LOCAL GOVERNMENT COMMUNITY IN THE CULTURAL SECTOR

GAIL'S RESTAURANT
HAMILTON

As I drove in today from the airport and knowing I would be speaking to you all tonight, I couldn't help but reflect on the richness of our country. One of the privileges in my role as a Minister is that I am able to travel from one end of New Zealand to the other and just in the last few weeks I have been to Christchurch, Gisborne, Wellington of course, and now to Hamilton in the Waikato. And even when disasters occur, like on the East Coast two weeks ago, it always strikes me how significant the role and responsibility local authorities have in their communities, in times of stress as well as on a daily basis to help make our country what it is.

Before I move on I would like to acknowledge the 24 I think it is Mayors that are here tonight and in particular the three local Mayors, John Hewitt of Waipa, Angus McDonald of Waikato District, and Margaret Evans in Hamilton. The work you are doing in the Waikato is distinct for its innovation and effectiveness. The energy and commitment you bring to the role as leader of your councils and communities is inspiring and uniquely New Zealand. I believe as a nation we are finally maturing and trusting in our own judgement as to what's best for ourselves and our country. You are a great example of this. And also what a wonderful New Zealand event and some would say institution that brings us all together, the Mystery Creek Field Days. Mystery Creek is a real show case of New Zealand's rural sector.

Many of you will know already of my aim as Minister of Local Government to more clearly define the role of central government and local government. Tonight I would like to explore this theme both directly and a little laterally.

(adlb)

I am aware that a focus of your forum tomorrow is economic development. Economic growth continues to be a priority for New Zealand and local government has several significant contributions to make.

As the Prime Minister pointed out recently, ``that change has already produced significant gains in both employment and prosperity, for the people of this country. The economy is already about 20% bigger than it was six years ago, in 1991. Growth has moved faster here, in that period, than in any other developed economy in the western world. New Zealand is now moving through the trough of the current business cycle with growth around 2.5%, with a pick-up projected to come in the next year or so, to 3.5 - 4.0%''.

At the same time, I have also been encouraged by the Prime Minister's recent comments on the need to consider social impacts when addressing the economy. As he points out, what good is a healthy economy if we have no quality of life.

Our clean green image is one aspect of New Zealand that is vital in attracting tourists from overseas and to market our products, especially our primary products. The way in which local authorities implement the Resource Management Act and undertake their waste management responsibilities can affect this image. You will be aware that the Coalition Agreement seeks to create a clean, green healthy environment, not only for the benefit of all New Zealanders, but because it makes good economic sense.

As I meet ratepayers and electors around the country, one of the constant themes I hear is the steepness and the variety of charges made by local authorities in respect of the Resource Management Act.

Just as central government is constantly reviewing the costs it imposes on businesses (both directly and through freeing up regulatory regimes), I do urge local authorities to work together to identify best practice in this area, and to look to streamline your regulatory processes to reduce compliance costs on businesses.

I am aware that Local Government New Zealand and the Ministry for the Environment have been working together to develop methods for comparing quality processes of councils and so reduce compliance costs. I commend such initiatives which contribute to the area of economic growth.

Another area which greatly interests me with both my Local Government and Cultural Affairs hats on, and which is linked with environmental tourism, is that of cultural tourism.

Last night I attended a function in Wellington which is a perfect illustration of how this type of tourism can contribute to a local area's economic growth and at the same time enrich the lives of local people.

The function was entitled "Nelson and the Arts Come To Wellington" and its primary aim was to raise the profile of the Nelson cultural community amongst politicians and Wellingtonians, who are of course a target market for weekend and day trippers.

What makes this initiative particularly significant is that Nelson recognise culture isn't what some of their residents do in their spare time, but that it is an integral part of the way of life in Nelson for all its inhabitants, both economically and socially. I know that employment in small and rural communities is the key to enabling people to live where they want to live.

Arts and culture should be available to those that wish to pursue their talent and creative urge. We cannot afford to lose the value of this potential or stand by and watch it go to waste.

However to do this we must set up the right environment where such creative expression can be pursued as a viable career option that will see strong employment growth in rural areas. This will prevent further and unwanted urbanisation or dislocation of families. Job security will give artists the freedom to choose where they wish to live, and develop to their full potential.. According to statistics New Zealanders spend $1.9billion a year on cultural services. The cultural sector employs 5% of the workforce with an equal number of companies being involved in this field.

Nelson recognise this and are generating opportunities to capitalise on the economic benefits their cultural activities can bring to the area. Take the Wearable Art Awards for instance - this event now has an international following.

And Nelson also recognises that cultural activities are part of the quality of life that the region provides for its residents, whether it be through their direct involvement or through their appreciation of having beautiful things within their physical environment.

