Mayor Albert van Zetten says no yet again

This is not the first time that the mayor has taken it upon himself to deny the community access to an open and transparent community consultation process. There is no evidence that this answer is endorsed by the councillors or even that they have even been given the opportunity to discuss the subject. 

So, it appears the the mayor has taken this 'decision' all by himself and presumably the City of Launceston's (CoL) GM (aka CEO) endorses his stance.

What might the CoL administration be so concerned about as to deny their constituents a meaningful opportunity to contribute to any kind of open discourses about issues that impact upon them, planning issues and legitimate their placemaking aspirations. 

When the election is over that does not mean that ratepayers and residents need "shut up and get out of the way." 

SO, just what is it that Citizen's Assemblies deliver that Local Government, council operations and council's bureaucratic 'civil servants'  might be fearful of?

• Might it be the fact that their membership is drawn randomly from within a constituency and therefore they tend to represent a broader cohort of people than those who vote?

• Might it be the fact that they tend to call expert witnesses from outside the orbit of council operations?

• Might it be the fact that they are open and transparent processes that are likely to seriously examine a council's processes and offer new opportunities for communities to challenge comfortable decision making?

• Might it be the fact that they tend to identify levels of expertise and expert groups with qualifications that exceed those of the elected councillors and large numbers of council staff?

• Might it be the fact that in many instances they tend to speak with an authoritative voice that exceeds/challenges councillors' and their administrators' knowledge base and/or skills levels?

• Might it be the fact that some have exposed corruption and/or incompetence?

It could be all of that or any one of those factors. If so, it is a very poor foundation upon which to stand upon and to be flatfootedly denying communities their opportunities to contribute to meaningfully, and possibly innovatively, and surely, towards more inclusive solutions.

The really worrying factor is that not a single  CoL councillor will endorse the concept of a Citizen's Assembly – often called a jury –  on the agenda and around the table in an open deliberation at a council meeting. 

Apparently, there is not a solitary one who is prepared to test the credibility of her/his fellow councillors for fear of "looking silly". This is so very, very sad.

The big question is, is the mayor there, and are the councillors there, to contribute or is their purpose solely to do with being there and collecting their councillors' allowances? It is question that begs for an answer.

Click here to watch and learn more  https://www.newdemocracy.com.au/