Canterbury has extraordinary potential. We're home to world-leading agricultural innovation, growing tech and advanced manufacturing sectors, internationally recognised universities, and natural assets that attract visitors from around the globe. We have everything needed to compete with the best regions worldwide.
But we're competing with one hand tied behind our backs.
While successful regions overseas coordinate their economic development, infrastructure investment, and talent retention strategies across their whole region, New Zealand doesn't do this, and in Canterbury we have ten councils pursuing separate strategies. We market ourselves in fragments when we should present as one powerful region. We lose young talent to Auckland because we can't coordinate career pathways. We miss infrastructure investments because we can't plan at the scale needed to compete for major projects.
The cost isn't just inefficiency. It's lost opportunity. Companies that could invest here go to regions that present coordinated offers. Young people who could build careers here leave because they can't see the pathways. Innovation that could transform our economy stays disconnected from the businesses that need it.
This isn't about councils. It's about whether Canterbury can coordinate effectively enough to compete in a global economy where regions are the unit of competition.
Regional governance isn't a bureaucratic exercise. Done right, it's the difference between Canterbury punching above its weight and becoming one of the Asia-Pacific's leading regions for agriculture innovation, advanced manufacturing, and sustainable development.
The question isn't whether we need regional councils as they currently exist. It's whether we can afford to dismiss regional coordination at exactly the moment global competition demands it.
The views in this article are my own, though they may help inform some to consider their own thoughts.
What Regional Governance Actually Means
Regional governance is coordinating the right people and organisations to unlock opportunities that cross district boundaries.
It's not one big council doing everything. It's getting universities, businesses, infrastructure operators, iwi, government agencies, and community organisations working together on challenges and opportunities too big for individual districts but too local for Wellington.
Think of successful international regions. They don't succeed because they have big councils. They succeed because they coordinate economic development, infrastructure investment, talent development, and innovation ecosystems at regional scale with clear accountability.
That's what Canterbury is missing.
The Economic Opportunity We're Missing
Regional economic development. Right now Canterbury has ten separate economic development strategies. ChristchurchNZ promotes Christchurch, Timaru promotes Timaru, Selwyn promotes Selwyn. When international investors look at regions to invest in, they see fragmentation, not strength.
Successful regions present one coordinated offer: here's our regional innovation ecosystem, our infrastructure, our talent pipeline, our competitive advantages. Canterbury can't do that because we don't coordinate.
Talent attraction and retention. Your teenager studies at a school in one district, might attend polytech in another, gets their first job in a third. But there's no coordinated regional career pathway. No one's marketing Canterbury's opportunities to young people as a whole. No coordination between education providers and employers about what skills the region needs.
Result? Young people leave for Auckland or overseas because they can't see futures here, while Canterbury businesses struggle to find skilled workers.
Innovation and commercialisation. Lincoln University has world-leading agricultural research. University of Canterbury has cutting-edge engineering. Ara has practical trades training. But these aren't systematically connected to Canterbury businesses that could commercialise the research and create high-value jobs.
Other regions have innovation hubs that deliberately connect universities, research institutes, and businesses. Canterbury doesn't because we can't coordinate at regional scale.
Infrastructure investment. Major infrastructure projects require scale to be viable. Regional bulk water systems, advanced digital networks, integrated transport corridors. Individual districts can't achieve the scale needed. Central government wants to see regional coordination before committing major investment.
Without regional coordination, Canterbury misses infrastructure that could unlock economic development across the whole region.
The Social Infrastructure Gap
Economic opportunity means nothing if people can't access good lives in Canterbury.
Housing and growth. People live in Rolleston and work in Christchurch. Queenstown workers live in Cromwell. But each council plans housing separately. Transport systems, water infrastructure, and community services aren't coordinated with where people actually live and work.
Regional coordination could mean integrated planning that makes housing affordable and accessible across the region, not just within arbitrary district boundaries.
Health and social services. You see your local GP but travel to Christchurch for specialists. Ambulances cross district boundaries. Families needing support with housing, health, or justice issues bounce between disconnected agencies.
Regional coordination of health and social services already happens to some extent through Te Whatu Ora. But imagine if it was properly integrated with community services, housing, and economic opportunities across Canterbury.
Education and career pathways. Schools, polytechs, universities, and training providers operate independently. Employers struggle to find skilled workers. Young people can't see clear pathways from education to careers in Canterbury.
Regional workforce development boards could connect education providers and employers, ensuring training matches actual job opportunities and young people can see futures here.
The Infrastructure Coordination We Need
Regional transport. NZTA manages state highways, councils do local streets. The connecting routes that matter for daily commutes and freight movements often fall through gaps. Regional transport coordination could plan whole networks together, not separately.
Digital connectivity. Some Canterbury businesses have fiber, others barely get ADSL. It's postcode lottery. Regional infrastructure planning could prioritise digital connectivity based on economic development potential for the whole region.
