Thank you for the opportunity to present to Council and I congratulate
the new and returning councillors. Today I am presenting as Co-
convenor of A Better Eurobodalla, a community forum dedicated to
achieving open, accountable and responsive government in our
Eurobodalla region.
The agenda papers I am commenting on are:
FCS24/050 Policy Review – Code of Meeting Practice and
FCS24/051 Council Submission to the Office of Local Government
on the draft new framework for councillor conduct and meeting
practices.
To deal first with the Policy Review – Code of Meeting Practice. It is
pleasing to see Council thinking about how best to conduct its meetings.
It is worth noting that the current code of meeting practice was only
adopted in July 2023 and was the subject of considerable community
interest and engagement.
I am commenting only on one recommendation that I believe to be
contrary to public interest and that has been canvassed and commented
on at length previously.
First:
- Clause 3.4 change from “Approved speakers at the public forum are
encouraged to provide a written copy of their address to the Council by
12.00pm the business day prior to the meeting” to “Approved speakers
at the public forum must provide a written copy of their address to the
Council by 12.00pm the business day prior to the meeting”.
And
- Clause 3.28 as per point 3 above, for public access sessions, replace
“encouraged to provide” with “must”. Appendix B also amended to
replace “are encouraged to” with “must”.
These proposed changes take us back to the arrangements that existed
under the unlamented reign of the previous General Manager and the
Council before last. They were changed for good reasons. I take no
issue with the other recommendation that community members indicate
whether they support a recommendation or not.
But to the replace the word ‘encourage’ with ‘must’ as it relates to
advance copies of presentations to Public Access or Public Forums is a
significant issue.
A Better Eurobodalla and, I believe, the majority of speakers at Public
Forum and Public Access take the task of preparing and presenting to
our elected representatives very seriously. We research and prepare our
arguments responding to agenda papers and issues that we are only
made aware of when the agenda becomes available on the Wednesday
before a council meeting. A midday Monday deadline gives us
essentially 4 and ½ days to research and write a paper.
We all have other lives and responsibilities. Many of us are employed, or
active in the community in a voluntary capacity or are carers, or are
managing major health issues. That extra 24 hours until 12:30 Tuesday
allows for better considered and developed presentations to Council.
Sure, if our presentations are ready let’s give them to you early but to
prescribe this is onerous.
The other serious concern is that providing an early written presentation
allows for Councillors to potentially be briefed on the content of the
presentation before the meeting and before they have had the chance to
hear and question the presenter. I can hear the objections to that now –
‘this doesn’t happen’. To that I say that we know that in the past it has
happened and while we hope that is not the current practice, best
practice is to avoid that possibility.
Now to comment on Council Submission to the Office of Local
Government on the draft new framework for councillor conduct and
meeting practices.
The Office of Local Government have put forward a considered and
thoughtful paper. I support the logic and hence quote for the paper:
Strong and thriving communities need effective local government. No
other level of government is as close to the issues and people.
How councillors act and how appropriately and transparently decisions
are made at meetings is critical in demonstrating to the community that
their elected representatives understand the consequences of their
decisions, and then make the best possible decisions they can for their
community as a whole.
Unfortunately, the existing councillor conduct framework is not delivering
on the need for transparency or the necessary degree of respect in the
community for the role that councillors have.
Closed council briefing sessions are being used to make decisions away
from the public view.
Communities and councillors report that council decision making is not
transparent – with decisions being seen as made behind closed doors,
information not being provided or withheld, too much use of closed to the
public briefings or councils going into closed sessions for no adequate
rationale.
The arguments previously put forward for not opening briefing sessions
to the public range from:
This is not needed because no decisions are made at briefing
sessions, to
Councillors would be embarrassed to ask uninformed questions of
council staff if members of the public would witness this.
And from today’s agenda paper the premise put forward is that ‘For
such detailed briefings to be made open to the public, would be
unworkable’ but without a cogent supporting argument for this
position.
Again, from the agenda paper: For a councillor to be able to
contribute, make informed decisions and participate in integrated
planning and reporting, regular, detailed briefings from Council
staff are essential. Briefings give staff the opportunity to provide
detailed information and presentations to councillors and answer
complex questions, enabling informed decision making and debate
to take place during Council meetings.
A good argument,
but then the statement: c) Council is unsure how councillors would
be able to digest and understand information in a Council meeting
where they are required to make a decision, without having been
briefed beforehand.
There is no suggestion from OLG that briefing cannot take place,
simply that the public would be entitled to attend such briefings. There
should be no impact on statutory timelines, or the quality of briefing
material provided to councillors. If there are genuine matters, where
commercial in confidence or legal confidentiality is required then
clearly such provisions as currently apply to these matters would
continue. I say this mindful of the overuse of confidentiality provisions
that has occurred in the past.
Also from the paper: f) There is also a concern that open public
briefings could lead to the voices of the loudest being heard, which
may not in fact be representative of the community. Would the
public be able to ask questions, or speak?
The public can simply be observers of a briefing, as they are for most
of each council meetings, excluding Public Forum. Hence no
problem of ‘the voices of the loudest’ dominating.
The agenda paper seems to put forward the argument that either
briefing sessions are closed to the public or they don’t happen. The
OLG paper does not suggest this. Open and transparent information
sharing and decision making are two of the hallmarks of good
governance. Contrary to the agenda paper, there is no suggestion by
OLG that briefings take place during a Council meeting. Briefings can
happen in the timeframe that now exists.
Also contrary to the agenda paper, there should be only a positive
impact on councillors’ capacity to discuss matters with their
constituents prior to decision making taking place in the Council
meeting. An informed community is an educated community.
The issue of mayors being able to have private briefing sessions will
be a choice for our mayor. He may choose to do so but then normal
briefings would continue for other councillors, just with members of
the public being able to attend.
Thank you
Bernie O’Neil
Co-convenor
A Better Eurobodalla
18 November 2024
A Better Eurobodalla 