
and agreeing on the key success measures.
47. This work will
be delivered primarily out of ATEED, with support from Auckland Council. The
team leading the work will report through to the steering group[5] as required. Further updates to this committee will be provided as
the policy is implemented and the work programme progressed.
Implementation
48. It is proposed that the integrated approach for Council will be
facilitated by a small coordinating group of 3-5 staff based in ATEED.
Additional resources, either seconded or contracted, would be acquired for
opportunities where the potential return justifies this approach.
49. The Commercial
Sponsorships group would be responsible for leading strategic commercial
discussions, supporting asset owners and managers to develop value propositions
and provide advice and leadership to the range of personnel across the Council
group involved in sponsorship and commercial discussions. This team would lead
the change across the group to focus of leveraging assets and partnering with
sponsors in current and new projects.
50. Cross council
opportunities would be agreed in advance by the CCO Chief Executive forum.
51. It is envisaged
that there will likely be 10-15 strategic cross council opportunities per
annum. ATEED would receive a commission payment on signed arrangements to
support the operation of the team. Based on forecast figures it is expected
that these activities will be self-funding.
52. Operational
Guidelines are in development, a cross council group team will be brought
together to ensure that all areas are covered and that their implementation is
seamless.
53. A cross council
group has been involved in the project to date and would be utilised in the
next set up and operationalisation phase as part of a change management
strategy.
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Draft Commercial Sponsorship Policy
|
95
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Annmaree Desmond – Programme Manager,
ATEED
|
|
Authorisers
|
Brett O’Riley - Chief Executive,
ATEED
Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer
|
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION.. 3
1......... Policy
rationale. 3
2......... Purpose
of policy. 3
3......... Definitions. 4
POLICY.. 4
4......... Scope
and application.. 4
5......... Assets
and activities included. 5
6......... Exclusions. 5
7......... Approvals. 6
8......... Confidentiality/commercial
sensitivity. 7
INTRODUCTION
1. Policy rationale
In New Zealand,
and around the world, governments are looking for innovative ways to address:
· steadily raising expectations for better public
service provision, including new infrastructure and new technologies; and
· a declining appetite from citizens and
elected officials to fund these improvements through increased rates or new
taxes.
Sponsorships, both financial and in kind, have the potential
to provide additional revenue for Auckland Council projects, thus reducing the
cost of providing existing services, improving services or providing new
services. They also provide an opportunity for Auckland-based businesses,
local, regional, national and international, to play a role in supporting and
shaping Auckland to become a globally competitive and highly liveable city
Sponsorships are already an important part of
supporting and promoting the council group’s activities, but these opportunities
currently tend to be made available in a piecemeal way. The potential gains to
council, business partners, Aucklanders and visitors to Auckland could be
further realised with more promotion and coordination. This policy aims to
facilitate that process.
Significant positive outcomes of a strategic approach
to sponsorships include:
· enhanced social and community outcomes for Auckland,
including health, education and environmental outcomes
· increased investment in the arts, sports and
recreation, events and cultural initiatives
· partnering on game changing initiatives to grow Auckland
and generate broader ownership of the “world’s most liveable city” vision
· building Auckland’s brand through social, product and
service innovation
· generating new revenue for the council and CCOs,
enabling enhanced service delivery commitments, without increases in rates
funding
· increased utilisation and return on investment being
derived from council assets and programmes.
2. Purpose of policy
This strategy
provides direction for when a decision is to be made to enter into a
sponsorship agreement with an external party. It outlines Auckland Council’s
approach to entering into and managing sponsorships. The policy:
· provides clear guidance to all parties on
how council, and its subsidiaries, will enter into and manage sponsorship
relationships
· ensures that any sponsorship relationships
are consistent with council’s strategic direction, as set out in its planning
framework
· recognises that there are benefits to
sponsors, council, residents and visitors from entering into sponsorship
relationships
3. Definitions
For the purposes
of this policy, the following definitions apply:
Sponsorship
A commercial arrangement where a sponsor provides cash
or in kind contributions to Auckland Council (and/or its subsidiaries) in
return for agreed benefits and in order to achieve common goals.
