Open meetings for City Council committees

Press, Volume CXIV, Issue 33580, 8 July 1974, Page 12

Open meetings for City Council committees

The Mayoral candidate nominated by the Citizens’ Association (Cr H. G. Hay) intends to move, at the next meeting of the Christchurch City Council, that the meetings of the standing committees of the council be opened to representatives of the news media and to members of the public. The step should encourage greater public awareness of local body affairs. Many of the council’s important decisions are made in committees: the full council confirms them without much discussion or explanation. The argument that citizens have a right to know what discussion preceded the taking of these decisions is telling. Electors would be better able to judge the performance of individual councillors. The qualities that make for a good councillor — diligence, awareness of the issues, and reasonableness are among them — would often be seen better in committees than in the full, open council meetings where, too often, party loyalty or a wish to exploit an issue for electoral advantage — take precedence over reasoned and informed deliberation. Open committee meetings are less likely than full council meetings to become forums for electioneering. The work would probably be followed closely only by those who have a special interest in the business of the committee; if the members of the committee are conscious of the fact that they have a knowledgeable audience they may be induced to restrict their argument to the business in hand and avoid the scoring of party or personal points.

Party affiliations among councillors often seem to be put before the reasoned and deliberate handling of business. Party groupings enable voters to choose between candidates who have identified themselves with certain policies and with specific programmes and to expect with some confidence that those elected will act as they have promised. One result of the introduction of the ward system by the Christchurch City Council may be that electors will rely less on party affiliations to identify candidates. Electors will be able to focus their attention on fewer candidates than before and they may pay more regard to individual statements and to the abilities and interests that candidates have demonstrated. A chance to observe councillors at their committee work would undoubtedly be informative, and some who have not achieved prominence through their performances in full council meetings might show to advantage at the committee tables.

The dangers which the Mayor (Mr N. G. Pickering) sees in having open committee meetings are probably less serious than he supposes. Many of them would be avoided if the council waited before opening its committee meetings until after Parliament amended the Public Bodies Meetings Act so that its provisions applied to committee meetings as well as full meetings of such local bodies as the Christchurch City Council. If confidentiality were important to the conduct of business, the meetings could be closed. There is no need to fear, as the Mayor apparently does, that if committee meetings were, as a rule, open to the public, councillors would feel that they must deal with sensitive issues outside the formal bodies of the council. The decision on opening committee meetings could have a significant impact on the conduct of local body affairs. It should not be made hastily, and certainly need not be made at the next meeting of the council. Nor is it the sort of issue that could be properly dealt with during an election campaign. But the idea should not be dismissed without being given careful consideration.