A principle noted by those who have written about the benefits and pitfalls of cultural tourism is ably demonstrated by Nelson - that the most valuable experiences for visitors are those which also appeal to local residents. Nelson, while providing ably those services that Local Government is normally recognised for, is also making sure that what makes Nelson Nelson and not town X, is promoted and enhanced, for the social and economic well-being of its community.

I don't think it is by accident that Kerry Marshall, President of Local Government New Zealand hails from Nelson.

I am not suggesting that Local Government suddenly become wholly responsible for all cultural activities within their community - there is a need in this area also to more clearly define exactly what Central Government's and Local Government's role in the cultural sector is, however, I will come back to this later.

What initiatives such as Nelson's Cultural Guide Book, which they launched in Wellington last night, provide is an opportunity for communities to sharpen their competitive edge - to be seen as distinct and having something special and different to offer.

This is not necessarily for Local Government to drive, but by facilitating this kind of focus, you and your community can only benefit.

However, to return to Local Government specifically. Economic growth for a community is of course also dependent on the quality of infrastrucutural services provided by Local Government.

I know there is a lot of debate both within and outside of the sector about the role of local government in providing infrastructure. I strongly urge local government to get active in these discussions. The current review of local authorities' powers to deliver water and wastewater services is one such opportunity.

I am comfortable for local communities to decide whether or not to franchise or contract out services such as water provision. But, as I know you will agree, the responsibility for performance and price remains with the council and cannot be abrogated to the contractor. Consequently a key task in any change from in-house provision will be for the council to be able to demonstrate its capacity to fully monitor its contractors. Robust debate on key issues such as these can only assist both local and central government decision-making.

There are close links between the economy's impact on the community and the community's impact on the economy. I am aware that as well as facilitating economic growth by establishing a business-friendly environment, some territorial authorities have also become more directly involved in ``growing'' the economy by promoting business through:

Rates relief for new developments;
developing land for commercial or industrial purposes including the renting new venture workshops
involvement with ``business grow'' schemes, enterprise and resource centres and the ``be your own boss'' scheme; and more.
These initiatives are important as they are links in the circle of civic strength and social cohesion, and together these can produce significant social and economic dividends for your communities and the nation as a whole.

As I travel around, I am also conscious that there is a perception that local government is increasingly becoming involved in social service activity which some would argue is more appropriately the preserve of Central Government. This perception needs to be examined to determine the extent of that involvement.

I personally believe that the debate of the new millennium will be about the quality of life. We have pushed and pulled the economic framework over the past two decades, often at the expense of our social well being, but again, to progress this debate we need to clearly define what the state's role is and where Local Government fits in.

I read with interest, the debate over Christchurch City Council's proposal to boost its spending on social services and to send Government a one million dollar bill for their social spending.

Cr Margaret Murray was quoted in ``The Press'' as saying ``By moving into a role which is the responsibility of central Government, we are letting central Government off the hook at a cost to the ratepayer''.

I have some sympathy, with this sentiment -- I am concerned that central Government should not abdicate its responsibilities in the area of social services, for instance employment initiatives. Councils should not feel obliged to pick up the tab where gaps emerge.

However, I wish to make it perfectly clear, that I see an important distinction between the provision of ``social services'' to ensure minimum standards of living for individuals and their families by central government, and the development and provision of community services and facilities by local government to reflect the needs and aspirations of communities as a whole, including (I say quickly putting my Cultural Affairs hat back on - or perhaps I never took it off!) cultural activities which add depth and richness to our lives.

As I have indicated previously, I think the former is part of the national aspirations and values that characterise New Zealand, and is therefore primarily the responsibility of central Government. Action for, and on behalf of, local communities on the other hand, is the proper jurisdiction and responsibility of local government.

I am not suggesting that legitimate community services provided by local authorities should be abandoned. What I am saying is that we must be clear where the responsibility for the provision of these services lies, and then ensure there are adequate powers to ensure that they are delivered. I have support within Local Government New Zealand for this view.

This is a big issue to which I am giving urgent attention.

I am working in a similar way within the Cultural Affairs portfolio and as I mentioned earlier, this incorporates Local Government policy. That is, what should the role of central government be in funding cultural activities? At what level should the local community assume responsibility for local initiatives? How should cultural heritage policy evolve, recognising the importance of the regional museums and national collections? How do we prevent the cost shifting solely onto Local Government.

I don't have the answers to these questions nor know what New Zealanders cultural priorities are. Therefore, together with the Ministry of Cultural Affairs I am currently seeking to establish Terms of Reference for a review of the cultural sector that will seek to address some of the current problems and I hope provide a fresh vision and role for the cultural sector for the new millennium and beyond. The issues include fragmentation, dependence on lottery funding, , the role of the State, the lack of co-ordination, portfolio overlaps and gaps and so on. What is most important is that we set up a framework within the cultural sector that will provide stability for its participants well into the next century.

