Cuts debate

I NOTE with interest readers’ scathing comments about Rod Oram’s spirited defence of Auckland Council’s financial problems (SST, July 27). As an elected member I have attended many seminars where Oram has apparently been contracted to promote council’s view. In spite of his skilful presentations there has been a lack of substance and real information on which elected members can base important decision-making. Debate and incisive questioning is strongly discouraged and any feedback is primary-school style via felt-tip pens on sheets of butcher’s paper. Even then the information is hidden from public scrutiny. The collective council mind seems to have been predetermined, with the only goal to sell the product to the unfortunate elected members.

Important policy-making needs to be in the open with full information, facts and options available to elected members. Full written reports should be provided and if Power Point presentations are made, the copies should not be collected in case they end up in the ‘‘wrong’’ hands. It’s no wonder that the PR-style, substance-lacking sessions have led to the

council appearing to be both broke and broken. Dr Grant Gillon, member Devonport/ Takapuna and Kaipatiki Local Boards Rod Oram replies: My opinions are my own. I look forward to debating them with Dr Gillon. But first he would need to identify where we disagree, and to offer evidence for his position.