He pointed out the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act “expressly states that ‘free and frank expression of opinion’ cannot be used as good reason to exclude the public from meetings”.
The council corrected the practice once he pointed it out, but Boshier was “concerned that an unchecked error was allowed to occur and potentially embed into the Council’s practice”.
TRC also wasn’t recording its process for deciding to meet behind closed doors, and Boshier said reasons for excluding the public should be given in plain English for each item discussed in private.
He found the later release of information from public excluded meetings was ad hoc and the process should be formalised.
Boshier said despite public fears he didn’t find councils across the country making decisions unlawfully in closed workshops.
But he did find councils closing workshops by default, or dodging obligations by using terms like ‘hui’ or ‘forum’ to describe workshops or informal briefing sessions.
“Secrecy inevitably breeds suspicion.”
TRC claimed it didn’t exclude the public from most workshops, but Boshier found that the council didn’t advertise or inform the public about workshops “in any way”.
“If the public is not aware that a workshop is open, I consider it to be closed by default.”
“The council should ensure workshops are presumptively open to the public, unless it is reasonable to close a workshop on a case-by-case basis.”
He recommended the council advertise workshops, promote them to special interest and community groups, and inform the public about closed workshops – including the topics they cover and the reasons they are closed.
“I also discovered that a range of council officials and elected members [across the country] didn’t want to open workshops for a number of reasons including that asking questions could make them look stupid.
“I don’t consider that to be a valid reason to close a workshop. Elected members should be resilient enough to withstand reasonable public scrutiny.”
Boshier also said TRC should live-stream all meetings and publish the recordings once they’re finished.
Currently, people can email for a Zoom link to meetings but the report said that was not obvious on the council’s website. TRC streamed and recorded meetings during Covid-19 lockdowns but then stopped.
The Ombudsman’s report also found not enough in TRC meeting minutes about discussion, debate and questions raised – and he wants those details included.
The report was not a wholesale condemnation of TRC, Boshier praised the council’s culture of openness, effective relationships between staff and councillors, and good networks with other councils.
He made 21 recommendations to TRC, and chief executive Steve Ruru said the council welcomed the chance to improve.
“We have already developed new good practice guidance material for staff and the Council made a decision, at its 19 September meeting, to start live-streaming its Council meetings in 2024.”
“We hold very few workshops and consider few items in public excluded.”
Ruru said the prohibition on using ‘free and frank expression of opinion’ to exclude the public from meetings comes from a “little known section” of local government law.
“Its use crept back into our practices in relation to a small number of reports by mistake over time. We stopped using it as soon as the Ombudsman brought it to our attention in October 2022.”
He said the council was evaluating “how and if” each of the recommendations could be implemented and would report progress to the Ombudsman.
The eight councils investigated were: Clutha District Council, Rangitīkei District Council, Palmerston North City Council, Rotorua Lakes Council, Taranaki Regional Council, Taupō District Council, Timaru District Council and Waimakariri District Council.
Public Interest Journalism funded through NZ On Air