We are a nation of only three and a half million people. Do we want to do a few things extremely well, or do we want to spread our funds widely and thinly and try to do it all? Do we want to be jack and jills-of-all-trades and or do we want to develop centres of excellence?

Eighty nine percent of New Zealanders believe that cultural activities help to bring people together in local communities, and cultural activities are valued by 90% of New Zealanders as helping to enrich the quality of their lives. I would go so far as to say that it is the culture of a community that makes it strong. That community may be a small group or individuals, a town or a country. Each has its own unique culture.

As a nation we are maturing - perhaps it is fair to say we are moving from that of teenager to the tentative stages of early twenties, beginning to know in ourselves who we are but still not entirely sure or confident in that. We need to know our history, we have our roots in bi-culturalism, but we need to become more comfortable with the more multi-cultural society we are today.

Our culture is what helps us to identify this, but I also think that we are only just beginning to recognise the role it has to play. Culture can be so woven into our lives that we fail to distinguish it from anything other than 'that's just what I do'.

It goes back to the very definition of what is culture. To some it's pretty high brow and elitist, wandering around an art gallery, glass of wine in hand, or an outing to the ballet or orchestra.

Culture is broad and inclusive. Its the grass roots, the community.

Our culture is who we are as a people, as a nation, its harnessing the passion of New Zealanders. It is the stunning productions coming out of South Auckland schools, it is the murals on many of our smaller town walls, it is OMC taking on Europe and America. It is artists in places like the Coromandel and Nelson, it is the International Flower Show and Gumboot Day in Taihape. And it is art galleries and operas, but it is also, writers festivals, sculpture symposiums, film festivals, A&P Shows, wine and food festivals, local pottery shops and Wearable Art Awards.

We need, and by we I mean central government, to recognise the value of these activities to our economy and well-being as a country. Five percent of our workforce - that it is a significant number.

One of the main problems at the moment is that not only is funding in the sector fragile, but it is also fragmented. Lotteries should not be required to be funding legislatory obligations. Their contribution, I believe, should be the icing on the cake, not the cake itself. They should be funding new community initiatives, not spending money on arts structural costs such as administration. Another difficulty is that the participants are competing with each other for what limited funds there are, which sets up the whole debate and infighting of who is more deserving and often competing against other sectors such as sport. It is a frustration for me as Minister of Cultural Affairs that I am not able to have responsibility for all of the cultural sector, as it is split between different portfolios. For me to develop the structure of the sector I therefore need to both compete and at the same time take with me, for example, the portfolios of Broadcasting, Education, Commerce, conservation and Internal Affairs, to name a few.

We need to take a principle based approach and to, taking a broad view that includes all areas where culture has a part to play.

Combine this with the sectors reliance on funding from a source that is reliant on how much people gamble in any given year, which is in my opinion ridiculous, and no wonder people in the cultural community feel frustrated.

My aim is to set up a framework that is robust and objective beyond annual tinkerings of funding pools and the lobbying skills of the different cultural factions. If we are to truly recognise and value the role of culture within New Zealand, both economically and socially, I believe we need to provide it with its own structure, to provide stability and confidence for the people who make it happen.

Areas I would like to look at include the effect of cultural globalisation and Americanisation on new Zealand's own cultural identity, the impact on the sector of new technology, the level and sources of arts funding and the balance of national and regional funding. We have to address the regional tensions and jealousies.

Clearly, Local Government need to be a part of this and I know there has been much speculation from the Local Government sector.

Coming from a principle base and acknowledging we need to be going right back to structures, and philosophies. We have so much going on already that is innovative and exciting and which pushes the boundaries of what we have traditionally considered culture to be. One needs look no further than some of the rural small businesses that are emerging.

For example, I had the privilege a couple of weeks back of meeting Cathy Tait-Jamieson. Cathy and her husband produce organic dairy products at their 500-acre farm in Palmerston North. They have been producing organic yoghurt and milk for the domestic market over the past decade and they now export to Australia.

And in my travels around the country I see the examples of what people are doing with small businesses, (and I have to say, more often than not they are women) growing out of cottage industries. This ranges from soft cheeses delightfully packaged, to boutique wines, to beautiful craft work

These businesses are of course, part of the make-up of our culture, your culture in your communities. It never fails to excite me that the more I talk about these issues the more the symbiotic relationship that they have to each other becomes apparent. We cannot talk about developing culture without including the role of government, we cannot discuss economic impacts without social impacts.

