Commentary: They who pay the piper call the tune

JOHN MAFFEY

The author was Head of Social Science at Marlborough Boys’ College.

A recent call from Councillor Deborah Dalliessi for greater voting transparency around the table at MDC meetings can be summed up as support for an openly democratic model of local government.

Why is this not standard procedure, except when privileged information is being debated? A Council closed shop risks losing public confidence.

Councillor Gerald Hope states that open disclosure will lead to “embedded” division in our community. Is this not an archaic idea in 2026? I suggest that openness and honesty with the public creates trust and respect for a diversity of views, in keeping with the community itself.

Having hidden or difficult to trace voting records, as now, disguises or obfuscates how important decisions are made. This denies accountability to ratepayers.

The suggestion from Gerald that an “open book” record may lead to factionalism is not a reason to deny full disclosure of who supports or opposes a proposal.

Factions are the result of favours being granted to some and not others, not because of open decision making.

Gerald’s assertion that cohesion and unity of councillors depend on making it difficult for ratepayers to be informed about how they vote, to me, is a weak basis for cohesion and unity. Of course, a majority vote prevails, but it is only proper that each councillor’s vote is publicized, especially when public interest and concern is heightened.

Voting records at other councils, such as the Christchurch City Council, are published in the media routinely. The majority wins the day without their world falling apart. Why can’t the same happen here?