Post by Kiwi Frontline on Oct 20, 2019 6:19:49 GMT 12
THE DEATH RATTLE OF LOCAL DEMOCRACY – Gerry Eckhoff
What is the point of the oath of office if appointed members with voting rights can virtuously ignore this essential requirement? This oath of office is designed to set aside parochial interests of the duly elected in favour of ensuring all our interests are equally considered. No longer it would seem.
Just prior to the Local Government election, the Otago Regional Council voted (by majority) to appoint two representatives of Ngai Tahu with full voting rights onto the ORC Policy Committee only which deals with the allocation of fresh water and minimum flows. This recent decision from the ORC – in the final days of its train wreck tenure – was as wrong as it was predictable. The question as to why we the people were never consulted over this appointment is obvious. Reserving seats for Ngai Tahu to the full council (and therefore every committee) would have opened up the council up to a petition to hold a referendum of the people of Otago – which could easily have been included in the Local Government election process.
It follows that if two appointments are commendable, why not appoint four or six representatives of Ngai Tahu to the twelve-member council, to make the appointment process gain even more probity in the eyes of some. That is a surprise that awaits us all I suspect.
The question therefore is not whether a council has the authority to make this appointment but whether the council understands the future implications of this decision. The staff reported to council – that this decision gives tangible effect to the Council partnership with Iwi. Really? To what partnership do staff refer? Article 7 or 8 of the Treaty of Waitangi?
The idea of a partnership is simply a political construct devised to give vested interests of Government and Maori “standing” with the wider community while engaging in decisions that should always remain the prerogative of duly elected representatives......
www.nzcpr.com/the-death-rattle-of-local-democracy/#more-30644
What is the point of the oath of office if appointed members with voting rights can virtuously ignore this essential requirement? This oath of office is designed to set aside parochial interests of the duly elected in favour of ensuring all our interests are equally considered. No longer it would seem.
Just prior to the Local Government election, the Otago Regional Council voted (by majority) to appoint two representatives of Ngai Tahu with full voting rights onto the ORC Policy Committee only which deals with the allocation of fresh water and minimum flows. This recent decision from the ORC – in the final days of its train wreck tenure – was as wrong as it was predictable. The question as to why we the people were never consulted over this appointment is obvious. Reserving seats for Ngai Tahu to the full council (and therefore every committee) would have opened up the council up to a petition to hold a referendum of the people of Otago – which could easily have been included in the Local Government election process.
It follows that if two appointments are commendable, why not appoint four or six representatives of Ngai Tahu to the twelve-member council, to make the appointment process gain even more probity in the eyes of some. That is a surprise that awaits us all I suspect.
The question therefore is not whether a council has the authority to make this appointment but whether the council understands the future implications of this decision. The staff reported to council – that this decision gives tangible effect to the Council partnership with Iwi. Really? To what partnership do staff refer? Article 7 or 8 of the Treaty of Waitangi?
The idea of a partnership is simply a political construct devised to give vested interests of Government and Maori “standing” with the wider community while engaging in decisions that should always remain the prerogative of duly elected representatives......
www.nzcpr.com/the-death-rattle-of-local-democracy/#more-30644