There is much work yet to be done. However, I wanted to talk to you tonight about this because there are parallels and overlaps between the portfolios of Local Government and Cultural Affairs. I will involve you and I will want your input. I look forward to doing so in the coming months.

I know though that there are a number of other important areas that you would like to hear from me on. One, that is in keeping with the 2010 key issue of establishing a flexible and enabling legislative framework, is the review of the Rating Powers Act and other council revenue raising powers. I have taken on board sector comments that this legislation is proving inadequate and inappropriate to local government with its new accountability processes.

The new funding policies under the Local Government Amendment Act No.3 1996 will see councils looking to more accurately allocate costs. We need to look at whether councils have the tools needed to do that. Also many of the processes set out in the Rating Powers Act are unduly restrictive.

I should say at this point, however, that I do not envisage a move away from property rates as councils' primary revenue raising tool.

I am currently discussing the scope and timetable of the Review with my Cabinet colleagues over the next few weeks. We will shortly be releasing a Discussion Document, for consultation with councils and other interested parties, covering the principles and issues to be addressed in the Review.

The inadequacy of the Rating Powers Act is only one of the problems facing local government at present. Ask any council what are the key areas of public concern within their communities, and the issue of dog control is bound to be raised.

The issue of dangerous dogs, prompted by the tragic fatal mauling in the Bay of Plenty, has caused widespread public concern. I have recently received the report of the Working Party of MPs, representing five political parties, which, as you will be aware, I convened to look at ways of dealing with dangerous dog breeds.

I asked the Working Party to look at ways in which we could achieve the phased elimination of Pit Bull Terriers under existing laws, and whether we should take steps to deal with other breeds.

Briefly, the Working Party has recommended that we deal with Pit Bulls already in the country by requiring neutering, muzzling, secure fencing and other restrictions. At the same time, they have recommended we place an import ban on more Pit Bulls coming into the country, as well as three other breeds of fighting dog.

While I am pleased by the Working Party's report, and by the multi-party support these proposals enjoy, I also recognise that there is a considerable amount of detailed investigation and consultation required to ensure that any measures we put in place will actually work.

Prominent in this, is the need for detailed consultation with the local government sector which will, of course, be faced with the responsibility for enforcing any new dog control regulations. I have written to Local Government New Zealand seeking their initial views on the Working Party's recommendations, and I look forward to constructive and ongoing dialogue with you all on this.

One last matter which is of direct relevance and interest to elected members, as it covers elected members' remuneration.

Local authority Mayors and councillors are generally hard working. Mayors are leaders in their communities and need to be available to their constituents on a full time basis. As such they often work long hours which can be disproportionate to the amount of remuneration received.

As Minister of Local Government, I am required from time to time to review the maximum rates of remuneration. The last time this was done was in April 1996. Remuneration was increased by 2% -- this was only the second increase since 1989. Another increase is now due. My officials at the Department of Internal Affairs are currently working on the review and I will release a new determination at the Local Government Conference in July.

When the last increase was announced, it was accepted that there may be difficulties with the present remuneration arrangements, and Local Government New Zealand was invited to advise me of any anomalies they see with the current system, so that they can be examined in a wider review of elected members remuneration.

I understand that the matter was discussed at the Local Government New Zealand conference last year, and that the information from the workshop sessions is contributing to a project being undertaken by Local Government New Zealand. The purpose of this project is to advise me of the issues the sector would like addressed in the wider review. I look forward to receiving these views.

In finishing I would like to allude to a strategy Vicki Buck, the mayor of Christchurch, has implemented entitled the Children's Strategy. Her strategy works on the philosophy that if the community is safe for children then chances are its safe for everyone. To me it epitomises good old New Zealand common sense - sometimes the hardest of all to achieve. But think about it - a community that is safe and enriching for our children, how secure as grown-ups we would feel in that same community.

So in the context of tonight, it may be that we want to know that water will come out of our taps when we turn them on, that children and adults can go swimming in the local pool safely or that local artists or school children can be given an opportunity to exhibit in the local gallery.

Earlier this week I had the huge privilege of attending the Ralph Hotere exhibition at the Wellington City Gallery. One particular piece 'O Africa' drew my attention. This piece was inspired from the Spring Bok protests in 1981, and in particular I suspect that dreadful day here in Hamilton on the 25th of July 1981.

O Africa is a stunning mix of art mediums including poetry by Hone Tuwhare. I would like to end by quoting Hone Tuwhare's words used in the painting which I think sums up why, we here tonight, do what we do, in building a future for ourselves, our country and most importantly our children - harnessing that passion we have as a people - acknowledging the yearning for a better future.

"So that innocence & child shall reign. So that we may dream good dreams again".

Thank you all for your attention this evening, and I wish you well with tomorrow's Mayoral Forum.

