JURY DID SELFLESS JOB

TOO often, the intelligence of Geelong citizens has been insulted by our former mayor.

The Geelong Citizen’s Jury is a revolutionary approach to test democracy; to see if unbiased, unconnected and unaccustomed citizens can be put together under assiduously moderated circumstances around “mutual respect and equal say”, to reach consensus about something that is central to our lives.

We were an eclectic group of 100. I knew no one there. We had somehow to work together over what turned out to be many days to reach consensus on how the mayor and councillors could be elected, where possible, avoiding vested interest and other traps and mistakes of the past.

Our recommendations included citizen education about the relevant skill base of standing candidates so we are better informed about their capacities to undertake such key roles. We recommended Skype to inform citizens during council meetings. This simple medium can improve councillor behaviour and adherence to best practice.

For councillors to work equally for all, and not more favourably for some, a lot of things need to change. Another recommendation was civic education about councillor rights and responsibilities and council “code of conduct”.

This 100-strong Geelong jury came from diverse culture, occupations, ages and abilities, political persuasion and ways of life. There, I met wonderful managers, nurses, unemployed people, retirees, students, grandparents, migrants, executives and civil servants who were together becoming passionate about our city’s ethical governance.

This closely monitored, impartial and empowering process was found to be without bias. Everyday Australians, under the probity of absolute transparency and rules of “respect and equal say” can produce amazingly informed, positive outcomes for our society. Monica Walters, Herne Hill