Last year, the South African Government launched a review of local government, and came up with some pretty damning findings. This has resulted in the launch of an ambitious Local Government Turnaround Strategy aimed at addressing the internal factors (e.g. quality of decision-making by Councillors, quality of appointments, transparency of tender and procurement systems, and levels of financial management and accountability) as well as the external factors (e.g. revenue base and income generation potential, inappropriate legislation and regulation, demographic patterns and trends, macro and micro-economic conditions, undue interference by political parties and weaknesses in national policy, oversight and inter-governmental relations) bedevilling local government.

The focus by national government on local government is to be welcomed. It is after all the sphere of government that has the greatest impact on our day-to-day lives. Of equal significance is the stated abandonment of a ‘one size fits all’ approach that has predominated government thinking for the past 15 years. The adoption of a differentiated approach means that the governance of our metropolitan areas – the engine rooms of the SA economy as well as areas of growing poverty and unemployment – can finally be taken seriously.

The jury is still out whether Government’s new local government strategy is going to succeed when previous attempts, such as Project Consolidate, didn’t seem to make much impact. I hope to cover these issues in more detail as the strategy unfolds. For the moment, as a contribution to the debate, here is a paper on Lessons from South Africa’s Local Government Transition, focusing on metropolitan government, that I presented at a recent international workshop.

I participated in a roundtable discussion on metropolitan governance at the end of last year, hosted by the Ottawa-based Forum of Federations, the Australian Centre of Excellence for Local Government and the Australian Major Cities Unit.

Delegates to the roundtable on metropolitan governance, Sydney, December 2009

I had an opportunity to engage in very interesting urban policy discussions and visit a number of urban regeneration projects in Sydney. Here are a couple of observations:

Cities in National Government Policy

Traditionally, national (or federal) governments around the world are not clear on city or urban policy. Sometimes, this is because of the strength of the rural or small town lobby. Sometimes, it is as a result of an over-romanticised view of a rural past, and a denial of urban demographic trends. Particularly in federal systems, cities are often regarded as ‘falling under’ provincial or state governments, and treated as subordinate elements of a government hierarchy rather than engines of national economic growth and centres of innovation. Often, federal governments adopt either a ‘hands-off’ or a ‘one size fits all’ approach to cities.

This may be changing in Australia, a strong federal state. Under the Rudd government, there has been a shift in national urban policy, with two significant developments taking place. Firstly, a national infrastructure strategy has been developed to provide a platform for future growth and development. This has been done via Infrastructure Australia, a new body charged with prioritising billions of dollars of investment in infrastructure, on the basis of National Infrastructure Priorities:

1. National broadband network
2. Creation of a true national energy market
3. Competitive international gateways
4. A national rail freight network
5. Transforming our cities
6. Providing essential indigenous infrastructure
7. Adaptable and secure water supplies

North Sydney

As the 5th point indicates, the role of cities has been explicitly recognised: “… the rapid growth and development of major cities in Australia has imposed complex planning and governance challenges on scales never experienced in this country before. What makes our cities more productive, liveable and sustainable has become a matter of national importance. What makes one city more successful or more competitive than another, or how they should be organised to promote social inclusion and environmental sustainability, are now fundamental questions of national productivity and well-being” (A Report to the Council of Australian Governments, page 40).

This is being given effect to in two ways. Firstly, a Major Cities Unit has been established by the government to “identify opportunities where federal leadership can make a difference to the prosperity of our cities and the wellbeing of their residents.”

Secondly, an innovative Capital City Strategic Planning Systems scheme was launched in December 2009. The objective is to ensure Australian cities “are globally competitive, productive, sustainable, liveable and socially inclusive and are well placed to meet future challenges and growth”. The mechanism consists of developing city strategic plans based on national critera by January 2012. These plans will then guide future infrastructure investment decisions. Cities around the world will be watching the Australian experiment with interest!