ENDS GAIL'S RESTAURANT
HAMILTON

As I drove in today from the airport and knowing I would be speaking to you all tonight, I couldn't help but reflect on the richness of our country. One of the privileges in my role as a Minister is that I am able to travel from one end of New Zealand to the other and just in the last few weeks I have been to Christchurch, Gisborne, Wellington of course, and now to Hamilton in the Waikato. And even when disasters occur, like on the East Coast two weeks ago, it always strikes me how significant the role and responsibility local authorities have in their communities, in times of stress as well as on a daily basis to help make our country what it is.

Before I move on I would like to acknowledge the 24 I think it is Mayors that are here tonight and in particular the three local Mayors, John Hewitt of Waipa, Angus McDonald of Waikato District, and Margaret Evans in Hamilton. The work you are doing in the Waikato is distinct for its innovation and effectiveness. The energy and commitment you bring to the role as leader of your councils and communities is inspiring and uniquely New Zealand. I believe as a nation we are finally maturing and trusting in our own judgement as to what's best for ourselves and our country. You are a great example of this. And also what a wonderful New Zealand event and some would say institution that brings us all together, the Mystery Creek Field Days. Mystery Creek is a real show case of New Zealand's rural sector.

Many of you will know already of my aim as Minister of Local Government to more clearly define the role of central government and local government. Tonight I would like to explore this theme both directly and a little laterally.

(adlb)

I am aware that a focus of your forum tomorrow is economic development. Economic growth continues to be a priority for New Zealand and local government has several significant contributions to make.

As the Prime Minister pointed out recently, ``that change has already produced significant gains in both employment and prosperity, for the people of this country. The economy is already about 20% bigger than it was six years ago, in 1991. Growth has moved faster here, in that period, than in any other developed economy in the western world. New Zealand is now moving through the trough of the current business cycle with growth around 2.5%, with a pick-up projected to come in the next year or so, to 3.5 - 4.0%''.

At the same time, I have also been encouraged by the Prime Minister's recent comments on the need to consider social impacts when addressing the economy. As he points out, what good is a healthy economy if we have no quality of life.

Our clean green image is one aspect of New Zealand that is vital in attracting tourists from overseas and to market our products, especially our primary products. The way in which local authorities implement the Resource Management Act and undertake their waste management responsibilities can affect this image. You will be aware that the Coalition Agreement seeks to create a clean, green healthy environment, not only for the benefit of all New Zealanders, but because it makes good economic sense.

As I meet ratepayers and electors around the country, one of the constant themes I hear is the steepness and the variety of charges made by local authorities in respect of the Resource Management Act.

Just as central government is constantly reviewing the costs it imposes on businesses (both directly and through freeing up regulatory regimes), I do urge local authorities to work together to identify best practice in this area, and to look to streamline your regulatory processes to reduce compliance costs on businesses.

I am aware that Local Government New Zealand and the Ministry for the Environment have been working together to develop methods for comparing quality processes of councils and so reduce compliance costs. I commend such initiatives which contribute to the area of economic growth.

Another area which greatly interests me with both my Local Government and Cultural Affairs hats on, and which is linked with environmental tourism, is that of cultural tourism.

Last night I attended a function in Wellington which is a perfect illustration of how this type of tourism can contribute to a local area's economic growth and at the same time enrich the lives of local people.

The function was entitled "Nelson and the Arts Come To Wellington" and its primary aim was to raise the profile of the Nelson cultural community amongst politicians and Wellingtonians, who are of course a target market for weekend and day trippers.

What makes this initiative particularly significant is that Nelson recognise culture isn't what some of their residents do in their spare time, but that it is an integral part of the way of life in Nelson for all its inhabitants, both economically and socially. I know that employment in small and rural communities is the key to enabling people to live where they want to live.

Arts and culture should be available to those that wish to pursue their talent and creative urge. We cannot afford to lose the value of this potential or stand by and watch it go to waste.

However to do this we must set up the right environment where such creative expression can be pursued as a viable career option that will see strong employment growth in rural areas. This will prevent further and unwanted urbanisation or dislocation of families. Job security will give artists the freedom to choose where they wish to live, and develop to their full potential.. According to statistics New Zealanders spend $1.9billion a year on cultural services. The cultural sector employs 5% of the workforce with an equal number of companies being involved in this field.

Nelson recognise this and are generating opportunities to capitalise on the economic benefits their cultural activities can bring to the area. Take the Wearable Art Awards for instance - this event now has an international following.

And Nelson also recognises that cultural activities are part of the quality of life that the region provides for its residents, whether it be through their direct involvement or through their appreciation of having beautiful things within their physical environment.

