Amalgamation: One Structure. One Voice. One Trust.

The biggest barrier to progress inside the Trusts isn’t a lack of effort or commitment – it’s the structure itself. Too many boards, too many agendas (both political and commercial), and too many chances for accountability to be blurred. That’s why structural change isn’t optional – it’s essential if the Trusts are to move forward.

A Weak Community Shareholder, a Strong Commercial Company

The imbalance lies in the structure. To make sense of many past decisions made through a community–commercial lens, it’s crucial to first understand this structural imbalance. The shareholder boards carry the ownership and the risk – the properties, the frontline staff, the responsibility – yet the tools to exercise that role sit elsewhere.

In the context of power dynamics, the commercial board, through the management company, holds the resources: the expertise, the staff and all the resources, lawyers, consultants etc. Whilst the shareholder boards, split across two trusts are left to scrutinise without the same support (we have been fortunate this term to have lawyers, marketeers, business people).

In our current structure, moving forward in response to community expectations requires unanimity — if even one board is not aligned, community progress stalls. That’s why so often the commercial default wins: it doesn’t need agreement, just a lack of unity on the shareholder side.

A Shift in Culture

This term, things began to change. We pushed back on a strategic plan that ignored hospitality. We asked tough questions on director reappointments instead of rubber-stamping. We initiated a governance review to see whether the structure was still fit for purpose. For me the goal was to reestablish the community voice in a structure that was tiltled toward commerciality.

Together, these moves sent a message: that we aren’t just the half shareholders, we are the community owners.

The Frustrations of This Term

But here’s the reality: progress has often meant resetting the same dynamic over and over. It shouldn’t take this much effort every term just to be heard. The structure itself creates the tension, blurs accountability, and leaves the community voice fighting for space.

Why Amalgamation is the Answer

Amalgamation is how we fix this. By bringing the entities together, we strip out duplication, reduce costs, and remove competing centres of power. Instead of multiple boards and a management company pulling in different directions, we’d have one clear governance structure with a single mandate.

The benefits are obvious: faster decisions, a stronger community voice at the centre, and massive savings in overheads that could go straight back into core business and local giveback.

These problems aren’t about personalities – they’re structural. Amalgamation is the clean, practical solution that makes the Trusts leaner, more accountable, and more responsive to our local community.

Closing Reflection

The past term has shown what’s possible when trustees step up. We’ve shifted the culture, reminded everyone that ownership lies with the community, and opened the door to reform.

But we shouldn’t have to keep fighting the same battles. With amalgamation, we can lock in those gains, remove the distractions, and finally build the kind of Trusts West Auckland deserves – community-owned businesses that deliver more hospitality, more giveback, and more accountability to the people they serve.