You go voting – but how do you know who to elect?

In the last few columns I’ve been commenting on the need for participation in the democratic process, especially in the upcoming local body elections. Now, we are registered in the electoral roll, and we have resolved to go voting – how will we be able to choose the best candidates to lead our city?

There will be a large number of candidates to choose from. Only few of them will get adequate exposure in the media, fewer still will engage in public debates and still fewer you’ll ever get to meet in person and talk to. The mayoral race is sure to get media attention. Council contests will also likely get some attention in the local papers, especially where qualified candidates rise to challenge incumbent office holders.

The most important decisions in our city will be made by the councillors and the mayor. Those are the people we are going to elect to lead our city. The leadership of the city needs a variety of skills, talents and qualities. All candidates will have a variety of labels. Yes, as voters we want to know what kind of positions any particular candidate supports, what interests they represent and what ethics they apply to decision making. If you could ask three questions of each candidate – what would they be?

What are the issues that are dear to your heart? Is it (ir)responsible public spending? The way the city treats the socially and economically disadvantaged? Safety? Maybe you are interested in local democracy issues, or what is happing to our clean drinking water? Or something else altogether? No matter what, all your concerns are valid concerns. All your questions are valid questions, and you have a right, even an obligation, to debate all candidates, new or current office holders.

Every three years the time returns when we have our say on who represents us in government. First we elect our local body representatives, then, one year later, our central government politicians. Instead of bemoaning the fact that our expectations have once more not been fulfilled, we can now take up the opportunity to inspect the candidates before they are elected. Office holders have a voting record, inspect it! New and untested candidates bring skills, opinions and ethics, find out about them.

Have you thought about what your three most important questions are which you will be asking the candidates in your ward? I encourage you to follow through with this exercise, it’s easy – ask them your questions, and tell them you expect your questions to promptly be answered. Remember, the well-being of yourself, your family and your community depends on you making an informed choice at the next election!

Do you want to improve the performance of the city? Participate!

You will have noticed: the election season has started for good. Mayoral candidates have made a splash and there is a increasing number of notices in the paper about council and community board candidacies being declared. In last month’s column I suggested that you get involved and vote. As Cantabrians we‘ve lost the opportunity to elect regional councillors. What we are left with is an opportunity to elect city representatives and members for the health board.

Are you signed up to the electoral roll, but still not convinced that your vote makes a difference? A 2004 voter survey shows that up to 97% of potential voters were aware of the local body election but only 46% participated. The participation rate was lower still three years later. Abstaining from voting may be a sign of a deeper malaise. While in 2003, only five people in ten understood how Council makes decisions, that number dropped in a follow up survey five years later to about half of that.

When asked in 2008 if Christchurch City Council makes decisions in the best interest of the city, only four people out of ten agreed, a similar drop in numbers from previous years like in the previously mentioned study. In fact, the numbers are now so low that council has stopped reporting them¹. What does this say about the majority of the currently elected city politicians? To me it speaks volumes.

It is clear that the residents of Christchurch believe that Council should make decisions that are in the best interests of the city. It is clear that we should be electing people to represent us who have our best interests at heart.

Abstaining from voting doesn’t get the right people elected. When good people don’t vote, bad people get elected. It is our duty to inform ourselves about the candidates, incumbent or otherwise, and to make an educated decision who should lead the city for the next three years. And as I also said last time: it’s your responsibility and the well-being of our community depends on it!

¹ The Quality of Life statistics are available at www.bigcities.govt.nz

Register and participate

Here in Canterbury we’ve been spectators to an extraordinary and quite unusual political drama over the last few weeks and the drama is still ongoing. The dismissal of our democratically elected councillors of Environment Canterbury (ECan) is a first in New Zealand history. The fact that those elected councillors are being replaced by a few highly paid Government-appointed commissioners instead, rings alarm bells with everyone who is concerned with the well-being of our communities. There will be no elections in October and there is no guarantee there will be in the future.