A principle noted by those who have written about the benefits and pitfalls of cultural tourism is ably demonstrated by Nelson - that the most valuable experiences for visitors are those which also appeal to local residents. Nelson, while providing ably those services that Local Government is normally recognised for, is also making sure that what makes Nelson Nelson and not town X, is promoted and enhanced, for the social and economic well-being of its community.

I don't think it is by accident that Kerry Marshall, President of Local Government New Zealand hails from Nelson.

I am not suggesting that Local Government suddenly become wholly responsible for all cultural activities within their community - there is a need in this area also to more clearly define exactly what Central Government's and Local Government's role in the cultural sector is, however, I will come back to this later.

What initiatives such as Nelson's Cultural Guide Book, which they launched in Wellington last night, provide is an opportunity for communities to sharpen their competitive edge - to be seen as distinct and having something special and different to offer.

This is not necessarily for Local Government to drive, but by facilitating this kind of focus, you and your community can only benefit.

However, to return to Local Government specifically. Economic growth for a community is of course also dependent on the quality of infrastrucutural services provided by Local Government.

I know there is a lot of debate both within and outside of the sector about the role of local government in providing infrastructure. I strongly urge local government to get active in these discussions. The current review of local authorities' powers to deliver water and wastewater services is one such opportunity.

I am comfortable for local communities to decide whether or not to franchise or contract out services such as water provision. But, as I know you will agree, the responsibility for performance and price remains with the council and cannot be abrogated to the contractor. Consequently a key task in any change from in-house provision will be for the council to be able to demonstrate its capacity to fully monitor its contractors. Robust debate on key issues such as these can only assist both local and central government decision-making.

There are close links between the economy's impact on the community and the community's impact on the economy. I am aware that as well as facilitating economic growth by establishing a business-friendly environment, some territorial authorities have also become more directly involved in ``growing'' the economy by promoting business through:

Rates relief for new developments;
developing land for commercial or industrial purposes including the renting new venture workshops
involvement with ``business grow'' schemes, enterprise and resource centres and the ``be your own boss'' scheme; and more.
These initiatives are important as they are links in the circle of civic strength and social cohesion, and together these can produce significant social and economic dividends for your communities and the nation as a whole.

As I travel around, I am also conscious that there is a perception that local government is increasingly becoming involved in social service activity which some would argue is more appropriately the preserve of Central Government. This perception needs to be examined to determine the extent of that involvement.

I personally believe that the debate of the new millennium will be about the quality of life. We have pushed and pulled the economic framework over the past two decades, often at the expense of our social well being, but again, to progress this debate we need to clearly define what the state's role is and where Local Government fits in.

I read with interest, the debate over Christchurch City Council's proposal to boost its spending on social services and to send Government a one million dollar bill for their social spending.

Cr Margaret Murray was quoted in ``The Press'' as saying ``By moving into a role which is the responsibility of central Government, we are letting central Government off the hook at a cost to the ratepayer''.

I have some sympathy, with this sentiment -- I am concerned that central Government should not abdicate its responsibilities in the area of social services, for instance employment initiatives. Councils should not feel obliged to pick up the tab where gaps emerge.

However, I wish to make it perfectly clear, that I see an important distinction between the provision of ``social services'' to ensure minimum standards of living for individuals and their families by central government, and the development and provision of community services and facilities by local government to reflect the needs and aspirations of communities as a whole, including (I say quickly putting my Cultural Affairs hat back on - or perhaps I never took it off!) cultural activities which add depth and richness to our lives.

As I have indicated previously, I think the former is part of the national aspirations and values that characterise New Zealand, and is therefore primarily the responsibility of central Government. Action for, and on behalf of, local communities on the other hand, is the proper jurisdiction and responsibility of local government.

I am not suggesting that legitimate community services provided by local authorities should be abandoned. What I am saying is that we must be clear where the responsibility for the provision of these services lies, and then ensure there are adequate powers to ensure that they are delivered. I have support within Local Government New Zealand for this view.

This is a big issue to which I am giving urgent attention.

I am working in a similar way within the Cultural Affairs portfolio and as I mentioned earlier, this incorporates Local Government policy. That is, what should the role of central government be in funding cultural activities? At what level should the local community assume responsibility for local initiatives? How should cultural heritage policy evolve, recognising the importance of the regional museums and national collections? How do we prevent the cost shifting solely onto Local Government.

I don't have the answers to these questions nor know what New Zealanders cultural priorities are. Therefore, together with the Ministry of Cultural Affairs I am currently seeking to establish Terms of Reference for a review of the cultural sector that will seek to address some of the current problems and I hope provide a fresh vision and role for the cultural sector for the new millennium and beyond. The issues include fragmentation, dependence on lottery funding, , the role of the State, the lack of co-ordination, portfolio overlaps and gaps and so on. What is most important is that we set up a framework within the cultural sector that will provide stability for its participants well into the next century.

