KEY POINTS:
Four years on, the "what if" has occurred.
Where's the man of principle I went in to bat for six years ago? Just when new North Shore Mayor Andrew Williams has the opportunity to scrap the anachronistic council prayer he once campaigned so vigorously against, it looks as though he's going to chicken out and thank God for appointing him to office.
Are there no heroes left?
Back in November 2001, as a new first-time councillor, Mr Williams caused a wonderful furore by speaking out against the Christian prayer intoned by Mayor George Wood at the beginning of council meetings. "In this country it is illegal to impose your religious beliefs on others," thundered Mr Williams in an email to fellow councillors.
The prayer is "offensive and objectionable". People "of any religious persuasion are now a very small part of New Zealand society and there simply is no justification in mixing religion with politics or local government".
For the next two years, Mr Williams battled away, with great gusto but little success, and was then kicked out of office. Now, against the odds, he's unseated the great defender of the prayer, Mr Wood, and is mayor himself. Council procedure ordains that on October 30, it will be Mayor Williams who opens the first council meeting of the new era by seeking the wisdom and guidance of God.
My first reaction when I heard the shock North Shore result was, well that's the end of the prayer. But it seems not. Mr Williams tells my colleague Wayne Thompson that "I won't be revisiting the prayer issue. I'll be going along with the councillors' view on that".
Talk about He who moves in mysterious ways.
Back in 2003, Mr Williams particularly objected to the part of the prayer which acknowledged councillors had a calling from God to run the city affairs. "I don't have a calling from God to be there and I don't get my wisdom and guidance from God," he complained.
Now he has to decide whether or not to mouth the words he doesn't believe in, and more to the point, doesn't think should feature in a secular setting such as a city council meeting.
At the climax of the two-year-long battle, Mr Williams remained staunch. In August 2003 after a 10-3 vote by councillors to boot a Human Rights Commission conciliator out of a council meeting and stick with the prayer, Mr Williams said it was "unfinished business" and floated alternatives such as a "neutralised vow" or a moment of silent reflection.
He also looked ahead. "This is one of the few places in the country where there is a council effectively imposing religion as part of its resolutions. What if a mayor is elected in 2004 or 2007 who doesn't agree with that stance but is told it is a resolution and they have to say those words?" What if, indeed. Four years on, the "what if" has occurred and he now has to face up to answering what was, until now, a rhetorical question. He has two choices: be bullied into saying "those words" that he once found so objectionable, or stand tall and do what he knows is right.
Let me remind him what he told me earlier on. Councillors were not called by the Christian God, they were elected by the citizens of North Shore; Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindu and non-believers among them. The prayer ritual was "a farce" and North Shore should follow the non-prayer traditions of grown-up cities such as Auckland, Wellington and Christchurch.
He said if the mayor wanted to pray he should do it in private beforehand. If others wanted to, they should join him. I agreed then and do now.
At one stage of the earlier debate, Mr Williams claimed victory when Mayor Wood proposed to pray first, then formally call the meeting to order. This meant Mr Williams had to lurk in an ante-chamber until he heard the mumbled amen, then make a sprint for his seat. As he later conceded, this was not a victory at all. Apart from the indignity to himself, for the mayor to impose prayers on the public and officers is wrong. "He doesn't know what the public's feeling is, or the officers."
Your arguments remain as strong as ever, Mr Williams. But what about you?
