|
The public have a right to public information.
The importance of being able to access
information has been brought home to me pretty
vividly over the past couple of months as I
researched the background to Lake Horowhenua,
one of the few major lakes in this country to
remain in Maori ownership. The research was
commissioned by
Phil Taueki, a direct descendent of
paramount chief Taueki who signed the Treaty of
Waitangi for Muaupoko. Unfortunately Mr Taueki
was arrested early in December and faces the
prospect of Christmas in jail because the Crown
refuses to take cognisance of documentation,
which the Courts cannot suppress.
As you can imagine
I am therefore a strong advocate of the
Local Government Official Information and
Meetings Act 1987 (LGOIMA), and I am
delighted the Draco Foundation (who operate
Council Watch) took the time to prepare a
detailed submission for the Law Commission’s
review of this legislation, aptly titled:
The Right to Know.
I’m heartened to
read that the Commission has been greatly
assisted by the published research of Nicola
White and Steven Price, who happens to be my
lawyer. He acted for me when I, as a Horowhenua
District Councillor, was unable to obtain a
legal opinion I wanted to view before voting to
spend a significant amount from a multi-million
dollar Fund established by statute.
The key
principle of LGOIMA is one of availability -
unless there is good reason for withholding it,
all information is deemed to be available to the
public. In this, the Ombudsman is deemed
to be the final arbiter, the place where people
can go if they are not satisfied with the
outcome of an official request to the local
authority. In my case, however the
Ombudsman declined my request.
The Fund in
question was originally established under the
Reserves and Other Lands Disposal Act 1956,
with a provision that the fund was to be used
‘exclusively for the improvement and maintenance
of roads and other amenities within the boundary
of the Foxton Beach Township’. When this
legislation was amended in 1968, the wording
became ‘provision of services and public
amenities for the benefit of the inhabitants of
Foxton Beach Township’. A legal opinion
Council had obtained in 1991 endorsed spending
only within the boundary.
Proper use of
tagged public funds. When the Council
began to consider spending $500,000 on a
swimming pool in Foxton the
Horowhenua District Council’s Chief
Executive advised the Council that ‘clearly’
this was an appropriate use of the Fund.
Furthermore he had a legal opinion to this
effect. But when I asked to see that legal
opinion, I was denied access to the document. Mr
Price (my lawyer) argued that the legal opinion
that I sought fell squarely within council
business, was a matter of intense interest to
her constituents, was relevant to ongoing
council decisions and concerned issues of policy
and statutory interpretation. Also, S 42 of the
Local Government Act 2002 did not endow the
chief executive with exclusive ‘oversight of
legal advice’ as the chief executive asserted.
“Naturally her suspicions are aroused by the
fact that the Chief Executive refuses to show it
to her.”
But his arguments
were all to no avail. I have yet to view that
legal opinion, and all I could do was record my
vote against the use of the Fund for the
swimming pool; the only vote against the motion.
So although the LGOIMA is a powerful weapon to
maintain transparency in local government, there
are occasions when even elected members cannot
rely on it to access documents necessary to
fulfil their fiduciary duty to their ratepayers.
The public should
always have a right to know, unless there are
very good reasons not to. This is the
basis of open government and is a key principle
of the
Official Information Act 1982 and the
LGOIMA... it goes to the heart of generating
trust in our governmental systems.
Be safe these holidays!
I would sincerely
like to wish all those who support the Council
Watch web-site a very merry Christmas, and
meanwhile I’ll continue with my efforts to get
Phil Taueki out of jail for Christmas. |