Secrecy is at odds with due process

TALKING about transparency and the public's need to know is one thing - but delivering on that is another.

At a time when the Wanganui community wants to know what's going on, its district councillors this week voted to hold their 10-year plan discussions in committee. In other words, the shroud of secrecy came down, and the public and media were barred. Collectively, we're none the wiser.

This council is at a crossroads. It is not all sweetness and light in city hall with strongly differing views around the council table.

Councillors Philippa Baker-Hogan and Rob Vinsen have been two of the more strident voices calling for openness in council deliberations. So the decision of this pair - along with all but one of the other councillors (the exception was Ray Stevens) - to go into committee this week when debating submissions to the 2015-25 plan, was puzzling.

What about the need for the public to know and the call for more transparency? Ironic, isn't it, that Mrs Baker-Hogan and Mr Vinsen, who have accused the council of withholding vital information from the community, hopped on board the secrecy bus at Monday's meeting. They changed their vote at yesterday's meeting, but were outvoted.

Eventually, we will learn what decisions council has taken. It will be by way of a media release or two that has been filtered - first by debate held behind closed doors and then by the council's communications department and only after sign-off by Mayor Annette Main.

We can understand the need for secrecy for matters of commercial sensitivity or staffing issues, but a blanket news blackout is at odds with due process and it is disappointing it got the support it did, especially given the magnitude of issues councillors were debating.

Stifling the voice of elected representatives does a disservice to those who empowered them.