Activity
The preparation or delivery of any service, programme
or event by, or on behalf of, Auckland Council (and/or its subsidiaries)
Asset
Any land, building, equipment, intellectual property
or other item owned or controlled by Auckland Council (and/or its subsidiaries)
POLICY
4. Scope and application
This policy is intended to apply to the Auckland
Council group, including its council-controlled organisations. CCO boards are
requested to consider adopting this, or a similar policy to guide their
activities in this area. This policy applies to all sponsorships, both inward
and outward, entered into by the Auckland Council (and/or its subsidiaries).
This policy will be supported by operational guidelines developed to assist
staff in achieving consistency with the policy. These guidelines will, for
example:
· provide a classification matrix for
differing types/levels of partnerships and sponsorship relationships e.g.
local, regional, strategic, discrete, and how and where each class will be
managed
· set out due diligence processes required
before entering into agreements
· detail processes and criteria for
assessment of proposals
· outline decision making processes where
proposals impact on multiple council entities
· provide guidance on how revenue flows will
be managed and allocated.
5. Assets and activities included
Sponsorships can play a key role in enhancing existing
services or facilities or providing new services or facilities that would not
otherwise be available. Sponsorship opportunities can also enhance the appeal
of existing services and broaden their reach e.g. provision of healthy free
lunches at an event targeted at disadvantaged children.
Auckland Council and CCOs hold or deliver a
significant range of assets, programmes, rights and services that are of value
to sponsors. In summary, council assets considered appropriate to be included
as available for sponsorship opportunities are:
· Events – community, regional and major events and festivals
· Facilities and assets – including libraries, swimming pools,
community centres, galleries, function centres, stadiums, either as entire
assets or apportioned e.g. auditoriums within facilities
· Programmes – literacy, cultural, arts, health promotion,
education, community safety, community development, conservation and
environment, business and sector development, innovation programmes
· Public spaces – parks, walks, playgrounds, beaches, either as
entire assets or apportioned e.g. walkways within parkland
· Infrastructure – digital, transport, water and wastewater, community
housing, social infrastructure
· Supply partnerships – e.g. horticultural supplies, pool
supplies, animal food for shelters, vehicle or equipment supply
6. Exclusions
Some of the most valued assets of Auckland Council are
our brand, our reputation and the confidence of the people of Auckland. As a
public sector organisation, governed by elected representatives, we have a responsibility
to ensure that any sponsorship agreement is consistent with the council’s
values, principles and strategic direction, as set out in key strategies such
as the long-term plan and the Auckland Plan.
As a general
principle, sponsorships must:
· not be inconsistent with council’s
strategic direction, as set out in its planning framework, and its legal
mandate, purpose and policies
· not impose or imply conditions that would
limit council’s ability to carry out its functions impartially
· not require, or imply, endorsement of any
product or service by council
· deliver mutually agreed benefits to
sponsors and council, on behalf of Aucklanders
· enhance Auckland’s ability to achieve its
goal of becoming the world’s most liveable city
With respect to explicit exclusions, the Auckland
Council group will not enter into sponsorship agreements with:
· any business or organisation that will bring council
into disrepute or be widely offensive to the general public, or deeply
offensive to a specific group
· any business or organisation involved in the delivery
of products or services that are considered to be in conflict with council’s
social, environmental and cultural responsibilities to the community
· any business or organisation that provides direct pecuniary
benefits to any staff member or elected member of Auckland Council
· any business or organisation that seeks to limit, on
an ongoing basis, general public access to council’s facilities and/or
services.
