‘Interactive Democracy’ is a recent catch phrase that sums up the basic principles involved in any form of duly elected government i.e. the free flow of two directional information between constituents and the elected body. A recent survey of Okara Ward (sample size was 300 and the margin of error was + 3.1%) indicates a problem that goes deeper than listening skills.

While only a mere 12.3% of the constituency feels that the Council even listens to them, only 5.3% feel that the Council is responsive to what they hear regarding the public’s expressed needs and requirements. Overwhelmingly the constituency is saying that our two Councils disregard the public voice, with nearly two thirds (65.3%) convinced that the Councils are deaf. While this may to some extent be influenced by the recent rejection, by both councils, of a public petition requesting a referendum on the desire to proceed with the Northland Events Centre, it is supported by an additional survey questions that indicates a severe loss of faith and trust in our Councils.  A significant majority of the constituency thought that the Councils were not acting in the public’s best interest with 64.3% of all respondents indicating that they do not feel they received value for money by way of the rates paid in the district. Further, Council seems to be ignoring 71% of ratepayers who wish to retain ownership of the Town Basin land.

If not deaf, then, the only other explanation is a closed mind that wishes to avoid any confusion by hearing new information.  The Local Authorities (Members’ Interests) Act 1968 is quite clear on situations where public officials, as decision-makers, have a “closed mind” and are not prepared to listen fairly to all of the arguments.  That is called “Predetermination” and is unacceptable under the law.  The Controller and Auditor-General’s published advice on such bias is that the question is not limited just to actual bias, but relates to the appearance or possibility of such bias.  In the case of Whangarei’s Councils such “appearance” is apparently huge!  Can almost two thirds of the public be so pathetically wrong?! 

Listening openly and fairly is not hard.  It can partially be done via submissions and public hearings.  Sadly, though, these require considerable effort on the part of the individual citizen and as we have learned above, he or she is so disillusioned that making such effort seems a waste and most don’t try.  This leads to a vicious circle where the few submissions or “mass” submissions precipitated by a particular interest group become easy for Council members to disregard as not truly representing the public’s interests or concerns.  Until faith is restored in our local government these channels will continue to produce minimal results.  That leaves surveys and referendums as a means of gathering credible, statistically accurate, court defensible information on citizens’ interests, desires and concerns. 

WDC has recently doubled its Communication budget to $400,000. It seems to be doing a lot of talking, but surely some of these funds can be used for conducting such surveys and referendums.  These instruments should be constructed by professional, outside sources that have the expertise to formulate unbiased questions that do not in any way shape responses.  Further, the analyses of results should be left to independent experts.  There is no defensible reason why WDC can not and should not be using this means of interactive communication with its constituents.  Further, individual Councillors should be using surveys within their Wards to ensure they are in touch with the people who elected them… this is particularly crucial in Wards that are geographically difficult to cover just by “walking the talk.”
Surely referenda and surveys are powerful tools to enable council to listen to their customers, the ratepayers. Then all we need is the political will to be responsive to the customers’ wishes.