In Porirua, the citizens’ assembly concept was translated into an exercise in co-governance.
In Whanganui, it has become an exercise which will be conducted in secrecy.
The claim that this is enhancing the democracies of the two cities is common to both initiatives.
The appointments of people who sit on the assemblies, rather than electing them, is another.
PoO brought the Porirua Climate Assembly to readers’ attention a few weeks ago.
Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira chief executive Helmut Modlik –in an an article in The Post – had ballyhooed about the assembly in an article headed:
The appointments of people who sit on the assemblies, rather than electing them, is another.
PoO brought the Porirua Climate Assembly to readers’ attention a few weeks ago.
Te Rūnanga o Toa Rangatira chief executive Helmut Modlik –in an an article in The Post – had ballyhooed about the assembly in an article headed:
Porirua showing world better way to do democracy – Te tiriti-style
Modlik described The Porirua Climate Assembly as the first of its kind in the world,
… a dual-chamber citizens’ assembly grounded in tikanga, whakapapa and relationship, not just rules.
It represents a new blueprint for how we, as a nation, can face the climate crisis while honouring our founding partnership — Tangata Whenua and Tangata Tiriti walking forward together, side by side.
The assembly, established in 2021, comprised “two chambers”, one of them
“… a mana whenua chamber which upheld the tikanga, values and obligations of Ngāti Toa Rangatira to this whenua — our home.”
The numbers of Ngati Toa tribal people in this chamber was not revealed in the article, but another report said the total membership of the assembly was 100 citizens.
The other chamber comprised “50 everyday Porirua residents chosen through a fair and representative process that originally targeted 12,000”.
How the members of both chambers were chosen was not explained, but Modlik enthused:
Together, these two chambers wove a shared vision — one that centres rangatahi, protects te taiao, builds local resilience, and empowers communities to act. This is what democracy looks like when it’s truly of the people, by the people, for the people.
While co-governance was the feature of the Porirua assembly, secrecy – so far – has distinguished the exercise further north.
We do know the number of citizens who have volunteered, been head-tapped or been dragooned to serve their community.
A report posted on Scoop says:
A democracy experiment in Whanganui begins under wraps tonight (Tuesday) as the city’s hired pool panel meets behind closed doors.
Whanganui District Council is keeping secret the identities of the 40 residents selected for its inaugural citizens’ assembly, and there will be no public access to the five meetings.
The assembly’s mission is somewhat less challenging than that set for the Porirua assembly, which perhaps explains why a team of 40 rather than 100 will attempt to tackle it.
The citizens’ assembly has been set up to provide recommendations to the council on the future of outdoor swimming facilities on behalf of ratepayers and residents.
The ethnic mix is not mentioned in the Scoop report, but it does say the 40 locals have been “randomly selected” according to Whanganui demographics.
Their names were drawn out of a hat? Or what?
They will be paid $500 each by ratepayers “to get to grips with the issue and come up with answers for the council.”
While the outcome of the initiative would be publicly reported, the council said it was keeping the names of assembly members confidential.
It fears publication of members’ names would “likely discourage” future participation.
“Anonymity allows participants to engage fully, particularly if they wish to offer personal opinions or are involved in controversial topics,” the council’s chief strategy officer Sarah O’Hagan told Local Democracy Reporting (LDR).”
The randomly selected 40 citizens gathered for up to five closed-door sessions, meeting for the first time on Tuesday night at the city’s War Memorial Centre.
The meetings are not being live-streamed.
The council said it was “formally withholding” the names of the participants to protect them from improper pressure or harassment.
“While the citizens’ assembly is underway, we want to provide an environment where the group is free to have discussions without scrutiny on individuals or external pressure,” O’Hagan.
“With this in mind, we have not published the names of individuals selected for the assembly.
“One of the reasons for this is we want to consider using this participatory approach in the future.”
Local Democracy Reporting’s request for the names was treated by the council as a request under the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA).
The council said the names were being withheld to protect the privacy of individuals and to protect “members, officers, employees, and persons from improper pressure or harassment”.
“The council does not consider there to be any public interest that outweighs the need to protect individuals’ privacy and maintain the effective conduct of public affairs,” O’Hagan said.
O’Hagan said after each facilitated session, the meeting run-sheet and high-level minutes would be published on the council website and social media, summarising the process and conversation without identifying individuals.
“In this way the community can keep up-to-date with what’s being discussed at the assembly.
“It’s … really important to us to keep the wider community informed of the group’s progress.”
Important to know what they are doing while they are doing it, but not who they are, in other words.
At least, not for a few weeks.
Representatives of the citizens’ assembly will present the group’s recommendation on the future of outdoor pools to elected members at a livestreamed council meeting in late June.
That meeting will be open to everyone to watch, as is the meeting where elected members consider the recommendation and make their decision, O’Hagan said.
“We’d encourage anyone who’s interested to tune into these livestreamed meetings,” O’Hagan said.
“Once the assembly has concluded, photos and video of the process showing the people involved will be produced.”
Whanganui mayor Andrew Tripe said there was a fine balance between protecting privacy and being transparent.
“The unintended consequences and risks of providing the names of participants to the wider community comes with significant risk – e.g. criticism on social media, blame for any recommendation they make,” Tripe said.
“Being able to participate in the process unencumbered will mean a better process, and – if we agree to undertake the process again – will ensure that other participants step up.
“Obviously the outcome of the process is a recommendation to council and that will be publicly available.”
The citizens’ assembly is based on a concept of participatory democracy originating in ancient Rome.
Bob Edlin is a veteran journalist and editor for the Point of Order blog HERE. - where this article was sourced.
3 comments:
Seems council bureaucrats and councillors are keen to delegate their responsibilities either to maori co-governance trusts or anyone else they can rope in. The ratepayers of course foot the bill while the shiny bottoms from council continue to accept their ever increasing salaries and do even less to earn them. Little wonder NZ has productivity issues and excessively expensive rates bills.
Agree with above comment. Do Councils appoint assembly members who agree with their own views? Don't want to deal with those pesky ratepayers who have different views. The assembly costs should come out of Councillors allowances as the assembly people are doing the Councillors work. Did Councillors ask ratepayers if this was a good idea (they are footing bill after all)
Have the Whanganui District Councillors not heard of opinion polls? Or focus groups? Both standard tools for measuring public opinion in a scientifically measurable way. If they are good enough for every political party to use in formulating policy, what's so different about Whanganui parish pump politics?
Post a Comment