“CONSULTATION can always be improved and I am a strong supporter of the council’s Community Consultation Committee. When asked if residents should be able to address council meetings, I had suggested that pre-meeting procedures involving planning conferences, forums, community surveys and written submissions were sufficient avenues to engage without adopting this suggestion. This does not mean that other methods of consultation should not be investigated. Nothing should discourage residents from making a submission, unfortunately few do.”
Cr Steven Tang, Glen Eira Council. – Leader, Sept.8th: 2009
We beg to differ Cr. Tang! When figures for interviews, forums, questionnaires, focus groups are all lumped together as they are in the Annual Report (Page 82), then it is quite misleading to assume that Council’s consultation methods are truly multi-faceted, or that the community repeatedly fails to avail itself of the opportunities provided. By and large, the only way that the community gets a ‘formal’ look in is via formal submissions and public questions.
We’ve therefore taken the trouble to quantify our assertions – to present facts rather than spiel. Our analysis includes all public minutes from December 16, 2008 until November 3rd, 2010. That is, the current reign of these councillors. We cannot, of course, vouch for the total number of contacts such as phone calls, emails, letters, private meetings that may have occurred. These are never published so that the community actually never gets to know such vital statistics as: how many complaints have been registered? How many compliments have been registered? How many queries have been successfully answered? And the most important, how ‘satisfied’ are residents following their contact with council and councillors? Our figures reveal:
501 separate approaches to council
258 known individuals who either submitted public questions or submissions. We listed the names a few posts back. The ‘unknowns’ include:
8 individuals signing a petition;
14 ‘unknown’ on amendment C75;
2 ‘unknowns’ on Council Plan;
23 ‘unknowns’ on Bicycle Strategy;
1 ‘unknown’ on Early childhood Development Plan;
18 ‘unknown’ on Toilet Strategy;
5 ‘unknown’ on amendment C76;
23 ‘unknown’ on Street Tree Strategy.
Our analysis also revealed a total lack of consistency in process and policy as to the publication of submissions. For example, those submissions falling under Section 223 of the Local Government Act revealed the names of correspondents. Others, that fell outside these parameters were ‘revealed’ only, it seems, when it was politically advantageous, or fairly innocuous. Those issues that could be expected to draw major criticisms were deemed ‘not suitable for publication’! We have the full submissions on the Toilet Strategy, and the environmental strategy (the latter including names), yet the Planning Scheme Review, Bicycle Strategy submissions are totally missing. Why? What is council’s real agenda here? Why do they publish some submissions yet ‘hide’ others and in the case of the Planning Scheme Review, and the Early Childhood Development Policy, offer only a bare skeletal, so-called ‘summary’. If toilets can be given the spotlight, then surely something as fundamental as the Planning Scheme also needs to be put under full scrutiny?
The most important finding however relates to outcomes. We repeat our previous questions. We want to know:
- Of all those individuals and groups who bothered to write, were they ‘satisfied’ with the outcome(s)/responses?
- Were they even answered? Ie. what’s been done about the petition?
This is our ‘hidden agenda’. We request all those people and groups that we’ve previously listed, contact us (gedebates@gmail.com) and let us know exactly how ‘satisfied’ they are with the manner in which their submissions, questions and petitions were responded to and acted upon. Did your viewpoint or suggestions actually change anything? Were your problems attended to, fixed up? Were the answers provided accurate and relevant? Or were you simply fobbed off?
This council, the administration and councillors must now be called to account by YOU, THE PUBLIC. Their failures should be exposed, and where relevant, the ‘successes’ highlighted. But most importantly the community has to judge performance on outcomes and decide whether we want these same individuals to continue being councillors and administrators.
More detailed analysis will appear in the days ahead.
Glen Eira Debates 
November 17, 2010 at 3:11 PM
When councillors vote in unanimously local laws and codes of conduct that restrict free speech and blatantly gag any oppositiion then its fair game to suspect that there is much to hide. When they don’t even see the need for residents on committees then there’s simply no hope. I’ve watched this council over many many years and whats been happening in the past five years is probably the worst example we’ve ever had of collusion and secrecy. I can’t have any respect for councillors that repeatedly ignore what the people say they want and continually fall into line with the autocrats sitting pretty as unelected officials. They must all be gotten rid of.
November 17, 2010 at 9:53 PM
Reading the last set of minutes, council officers have been given the brief to go away and have a look at the 6 steps consultation policy. I’m not too optimistic as to the recommendations that will be forthcoming. It just amazes me time and time again why councillors don’t simply set the agenda and tell officers this is what we want, now go away and produce the necessary documents. It isn’t rocket science after all. Consultation is simple but the guidelines should specify that if a project is to affect say 20% of the community then at least 3 methods of consultation need to take place. Cut out the middle men – those expensive ‘consultants’ who provide what officers direct anyway, and start talking with residents. Ask them directly what they want. But don’t go through the farce of providing one solution as with the sell off of Packer park, and then use the answers to this as the basis for coming up with another hairbrained alternative such as a replacement minibowls/petanque/croquet pitch. The easiest question to ask is WHAT DO YOU WANT isn’t it? If you’re really serious and prepared to listen to what people have to say, then they will tell you. The sad part is that past experience has told many residents that it’s not even worth the effort since nothing ever comes of their ideas and input. There’s no-one else to blame for this except councillors.
November 17, 2010 at 10:46 PM
You asked about how satisfied I am. I attended the Tucker Ward forum which was 3 weeks ago. Many issues were raised there. So far no response from any councillor and nothing on the website to indicate to those who attended that anything had been taken up. Even a simple letter would have been appreciated since we all had to sign on. Things shouldn’t operate like this. When people give up their evenings they have a right to know what the outcomes of the meeting was. I shouldn’t have to start ringing every single councillor to find out what they’ve done about anything. It should be made available via website, letter, public notice, council meeting or whatever it takes. But the forum has come and gone and I’m not any the wiser about anything.
November 18, 2010 at 8:05 AM
What do you expect? It only takes several hundred votes for these people to be elected to council.
On top of that, we have several current and former councillors blogging right here under the “anonymous” tag. Gutsy effort from people elected to do a job but otherwise just stir the pot.