It's partay time at Michael's

So, as was presaged here in a comment some days earlier, a misplaced Mayoral email has revealed that diVision councillors get together (given the nature of the meetings, "caucus" is far too grand a word) before meetings of the full Council.

Now, as some commenters have pointed out, Vision candidates clearly indicated their alignment when they stood. But then the question arises, did the people who voted for them, do so as individuals or as a team? And the answer, alas, is that we'll never really know, we can only go on anecdote:

I admit to voting for them as a team because I wanted the changes they promoted. I expect them to work as a team to give me the policies I voted for.

That is actually the GOOD thing about this council. The majority have a clear idea of what they're going to do. That's why things are getting done.

Have to disagree with the "we employ individuals" line. It depends who you voted for. I seem to remember that some people stood on party tickets when I voted. They had their affiliation clearly marked on the ballot paper... You may have voted on their individual strengths / weaknesses but I voted for councillors with clear views and policies.

Thats a fair analysis. I chose not to vote for any Vision candidate at the last election -liked Dot but didn't vote for her because I didn't like her leader. I had friends who voted all Vision because that would give them a majority around the council table to do the things they promised. So we can't say, no matter which way we voted, that we were not aware that 'teams' were standing and 'teams' might be elected.

And we mustn't forget, diVision are amateurs when it comes to the politicisation of local government - the Labour Party started it off decades ago. Then again, at least they have a broad membership base and anyone can join:

"Open and transparent?" We can't even join Vision to see how they do things. This is the very opposite of "Open Democracy", and as for transparency, forget it.

And, as other commenters have countered:

We employ councillors not just as dumb voting machines, but for their individual skills. There are 12 councillors because the multiple issues require that many hands on board to get a handle on all of it. By deciding policy direction without the benefit of all that experience and talent, Vision are selling Wanganui short.

Now, when at the next Council meeting, one of the other councillors comes up with a good argument, we know why Vision pays no attention to it.

When policy has already been debated and decided at the Vision caucus, the Vision councillors turn up at the council table. Why would they need to listen to the arguments our other elected representatives bring? They already know how to vote.

Why should policy discussion be confined to the council table? I'd like to think all 13 of the mob I pay for, talk & Debate policy all the time. Even in their sleep, otherwise I'm not getting my money's worth.

Party politics has no (zero, nada, zip) place in local body politics.

Yes, it's unsurprising the diVision (and has there ever been a more appropriate instance of the use of that monicker?) people meet secretly. It's even perfectly proper if they were discussing who they wanted on their ticket for the by-election - that's party political business. But the appointment of a new CEO, and what's going to happen over the Cooks Gardens mess?

We find it reassuring to hear that, as one commenter (supporting Vision) said:

Poor old Dick Hubbard in Auckland [is] pulling his hair out... because deputy Hucker white-ants him every week. Or Kerry Prendergast in Wellington who was lamenting in last month's Dominion-Post that she spends all her time assembling council majorities on minor issues that she has stuff all time for the big picture.

That proponents of one viewpoint or another have to work hard to form temporary coalitions who agree to act in concert means that decisions are being made - hopefully - on the basis of the strength of one argument over that of another (though we're not so naive as to assume there's not horse-trading going on either).

National politics in NZ is littered with examples of elected representatives who didn't like what their parties were doing and, instead of their dissenting voices being welcomed as a sign of good political health (and perhaps swaying the argument from time to time), they've been rounded on and excised from the party. Look no further than the Diva's former hand-puppet Winston Peters for an example.

The majority of people voted for MMP, presumably to try to put an end to one-party control of the House of Representatives, yet some commenters seem okay with it at local level.

An excellent analysis of the effect of party politics on local government (in a UK setting, but applicable anywhere) is the book Party politics and local government by Colin Copus.

Unfortunately the Politicos bookshop (which is where the link takes you) summary tells you very little about the book, but the Institute of Local Government Studies at the University of Birmingham have this analysis (pdf file) which says:

The book provides evidence to show that political parties have come to dominate the local political landscape to the almost total exclusion of citizens wishing to become involved in local politics outside the framework of a national party. Political parties serve to de-legitimise any political activity not conducted within the very strict definition of local politics constructed and shared by the three main parties. Finally, the book sets out the changes necessary for political parties to make if they are to become meaningful and relevant to the citizens they claim to represent and if local politics is to no longer be the domain of the Leviathan that is the political party.

So Wanganui, it seems, is on a path that risks the "total exclusion of citizens" outside the party framework. And that reference is to parties - the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats - that anyone can join, even online. Whereas, as we pointed out earlier, not only is diVision a party it's impossible to join, but the Vision Wanganui web site has disappeared, to be replaced by one devoted entirely to the Diva.

Comments on this post are now closed.