Barring the public and the media from council information sessions spurred an epic and occasionally elegant debate in chambers last week with a one-vote victory for Mayor Melissa Hamilton.
Cr Ross Bartley has repeatedly asked for information sessions to be open to the public and admonished council for not creating a set policy in a timely manner.
When the policy was finally introduced last week, it disappointed half of council, who didn’t vote for it, but satisfied the other half.
The debate can be boiled down to three streams. The conventional, and LGAQ supported position is that councillors should have closed sessions where they, and SDRC staff, feel comfortable to talk over issues outside of the public gaze. The progressive vision is to give constituents complete transparency about the decision-making process and open information sessions to the public and media. Cr Richters provided a different approach, arguing that the SDRC take the lead in Australia and develop an innovative policy that bridges the gap and sets an entirely new standard.
The debate over public access was extensive enough to push the ordinary meeting of council over the one-hour mark for the first time in several months.
Mayor Hamilton fully supported the new tabled policy which denies access except by rare invitation to members of the public. Her considered argument included pointing out that such policy was typical of most councils in Australia. She also argued that “any decisions of council must be made in an open meeting” anyway and no decisions are made in workshops or briefing sessions.
“I have not yet found another council in Queensland or, in fact, in Australia that opens their briefing sessions to the public.”
The Mayor also explained that the absence of statutory power to move briefing or information session into confidential mode if required is lacking. She added that closed meetings were the norm in previous councils as well. “While some sessions have been open in the past, many were closed for exactly the same reasons I have made today.”
If the public want to be involved, there are myriad avenues already open including deputations, meeting, petitions, public engagement sessions, submissions and similar.
Four of the nine councillors rejected the new policy. Cr Bartley complained that council was “making policy on the run.” The Mayor sharply disagreed saying that the draft policy has been circulated for some time.
Cr Bartley expressed his disappointment in a policy that limits public access. He pointed out that the public were invited to information sessions in the past which “worked very well”. He disparaged elements of the draft policy. “This contravenes itself in that we’re not supplying transparency at all, we’re closing them basically. It’s to give the community a reason why we won’t be allowing them into our information sessions, that’s what this policy does.”
Cr Wantling gave an impassioned statement saying that the new policy is “a fundamental shift in how we engage with the very people we were elected to represent.”
The bigger issue, Cr Wantling said, was around legality versus principle. “I reviewed the Local Government Act 2009 and while it doesn’t ban closed door workshops it does set out foundational principles we are supposed to abide by with transparency and effectiveness. Does this policy reflect those values? I don’t believe it does. In fact, I believe it is in conflict with the spirit and arguably the intent of the Act.”
Cr Sarah Deane, Cr Morwenna Harslett, and Cr Carla Pigeon all spoke in favour of the policy.
“I’m basically saying the same as what Cr Bartley said, but in speaking for [the policy[,” Cr Harslett offered. “Yes, it gives clarity around why there are certain things that we discuss in this room as councillors which need to be kept confidential for lots of different reasons…[the policy] gives clarity around these questions so that people in the public understand why there are some things that you do get an invitation to come along and listen to and some things you don’t.”
“Having a gallery in every information session will restrict the information being presented by staff,” Cr Deane agreed.
“There’s been a lot of good points raised for and against,” said Cr Pigeon. “I am for the policy. I believe that I want to be part of a progressive council; I want to see us move forward for the region and I believe this policy allows us to do so.”
Cr Joel Richters took the position that openness is the preferred position and that he “had great hopes when we first were talking about this policy” and that he would have preferred “to see this policy’s default position be that the sessions are open to the public” and find a way to have confidential discussions when required.
“There HAS to be a way for us to be able to do that. And if we are the ones that lead the charge then maybe we need to set the standard and make what we do unique.”
The policy passed with five councillors in support and four against.
The public and the media will not be allowed access to SDRC Information Sessions.
