Council TV unlikely to add value to local democracy
In most places, only a handful of people tune in.
There’s an insane appetite among some sections of the community for watching reality TV shows, no matter how banal or cringeworthy the subject matter.
But for Palmerston North city councillors to imagine there would be a desire to watch their dreary processes in the council chamber is really quite egotistical.
The council debated at its last meeting of the year whether it should spend some $55,000 on fancy gear and $20,000 a year to run it, to live stream its meetings to the disenchanted world. Or alternatively, it could try a cheap and cheerful feed through its Facebook page. Lots of other councils are doing it, and experience around the country has had largely muted, if mixed results. In most places, only a handful of people tune in.
Some of those watchers are janine.rankin@fairfaxmedia.co.nz
council staff, carrying on with their other duties somewhere else in the building with one eye on the screen, waiting for a cue about it being their turn to pop into the meeting to present a report.
Horowhenua District Council launched its live stream in stellar form in December, with some 3300 clicks on its meeting. In a council where the majority of councillors were determined to overturn mayor Michael Feyen’s choice of deputy mayor, it could be fair to say there was an element of entertainment or cringe factor influencing the numbers. That might not be a useful indication of how many people are really that interested in watching democracy in action.
Councils have convinced themselves, rightly or wrongly, that putting their meetings on show contributes to open and transparent government. Some even think it’s worth spending heaps of ratepayers’ money on it. We are deeply sceptical.
Of course, the big brother of government, Parliament itself, is available to view. The numbers watching are not religiously catalogued, given its noncommercial nature.
However, there is a six-monthly online audience survey across our channels, estimating that 560,000 adult New Zealanders viewed Parliament – on both free-to-air and pay TV channels – in the half year to December this year. That’s about 18 per cent of the adult population. Despite the small audience, ensuring the transparency of parliamentary proceedings is an important consideration. Audience surveys indicate that more than 76 per cent of adult New Zealanders consider it ‘‘very’’ or ‘‘quite important’’ that broadcasts are available on free-toair TV.
But back to the council chamber. There has to be some doubt about whether the most interesting aspects of council debates are, actually, audible, visible and able to be broadcast. Even as the Palmerston North City Council appeared to be focused on debating what to do, there was a sub-text going on. Councillors were busy playing with their devices.
Cr Duncan Mccann was experimenting with recording a part of the meeting and preparing to live stream it on Facebook. Another councillor was watching him, immediately alert to what he was doing, and then texting chief executive Paddy Clifford to tell him about it.
That led to Mccann being told he had just broken one of the rules of standing orders, by recording part of a meeting without first notifying the chairman. This raises suspicion about how much of councillors’ interactions, even at meetings, are going on by text and email and whatever else they use.
Some of the current councillors thought it was a huge advance when Palmerston North became the first council in New Zealand to introduce electronic voting, at a cost of $15,000, in 2012. The theory was that once councillors had to vote independently and unaware of how other councillors were voting, they would somehow be more honest in how they cast their vote, not influenced by what others were doing.
It is acknowledged that the system provides a reliable way of recording who voted which way on any topic. But some of us were never quite convinced the clunky technology that seems to be forever breaking down was warranted or necessary. And as to this independence thing, and the quest for openness and transparency, that little three-way exchange has aroused some suspicions.
How many councillor conversations are going on below the radar? Are they texting each other to discuss who is going to speak next and who is going to support who on particular votes? The live stream might not capture that.
End Notes
So Palmerston North’s mayor is not perfect, but he is improving. Grant Smith is spending the Christmas break recovering from hip surgery.
He says he is feeling better every day and now has a first-hand understanding of what people with disabilities and mobility issues have to go through – coping with things like footpaths, steps, toilets, parking, even getting in and out of vehicles. Apparently his New Year resolution is to be more sympathetic when the Disabled Persons Assembly raises issues.