Abstract:
Criticisms of local government range from its not doing its job (a central government-centric perspective), to local democracy is being undermined by paternalistic and excessive intervention (a local government-centric perspective). Taking a closer look at the effects of accountability arrangements using Mark Bovens’ public accountability framework can help us think differently about the concentrations of power and the checks and balances that are used to control such powers. This paper tests Bovens’ framework for its value in legislative design by exploring public accountability through the roles of Minister, mayor, governing body and chief executive in the Local Government Act 2002 (LGA). It concludes that it is lazy governance if we are only relying on prescription in statute and legal accountability as the main control mechanism; and by doing so we are placing less importance on mapping progress towards community outcomes collaboratively through the activities of the two spheres of government in New Zealand (central and local).
