Reform Wollongong City Council

If, like me, you regard the ability to learn from experience as a key indicator of intelligent life, then the events at the recent August Coledale Neighbourhood Forum provides a good test for the place of intelligence in the WCC Community Engagement process.

Prior to closing the Neighbourhood Forum, within minutes of it commencing, the Convenor (or, more accurately, NF Chair) informed the gathering that he had the power to do this.

At the August NF2 Forum, WCC’s Engamgent Coordinator was present and she certainly did not say that the Chair did not have the power to close the Forum and accepted the outcome when he so acted. This has to be interpreted as tacit acceptance of the power of the Chair to act in such a manner.

ROLE OF NEIGHBOURHOOD FORUM CHARTER

Neighbourhood Forums, while operating autonomously from Council, are (in effect) established by Council and are subject to a Charter. which spells out a number of important details about how they must operate. This Charter provides an impartial set of rules which can be called upon in the event of a dispute about process etc.

There is, on my reading, nothing explicit in the WCC Neighbourhood Forum Charter which relates (one way or the other) to the ability of the Chair to close Forum prematurely. In the normal course of events, of course, the Chair will both open and close the Forum.

In relation to the Chair, the Charter says:

“The Neighbourhood Chair/Co-chair is someone who will, in performing Forum duties:
•act honestly and in good faith;
•perform duties in a manner that engenders public trust in the integrity, objectivity, and impartiality of the position;
•exercise the care, diligence and skill that would be expected of a reasonable person in comparable circumstances.”

It was clear to me, sitting towards the back of the August NF2 Forum, that many of the people present did not regard that Chair’s decision to abruptly terminate the Forum as the actions as an exercise of care, diligence and skill of a ‘reasonable person in comparable circumstances.’

Just how many people were of that view, and how many of the contrary view we will never know.

What we can say with some certainty is that ‘at least some, and possibility a considerable number’ were of the view that this was an unreasonable action. Some others will agree with the Chair.

TEST OF REASONABLENESS

So what is a reasonable test of what is reasonable in such a circumstance?

One option is for those who regard the action as unreasonable to attend the next regular Neighbourhood Forum and to put the item on the agenda.

There is a real problem with this option, though, since most members of our communities only attend such Forums for a specific topic, and do not attend the regular monthly Forum.

If, for example, the August NF2 Forum was the first one many people had attended (to talk about dogs on beaches) it is highly unlikely that, in light of the way things unfolded, they would attend another.

This raises all manner of problems which relate to the ability of the Chair to carry out an often thankless and difficult task and also to degree of confidence the wider community can place in the way Neighbourhood Forums operate.

PUT IT TO THE NF MEMBERS AT THE FORUM

It seems to me that there is a relatively simple measure which can be taken to ensure that the position of the Chair is protected and the wider the community’s confidence maintained. – and that is to put the question of closing the Forum to the people actually attending that specific Forum, and get the people who are members of that particular NF to vote on the matter there and then.

This achieves two important things:

1. It provides a sound and immediate test of whether or not closing the Forum prematurely is a reasonable action (given the wide range of consideration which apply) and
2. it also removes from the Chair the weight of the decision, thereby preserving the Charter’s requirement for the Chair to “perform duties in a manner that engenders public trust in the integrity, objectivity, and impartiality of the position”

Additionally, it may provide an important circuit breaker for people participating, and provride a short breathing space in which cooler heads could prevail.

Something like the following could be added to the Charter as part of a Code of Conduct for Forums.

If the Chair of a Neighbourhood Forum considers there is good reason to close a Forum, the Chair shall put a motion to the Forum that this Forum be closed.

People will be allowed to talk to the motion as is normal.

It will then be voted on by all those members present who eligible to vote at that particular Neighbourhood Forum.

This will be decided by a simple majority.

In the event that the members decide the Forum should be closed, the Chair will then declare the Forum closed.

In the event that the NF members decides to continue the Forum and the Chair is unable to continue, the Neighbourhood Forum Co-Chair will Chair the Forum.

In the event that there is no Co-Chair present or willing to Chair the Forum, the Forum will elect an Acting and ad hoc Chair for the sole purpose of Chairing the Forum for this particular event.

A MATTER FOR THE 2009 EXTERNAL REVIEW

Council’s website says

“October 2008
At the Council meeting on 28 October 2008 Council adopted the Consultation Policy, Neighbourhood Forum Charter and Community Leaders’ Meeting Charter. … An external review of the effectiveness of this community consultation arrangement be undertaken in 12 months.”
(http://www.wollongong.nsw.gov.au/contactus/haveyoursay.asp)

October 2009 is not far away, so this matter could be included in that review to ensure we can ensure that an effective means of doing community business both protects the position of the NF Chair and ensures a fair crack of the sauce bottle for all those attending.

Yours truly

Bruce Reyburn
10 August 2009