We are a nation of only three and a half million people. Do we want to do a few things extremely well, or do we want to spread our funds widely and thinly and try to do it all? Do we want to be jack and jills-of-all-trades and or do we want to develop centres of excellence?

Eighty nine percent of New Zealanders believe that cultural activities help to bring people together in local communities, and cultural activities are valued by 90% of New Zealanders as helping to enrich the quality of their lives. I would go so far as to say that it is the culture of a community that makes it strong. That community may be a small group or individuals, a town or a country. Each has its own unique culture.

As a nation we are maturing - perhaps it is fair to say we are moving from that of teenager to the tentative stages of early twenties, beginning to know in ourselves who we are but still not entirely sure or confident in that. We need to know our history, we have our roots in bi-culturalism, but we need to become more comfortable with the more multi-cultural society we are today.

Our culture is what helps us to identify this, but I also think that we are only just beginning to recognise the role it has to play. Culture can be so woven into our lives that we fail to distinguish it from anything other than 'that's just what I do'.

It goes back to the very definition of what is culture. To some it's pretty high brow and elitist, wandering around an art gallery, glass of wine in hand, or an outing to the ballet or orchestra.

Culture is broad and inclusive. Its the grass roots, the community.

Our culture is who we are as a people, as a nation, its harnessing the passion of New Zealanders. It is the stunning productions coming out of South Auckland schools, it is the murals on many of our smaller town walls, it is OMC taking on Europe and America. It is artists in places like the Coromandel and Nelson, it is the International Flower Show and Gumboot Day in Taihape. And it is art galleries and operas, but it is also, writers festivals, sculpture symposiums, film festivals, A&P Shows, wine and food festivals, local pottery shops and Wearable Art Awards.

We need, and by we I mean central government, to recognise the value of these activities to our economy and well-being as a country. Five percent of our workforce - that it is a significant number.

One of the main problems at the moment is that not only is funding in the sector fragile, but it is also fragmented. Lotteries should not be required to be funding legislatory obligations. Their contribution, I believe, should be the icing on the cake, not the cake itself. They should be funding new community initiatives, not spending money on arts structural costs such as administration. Another difficulty is that the participants are competing with each other for what limited funds there are, which sets up the whole debate and infighting of who is more deserving and often competing against other sectors such as sport. It is a frustration for me as Minister of Cultural Affairs that I am not able to have responsibility for all of the cultural sector, as it is split between different portfolios. For me to develop the structure of the sector I therefore need to both compete and at the same time take with me, for example, the portfolios of Broadcasting, Education, Commerce, conservation and Internal Affairs, to name a few.

We need to take a principle based approach and to, taking a broad view that includes all areas where culture has a part to play.

Combine this with the sectors reliance on funding from a source that is reliant on how much people gamble in any given year, which is in my opinion ridiculous, and no wonder people in the cultural community feel frustrated.

My aim is to set up a framework that is robust and objective beyond annual tinkerings of funding pools and the lobbying skills of the different cultural factions. If we are to truly recognise and value the role of culture within New Zealand, both economically and socially, I believe we need to provide it with its own structure, to provide stability and confidence for the people who make it happen.

Areas I would like to look at include the effect of cultural globalisation and Americanisation on new Zealand's own cultural identity, the impact on the sector of new technology, the level and sources of arts funding and the balance of national and regional funding. We have to address the regional tensions and jealousies.

Clearly, Local Government need to be a part of this and I know there has been much speculation from the Local Government sector.

Coming from a principle base and acknowledging we need to be going right back to structures, and philosophies. We have so much going on already that is innovative and exciting and which pushes the boundaries of what we have traditionally considered culture to be. One needs look no further than some of the rural small businesses that are emerging.

For example, I had the privilege a couple of weeks back of meeting Cathy Tait-Jamieson. Cathy and her husband produce organic dairy products at their 500-acre farm in Palmerston North. They have been producing organic yoghurt and milk for the domestic market over the past decade and they now export to Australia.

And in my travels around the country I see the examples of what people are doing with small businesses, (and I have to say, more often than not they are women) growing out of cottage industries. This ranges from soft cheeses delightfully packaged, to boutique wines, to beautiful craft work

These businesses are of course, part of the make-up of our culture, your culture in your communities. It never fails to excite me that the more I talk about these issues the more the symbiotic relationship that they have to each other becomes apparent. We cannot talk about developing culture without including the role of government, we cannot discuss economic impacts without social impacts.

