The long-awaited media policy has finally been adopted by council with some councillors calling it a “gagging” and a violation of their human rights.
The six-page document appears to mimic other council media policies around Queensland, and CEO Rachel Brophy consulted with the LGAQ and looked at other policies to construct this one. Tabled documents call the new policy “best practice”.
But four out of nine councillors would have none of it during the ordinary meeting of council last week.
The purpose of the new policy states to “ensure there is a consistent and coordinated approach to interacting with the media”.
Cr Bartley says the new policy “effectively goes toward gagging elected members to a large degree”. In the past, he says, “we’ve always been able to give a personal opinion”.
Mayor Melissa Hamilton told The Town & Country Journal that councillors can continue to give their personal opinion, as long as they say it is their personal opinion.
Cr Bartley went on to point out that if a comment “has any denigrating effect on council then we have contravened the policy” and that he has “always been led to believe that we can always espouse a personal opinion as long as we make sure it is clearly articulated as a personal opinion.”
The clause that Cr Bartley referred to, in fact, means that councillors are not allowed to make personal slurs against each other or council, which is already in line with the Queensland Code of Conduct.
The policy, which, rightly or wrongly, mimics others in the state, states that the mayor is the “official spokesperson” and takes “precedence over a councillor, at their discretion” and that “elected members who have voted against a majority decision or who have declared a conflict of interest in a decision, will not be asked to be the spokesperson for that decision”.
Cr Windle defended the new policy saying that “it’s there to protect us as councillors as well.”
Cr Russell Wantling agreed with Cr Bartley.
“Councillors are elected to speak on behalf of their communities even when this means disagreeing with the majority. Any policy that limits the voice risks gagging councillors and undermining the very principles of local democracy.”
The mayor pointed to a clause which seems to contradict the notion of gagging.
As members of the community, elected members are entitled to enter into public debate in their private capacity and make comment on Council affairs.
However, the very next clause could be construed as a contradiction as Cr Bartley pointed out.
Council officials must support Council decisions and must refrain from using the media to make negative personal reflections on each other, Council or Council officers, or comments that could be interpreted as such, and/or which are reasonably likely to undermine public confidence in the Council or local government generally.
Furthermore, the new policy states that “requests for interviews on Council matters must be directed to the Media and Communications Coordinator and Officer(s) who will liaise with the Mayor and CEO to determine the most appropriate spokesperson to undertake the interview, having regard to this policy and councillor portfolios.”
Mayor Hamilton indicated that she didn’t see a contradiction.
The media, of course, is not held to council policy and can contact who they believe is relevant to a story. The new policy seems to mean that if a reporter contacts a councillor, the councillor must direct the reporter to the communications department. Mayor Hamilton, however, says that councillors can contact the media, as long as they don’t make personal slangs or misrepresent council decisions. Expressing the reasons for holding a dissenting opinion, she told the paper, is allowable, as long as the majority decision is acknowledged.
“We are elected to support council decisions. Whether we are all in agreeance or not, once the decision is made, we are meant to actually accept that decision and move on.”
The Mayor said that councillors “have to strive to maintain and strengthen the public’s trust and confidence in the integrity of local government.”
Cr Cynthia McDonald said that the new policy has “potential contraventions” to the Queensland Human Rights Act of 2019, specifically in that councillors must now “liaise with the CEO, Mayor and or media communications coordinator and officer prior to making comments on official laws,” and “must support council decisions”.
“I believe this policy may not comply”, she said. “Every person has the right to hold an opinion without interference” and “the right to freedom of speech and expression which includes the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds” whether “orally, in writing, in print, by way of art, or in another medium chosen by that person.”
Specific clauses in the policy that contradict the Human Rights Act were not described, however.
Cr Richters agreed with some of the policy but not about barring dissenting views. He acknowledged the code of conduct but added that “each individual here is elected and each individual here has an opinion and provided that opinion is their opinion and that they acknowledge that It’s not the opinion of the majority council then they should be free to make those opinions public.”
“That’s just shutting down public discourse”, he said, and asked for a revision to the policy, one that doesn’t “target councillors when they’re acting in their private capacities.”
“Until that can happen, I just can’t support it.”
Whether the four dissenting councillors have misinterpreted the new policy or are simply baulking at perceived top-down control, they are clearly signalling that they feel gagged, sidelined or controlled. This, of course, is a problem for the mayor, especially in light of shortened meetings, the near-abandonment of general business as an open forum, and the perception that more decisions are being delegated to staff than was the historic norm.
Cr Morwenna Harslett, Cr Carla Pidgeon, Cr Sarah Deane, Cr Sheryl Windle and Cr Melissa Hamilton voted in favour of the new policy, which was not addressed by the mayor in her recorded public “wrap up” of the meeting.
