Beehive's campervan blind spot

Insights Newsletter
28 October, 2016

If the mystification around the low local election turnout was not strong enough a signal that officials just do not get local government, the latest freedom camper rules review should amp it up.

The government is anticipating a deluge of freedom campers over the summer and at next year’s British and Irish Lions tour. These visitors are expected to run into a mishmash of different freedom camping rules as they travel the country, and Local Government Minister Peseta Sam Lotu-Iiga wants it sorted out.

From central government’s perspective this makes complete sense. With as many as 1,000 campervans expected for the Lions tour alone, that represents a lot of spending central government get to clip the ticket through GST, PAYE and profit taxes. Consistent and lenient rules would help maximise this stream of revenue.

The only problem is that it severely short-changes local councils, as they get lumped with all the direct costs, such as additional clean up services and the capital expense of upgrading facilities like public toilets. And it is ultimately local residents that pay in the end.

There are indirect costs too. Plans to open land for freedom campers are guaranteed to irritate local residents because they have to live with the noise and litter. Councils bear the brunt of this unhappiness too, to say nothing of the reputational damage from bad press.

There is an upside in that freedom campers boost trade among some local businesses, and these businesses pay rates. But the gains are narrowly focused, difficult to quantify, and do little to quell angry residents.

As such, it is hardly surprising that many councils limit the scale of freedom camping in their jurisdiction with stringent bylaws.

A better way for central government to approach this problem would be to share the economic gains. That way councils would be better able to show communities the local upsides of the activity, and provided the reward is great enough, encourage councils to expand facilities. It is win-win-win.

Based on history, the odds of this happening are low. A more likely outcome is a standardised set of rules being forced on councils. In an environment where local preference is all but entirely disregarded by central government, is it any wonder that the public is largely disengaged with local democracy? 

Stay in the loop: Subscribe to updates