More detailed guidance is provided under council’s
operational guidelines, including how the principles and exclusions will be
applied and how decisions are made if there is any doubt as to the suitability
of a sponsorship relationship. Auckland Council will retain the discretion to
not accept sponsorship from any entity for any reason.
Auckland Council recognises that sponsorship
contributions may not be stable from year to year and will not become
financially dependent on sponsorship as a source of income.
7. Approvals
Businesses see real value in opportunities to sponsor
Auckland Council assets and programmes. Whenever there is a potential benefit
available to one party, we need to consider whether other parties should have
opportunity to access that benefit.
The identification and selection of potential sponsors
needs to be actioned under clearly defined parameters that protect all parties,
including elected representatives. On that basis, the approvals process for
entering into sponsorship relationships will comprise the following elements:
· the Auckland Council group will initiate a transparent
programme that regularly provides opportunities for potential sponsors and
commercial partners to put forward proposals
· opportunities will be made available at both local and
whole of Auckland levels for business to have access to the benefits of
sponsorship relationships
· where practicable, sponsorship arrangements will be
subject to an open, competitive process
· sponsorship agreements will be signed off at levels
consistent with financial delegations
· sponsorship agreements will be consistent with the
provisions of Auckland Council’s Procurement Policy, where relevant
· any agreements that require sign off by elected
members will be considered by the Tenders and Procurement Committee
· any agreements requiring more extensive consideration
by elected members may be referred to the Finance and Performance Committee
· sponsorship arrangements that result in the re-naming
of a council building or facility will require the approval of the governing body
and/or the relevant local board
· Auckland Council (and/or its subsidiaries) will retain
the right to attach its name and logo to any activity or facility that is
subject to a sponsorship arrangement.
8. Confidentiality/commercial sensitivity
Information relating to sponsorship and sponsorship
agreements is often commercially sensitive. Disclosure of this information has
the potential to compromise Auckland Council’s relationship with its commercial
partners, reduce the perceived value of sponsorship, and impact on council’s
ability to secure sponsors in the future.
Council’s activities naturally generate significant
public interest and scrutiny and it may receive requests for information
relating to its sponsorship and commercial partnership agreements. The draft
policy recognises that while the public interest may outweigh any commercial
prejudice to our sponsors, there will need to be processes in place to ensure
the interests of sponsors and partners are also considered and managed.
Given the public interest in sponsorships, Auckland
Council (and/or its subsidiaries) will reserve the right to publicise the
headline value of the sponsorship and the nature and amount of the benefits.
Details of negotiations and the agreement itself will, however, remain
confidential.
Sponsorship agreements will note that all council held
information is subject to the provisions of the Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act 1987, and will also include reference to this
policy.
Before any decision to release information is made,
council will consult with the relevant sponsor regarding issues of commercial
sensitivity, and will have regard to any submission or comment that the sponsor
may make.
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
Submission to Ministry for Primary Industries on
Further Temporary Closure of Umupuia Beach, Manukau, to the Harvest of Cockles
File No.: CP2014/09144
Purpose
1. To seek
retrospective approval for a submission lodged on 13 May 2014 to support Ngai
Tai Umupuia Te Waka Totara Trust in their request to the Ministry for Primary
Industries (MPI) for a further two-year rahui (temporary closure) on the
harvest of cockles at Umupuia Beach, Manukau (Attachment A).
Executive
summary
2. Survey data
from 1997-2006 shows that the fishery for cockles at Umupuia Beach declined in
abundance from 320 million cockles on the beach down to only 30 million. The
area was subsequently closed over a series of two-year increments, with the
current temporary closure due to expire on 25 October 2014.
3. Recent surveys
show signs of recovery, with an estimated high point of 168 million cockles in
the 2014 survey. As this survey has only just been conducted, it is yet to be
fully analysed and size/age class abundance distributions are not currently
available.
4. Although
recovery seems to be taking place, cockles take four years to reach a
harvestable size of 30 mm, therefore, many of the cockles found in recent
surveys will be too small to take (~39%) or have yet to reach sexual maturity
(~26%).