Water and environmental infrastructure. Rivers don't respect district boundaries. Climate adaptation requires coordinated planning across coastlines and catchments. Infrastructure investments in water storage, flood protection, and environmental restoration need regional scale to be viable.
Tourism infrastructure. The Alps to Ocean cycle trail crosses multiple districts and DOC land. Tourists don't care about council boundaries. But management, infrastructure investment, and marketing are fragmented. Regional coordination could mean better visitor experiences and coordinated regional marketing internationally.
How Regional Governance Actually Works
Here's the crucial part: different functions need different governance approaches.
Democratic decisions on priorities and investment. When there are trade-offs between different regional priorities, elected representatives accountable to regional voters should make those calls. Not Wellington bureaucrats. Not part-time mayors accountable to district voters.
Technical expertise from universities, specialists, and agencies. Climate science, public health planning, engineering solutions. Democratic representatives set priorities, experts provide the knowledge and solutions.
Iwi partnership on anything affecting cultural sites, environmental management, or Treaty interests. Real co-governance with mana whenua, not just consultation.
Business leadership on economic development and innovation. Business understands markets and commercial opportunities better than councils do. Regional coordination means connecting business expertise with public investment.
Community delivery of local services. Community organisations and voluntary groups often deliver environmental restoration, sports facilities, and social services better than government. Regional governance means supporting and coordinating their work, not replacing it.
The point is: regional governance coordinates different institutions contributing their strengths, with democratic accountability for regional priorities and outcomes.
Why The Government Proposal Goes Backwards
The Combined Territories Board model fundamentally misunderstands what regional governance is.
It assumes regional governance is just about councils. It's not. It's about coordinating universities, businesses, infrastructure operators, iwi, government agencies, and community organisations around shared regional priorities.
This requires focus, expertise, and democratic accountability. Part-time mayors juggling district responsibilities can't provide any of these. They're elected by and accountable to district voters for district priorities. They don't have regional mandates or the time to coordinate complex regional challenges.
More fundamentally, removing elected regional representatives doesn't eliminate the need for regional coordination. It removes democratic accountability for it. Universities will still do research. Infrastructure operators will still invest. Economic development agencies will still market their regions. But no one will be democratically accountable for ensuring they work together on shared regional goals.
At exactly the moment Canterbury needs stronger regional coordination to compete globally, the government proposes dismantling democratic accountability for regional outcomes.
What Canterbury Actually Needs
Clear regional economic development strategy that presents Canterbury as one region internationally, coordinates infrastructure investment, connects universities and businesses for innovation, and builds regional career pathways to retain talent.
Regional infrastructure coordination for transport, digital connectivity, water systems, and environmental protection that enables economic development and quality of life across the whole region.
Regional workforce and education planning that connects schools, training providers, and employers so young people can see career pathways in Canterbury and businesses can access skilled workers.
Regional climate and environmental coordination for adaptation planning, biodiversity protection, and sustainable development that crosses district and catchment boundaries.
All with democratic accountability to regional voters through elected representatives whose job is coordinating these efforts, who can be voted out if they fail.
When a German manufacturing company considers where to establish their Asia-Pacific advanced manufacturing hub, they don't look at Christchurch vs Timaru vs Ashburton. They look at Canterbury as a region. Can they access the talent pipeline? Can they connect to university research? Can they rely on coordinated infrastructure investment? Right now, Canterbury can't answer yes to these questions. Munich can. Vancouver can. We can't, because we have ten separate structures, limited regional economic coordination, and no democratic accountability for regional competitiveness.
The Real Choice
Canterbury is competing against regions worldwide that coordinate effectively. Regions that coordinate effectively, whether through unitary authorities, regional development agencies, or other models - compete better than fragmented districts. Internationally, successful regions from Bavaria to British Columbia coordinate economic development, infrastructure, and talent strategies at regional scale.
Canterbury has all the assets to compete with them. What we lack is the institutional architecture to coordinate those assets effectively.
The government's proposal doesn't solve this. It makes it worse by removing what little regional coordination exists without building anything better.
The choice is whether Canterbury presents itself as one coordinated region ready to compete globally, or continues as ten separate districts competing with each other while losing talent and investment to regions that have their act together. This consultation is asking whether we support eliminating regional councillors. That's the wrong question. The right question is: does Canterbury need stronger or weaker capability to coordinate economic development, infrastructure investment, and talent retention across district boundaries? Does this proposal strengthen or weaken that capability?
Regional governance isn't about bigger councils. It's about whether Canterbury can coordinate well enough to compete, grow, and provide opportunities for the next generation. The government's proposal abandons that possibility at exactly the moment we need it most.
Dr Deon Swiggs is Chair of Environment Canterbury and Chair of the LGNZ Regional Sector. Government consultation closes February 20, 2026: https://consultations.digital.govt.nz/simplifying-local-government/proposal