There is much work yet to be done. However, I wanted to talk to you tonight about this because there are parallels and overlaps between the portfolios of Local Government and Cultural Affairs. I will involve you and I will want your input. I look forward to doing so in the coming months.

I know though that there are a number of other important areas that you would like to hear from me on. One, that is in keeping with the 2010 key issue of establishing a flexible and enabling legislative framework, is the review of the Rating Powers Act and other council revenue raising powers. I have taken on board sector comments that this legislation is proving inadequate and inappropriate to local government with its new accountability processes.

The new funding policies under the Local Government Amendment Act No.3 1996 will see councils looking to more accurately allocate costs. We need to look at whether councils have the tools needed to do that. Also many of the processes set out in the Rating Powers Act are unduly restrictive.

I should say at this point, however, that I do not envisage a move away from property rates as councils' primary revenue raising tool.

I am currently discussing the scope and timetable of the Review with my Cabinet colleagues over the next few weeks. We will shortly be releasing a Discussion Document, for consultation with councils and other interested parties, covering the principles and issues to be addressed in the Review.

The inadequacy of the Rating Powers Act is only one of the problems facing local government at present. Ask any council what are the key areas of public concern within their communities, and the issue of dog control is bound to be raised.

The issue of dangerous dogs, prompted by the tragic fatal mauling in the Bay of Plenty, has caused widespread public concern. I have recently received the report of the Working Party of MPs, representing five political parties, which, as you will be aware, I convened to look at ways of dealing with dangerous dog breeds.

I asked the Working Party to look at ways in which we could achieve the phased elimination of Pit Bull Terriers under existing laws, and whether we should take steps to deal with other breeds.

Briefly, the Working Party has recommended that we deal with Pit Bulls already in the country by requiring neutering, muzzling, secure fencing and other restrictions. At the same time, they have recommended we place an import ban on more Pit Bulls coming into the country, as well as three other breeds of fighting dog.

While I am pleased by the Working Party's report, and by the multi-party support these proposals enjoy, I also recognise that there is a considerable amount of detailed investigation and consultation required to ensure that any measures we put in place will actually work.

Prominent in this, is the need for detailed consultation with the local government sector which will, of course, be faced with the responsibility for enforcing any new dog control regulations. I have written to Local Government New Zealand seeking their initial views on the Working Party's recommendations, and I look forward to constructive and ongoing dialogue with you all on this.

One last matter which is of direct relevance and interest to elected members, as it covers elected members' remuneration.

Local authority Mayors and councillors are generally hard working. Mayors are leaders in their communities and need to be available to their constituents on a full time basis. As such they often work long hours which can be disproportionate to the amount of remuneration received.

As Minister of Local Government, I am required from time to time to review the maximum rates of remuneration. The last time this was done was in April 1996. Remuneration was increased by 2% -- this was only the second increase since 1989. Another increase is now due. My officials at the Department of Internal Affairs are currently working on the review and I will release a new determination at the Local Government Conference in July.

When the last increase was announced, it was accepted that there may be difficulties with the present remuneration arrangements, and Local Government New Zealand was invited to advise me of any anomalies they see with the current system, so that they can be examined in a wider review of elected members remuneration.

I understand that the matter was discussed at the Local Government New Zealand conference last year, and that the information from the workshop sessions is contributing to a project being undertaken by Local Government New Zealand. The purpose of this project is to advise me of the issues the sector would like addressed in the wider review. I look forward to receiving these views.

In finishing I would like to allude to a strategy Vicki Buck, the mayor of Christchurch, has implemented entitled the Children's Strategy. Her strategy works on the philosophy that if the community is safe for children then chances are its safe for everyone. To me it epitomises good old New Zealand common sense - sometimes the hardest of all to achieve. But think about it - a community that is safe and enriching for our children, how secure as grown-ups we would feel in that same community.

So in the context of tonight, it may be that we want to know that water will come out of our taps when we turn them on, that children and adults can go swimming in the local pool safely or that local artists or school children can be given an opportunity to exhibit in the local gallery.

Earlier this week I had the huge privilege of attending the Ralph Hotere exhibition at the Wellington City Gallery. One particular piece 'O Africa' drew my attention. This piece was inspired from the Spring Bok protests in 1981, and in particular I suspect that dreadful day here in Hamilton on the 25th of July 1981.

O Africa is a stunning mix of art mediums including poetry by Hone Tuwhare. I would like to end by quoting Hone Tuwhare's words used in the painting which I think sums up why, we here tonight, do what we do, in building a future for ourselves, our country and most importantly our children - harnessing that passion we have as a people - acknowledging the yearning for a better future.

"So that innocence & child shall reign. So that we may dream good dreams again".

Thank you all for your attention this evening, and I wish you well with tomorrow's Mayoral Forum.

ENDS