5. Ngai Tai would
like to allow the fishery to fully recover before it is again opened to
exploitation and are requesting a further two-year rahui.
|
Recommendation/s
That the Regional Strategy and
Policy Committee:
a) give retrospective approval for the submission to Ministry for
Primary Industries (MPI) to support a further two-year closure on the harvest
of cockles at Umupuia Beach, Manukau.
|
Attachments
|
No.
|
Title
|
Page
|
|
aView
|
Submission to MPI on Further Temporary Closure of
Umupuia Beach to the Harvest of Cockles
|
105
|
Signatories
|
Authors
|
Will Trusewich - Specialist Coastal
|
|
Authorisers
|
Ludo Campbell-Reid - Environmental Strategy &
Policy Manager
Roger Blakeley - Chief Planning Officer
Dean Kimpton - Chief Operating Officer
|
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
|
Regional
Strategy and Policy Committee
05 June 2014
|
|
Exclusion of the Public: Local Government Official
Information and Meetings Act 1987
That the Regional Strategy and Policy Committee:
a) exclude the
public from the following part(s) of the proceedings of this meeting.
The general
subject of each matter to be considered while the public is excluded, the
reason for passing this resolution in relation to each matter, and the specific
grounds under section 48(1) of the Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 for the passing of this resolution follows.
This
resolution is made in reliance on section 48(1)(a) of the Local Government
Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 and the particular interest or
interests protected by section 6 or section 7 of that Act which would be
prejudiced by the holding of the whole or relevant part of the proceedings of
the meeting in public, as follows:
C1 Stormwater Land Acquisition - Flat Bush School Road
|
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each
matter
|
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)
|
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this
resolution
|
|
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be
likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for
withholding exists under section 7.
|
s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary
to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage,
negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).
s7(2)(j) - The withholding of the information is necessary
to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or
improper advantage.
In particular, the report contains information regarding
the valuation of the proposed land to be acquired.
|
s48(1)(a)
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be
likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for
withholding exists under section 7.
|
C2 Stormwater Land Acquisition - Ormiston Road, Flat Bush
|
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each
matter
|
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)
|
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this
resolution
|
|
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be
likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for
withholding exists under section 7.
|
s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary
to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage,
negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).
s7(2)(j) - The withholding of the information is necessary
to prevent the disclosure or use of official information for improper gain or
improper advantage.
In particular, the report contains information regarding
the valuation of the proposed land to be acquired.
|
s48(1)(a)
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be
likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for
withholding exists under section 7.
|
C3 Stormwater Land Acquisition - Barry Curtis Park Vicinity, Flat
Bush
|
Reason for passing this resolution in relation to each
matter
|
Particular interest(s) protected (where applicable)
|
Ground(s) under section 48(1) for the passing of this
resolution
|
|
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be
likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for
withholding exists under section 7.
|
s7(2)(h) - The withholding of the information is necessary
to enable the local authority to carry out, without prejudice or
disadvantage, commercial activities.
In particular, the report contains information regarding
the valuation of the proposed land to be acquired.
s7(2)(i) - The withholding of the information is necessary
to enable the local authority to carry on, without prejudice or disadvantage,
negotiations (including commercial and industrial negotiations).
In particular, the report contains information regarding
the valuation of the proposed land to be acquired.
|
s48(1)(a)
The public conduct of the part of the meeting would be
likely to result in the disclosure of information for which good reason for
withholding exists under section 7.
|
PLT members: Roger Blakeley, Chief Planning
Officer; Karen Lyons, Manager Local Board Services; Heather Harris, Manager
Resource Consents; Harvey Brookes, Manager Economic Development; Matthew
Walker, Manager Financial Planning, Policy and Budgeting; Michael Quinn,
Executive Officer; Linda Taylor, Auckland Council Mayoral Office.
