Editorial: Fortress mentality at Civic House?

It is easy to fling accusations at local authorities that they are too fond of secrecy. Sometimes, our councils do seem to be overly cautious and reluctant to reveal information that might be considered sensitive.

Attempts by various media to access the details of funding arrangements for events such as the World of WearableArts awards show (Wellington) or the Ellerslie Flower Show (Christchurch) were fraught with frustration.

Details of past negotiations around Nelson's performing arts centre have been similarly locked down. The Tasman District Council, meanwhile, fought long and hard to resist Nelson Mail attempts to bring public scrutiny to bear on its potentially contaminated sites list. When finally, reluctantly, its hand was forced, it continued to be more obstructive than necessary.

Generally, however, both councils are comparatively helpful in their dealings with the media. Senior staff are accessible up to a point, though of course are often tied up at meetings. Mayors and councillors from both of the local bodies are also generally available when needed, too – some might hope that they were sought out a little more often, especially those who are seeking re-election in the October elections.

Both councils also have mechanisms to deal with their own "spin" but beyond that, they are usually open about making maps, plans and the like available for reproduction in the Mail, explaining the thinking behind recommended policy shifts.

This is as it should be. As the various ways and means of communicating become increasingly diverse and fragmented, the need for credible and reliable sources of information can only become more important. Clearly, some commercial business must remain confidential, and there are clear, nationally legislated rules surrounding that.

In recent years, the workload of local government has grown with new tasks imposed by Parliament. As unitary authorities, Nelson City and Tasman District already have considerably greater responsibilities compared with most other similar-sized councils.

These pressures have encouraged both of our councils to alter their committee structures in order to seek greater efficiency. Whether this has led to a less democratic arena and greater power to the bureaucracy in the form of senior staff – in particular, the chief executives – is a common perception, but one that is difficult to pin down.

Certainly, there seemed an element of the bizarre in an edict this year banning senior Nelson city councillor Ian Barker from seeking information from staff other than the council's chief executive Keith Marshall.

That this meant an elected representative essentially had less access to council staff than the media would seem, on the surface, to be little less than extraordinary.

However, Mr Barker has enjoyed a reputation of being something of a maverick on the various councils on which he has served.

It is unlikely that such an order would have been imposed had he not pushed his luck too hard and too often.

That he was reluctant to discuss the matter when it arose earlier this month – other than to take a poke at the creeping "fortress mentality" at Civic House – is instructive.

- © Fairfax NZ News