Sydney City Strategy and fragmented metropolitan governance

Sydney CBD

I had an opportunity to spend time with Alan Cadogan, Strategic Director of the City of Sydney’s 2030 Vision and Strategy. Entitled Green| Global| Connected, it’s an excellent strategic framework based on a thorough public process, easily accessible on the city’s website. However, I was surprised to find out that that the City of Sydney municipality only covers the Sydney inner city area, a total of 26 square km. The 2030 Vision therefore only applies to a small portion of the Sydney metropolitan area, which is home to over 4,5m people and covers a huge geographic area fragmented into 43 local municipalities. The difficulty is that the City of Sydney Vision relies on metropolitan-wide strategies for implementation, particularly with regard to issues such as public transport, climate change mitigation and affordable housing. As Alan put it, in the absence of metropolitan forms of governance, it’s a bit like ‘herding cats’ to get a coordinated approach to development amongst all the local authorities. It will be interesting to see how the Sydney city plan is translated into meaningful action.

Sydney Harbour Bridge

Barangaroo Delivery Authority – using state land to leverage urban regeneration

I also visited the Barangaroo urban regeneration project in Central Sydney, a prime 22ha site owned by the New South Wales State Government. There are potential lessons which we can apply to the Western Cape Provincial Government Property Project currently underway here in the Cape Town Central City.

The goals of the project are as follows:

ECONOMY

• Revive the location as a trade gateway
• Refocus attention on Sydney in order to attract new regional and global headquarters
• Leverage the next long term phase of Sydney’s economic growth

 ENVIRONMENT

• Create a new Headland Park providing green space for the CBD and reinstating the archipelago of green headlands of the western harbour
• Provide a leadership example for waterfront urban renewal and the role governments can play in delivering sustainability
• Deliver a Climate Positive precinct that values the wellbeing of people and the planet
• Being water positive, exporting more water than it uses
• Generating zero waste, and potentially recycling waste from the surrounding area, and
• Achieving carbon neutrality by generating more renewable energy than we use – equivalent to taking 36,000 cars off the road each year

 COMMUNITY

• Reconnect and restore Barangaroo to Sydney’s CBD to provide a new foreshore space for Sydneysiders to enjoy
• Restore Barangaroo as a bustling foreshore space, activated by people living, working and playing
• Create new recreational opportunities for diverse age groups and lifestyles
• Complete the Government’s 14 kilometre Foreshore Walk between Woolloomooloo and Anzac Bridge

 In order to develop the site, the NSW State Government has set up the Barangaroo Delivery Authority (BDA). The BDA is governed by a small independent board, which includes the Mayor of the City of Sydney, and has a number of key functions, including:

• to promote, procure, facilitate and manage the orderly and economic development and use of Barangaroo, including the provision and management of infrastructure
• to promote, procure, organise, manage, undertake, secure, provide and conduct cultural, educational, residential, commercial, transport, tourist and recreational activities and facilities at Barangaroo

 The BDA has a CEO but employs no other staff. It must utilise public sector employees from state departments. There is a City of Sydney design advisory team.

Key development debates have included the size of the public realm to be developed, an appropriate housing mix, activation of the sea shore, the level of commercialisation, carbon neutral development, mixed use, and integration with the surrounding parts of the Sydney CBD and waterfront.

Barangaroo site

See Laneways, Sydney: Using Public Art to Revitalise City Spaces and Christmas Lighting in Sydney for more stories about my trip to Sydney.

Sydney CBD map

I’m heading off for Sydney on Friday to take part in an International Roundtable on Metropolitan Governance. It will be hosted by the Forum of Federations (based in Ottawa), the Australian Centre of Excellence for Local Government and their new Major Cities Unit, in preparation for 5th World Urban Forum to be held in Rio de Janeiro in March 2010. Case studies from Canada, USA, South Africa, India, New Zealand and Australia will be presented.

I hope to also meet up with some old mates, including Peter Cranko, a colleague from Planact days, and to have a look at some of the City of Sydney’s urban regeneration and public space projects. I won’t be blogging en route as my trusty Sony Vaio is going in for a few repairs, but you’ll get my impressions of Sydney and the conference shortly after I return next Friday.