Economic and Quality of Life indicators (like the Genuine Progress Indicator, GPI) measure, among other things, citizen participation in the governance of their communities, on local, regional and national levels. Does it mean that the loss of our ability to elect our own councillors indicate that the quality of life in Canterbury will be lower in the future?

One might argue that with a mere 32% participation in the ECan election in 2007, we haven’t shown much interest in our democratic structures on a local authority level. In response to that I would argue that recent developments in Canterbury, and the introduction of the Auckland Super City, indicate more cutbacks of our democratic rights. It is apparent that plans for another Super City in Christchurch are already underway. This is the time when we all need to get involved and defend our given rights to participate in our democratic society.

Now don’t think for a minute that, “Well, I’m just one person – what change can I effect?” or, “My vote doesn’t make a difference.” During recent elections, there were several races that were decided by 10 votes or less. As an example, in our own Ward, Shirley-Papanui, Community Board member Pauline Cotter was elected by only 9 votes over her closest rival.

There are many things that you can do about this impending loss of democracy, but here is one thing you can do right away, and that doesn’t cost any money and just a few minutes of your time: If you are not already registered on the Electoral Roll, register yourself now. It is your responsibility, and the well-being of our community depends on it!

What counts is people

This is a letter to The Press, that was published on 26 Mar 2010:

Cr Button implies that the Refugee Migrant Centre has been adequately funded yet failed for lack of ‘prudent financial management’ (24 Mar). Accountability, transparency and prudent financial management apply to community organisations as much as they do to the council. However, we should not lose sight of the fact that our bottom line is to improve the situation of people, and not to make financial profit.

Put the needs of the people first

Last month I wrote about how a healthy city is continually creating and improving our physical and social environments. Improving environments is a continuous challenge our city is facing and during the past month there were two examples nicely illustrating the challenge.

One is the council commissioned report by Danish urban designer Jan Gehl and the other is the rent increase for community based early childhood centres, occupying council-owned facilities.

In a recommendable move the Council looked for advice from the internationally recognized authority on urban design, Jan Gehl, to get input on how to improve the physical environment of the central districts of our city. Gehl judges our city to be “an attractive living city for the 21st century”, but also recognizes that Christchurch has shortcomings, like “public spaces have lost their original

functions, such as market places to meet”, etc. This is true for both the central city as well as suburban areas like St Albans.

The report yielded 110 suggestions mainly aimed at making the area more people friendly and improve bicycle access. In a recent decision by our elected councillors, based on the recommendations by a staff report, it was decided that out of the 110 recommendations, a mere 5 should be followed up. Gehl’s report also said something to the effect of ‘put the needs of people first.’ I hope there will be more opportunities for ‘the people’ to scrutinise the recommendations and give input into the planning process.

In a controversial move that reminds us of the 24% rent increase for the city’s social housing units, the Council decided that it would simultaneously increase the rent it charges to community based early childhood centres and cut the funding from which that rent is subsidised. City- wide, 11 centres are subjected, with the St Albans-based Educare centre facing a 102% rent increase.

To create and maintain a healthy city, Council is also responsible for it’s social environments. The same principle that Jan Gehl pointed out in connection with the physical environment needs to apply here to: “Put the needs of the people first.” Not that this would come at a large price; it could cost as little as 16c per child that is using the centres per day as one letter writer to The Press pointed out .

Does the CCC have a moral responsibility to spend our money on people versus projects? We must have elected councillors who believe that the needs of the people (our needs) are addressed first!

Welcome!

Do communities count? Why do they? Do we need them? A common definition of ‘community’ is “a group of interacting people living in a common location.” Communities are often organised around common values and social cohesion within a shared geographical location.

Communities are neighbourhoods, villages, cities, or communities of shared ethnic ancestry, or of professional interest. Communities give identity and help support individuals. The community of people that one belongs to takes care of one’s basic needs and social well-being, guides us through our different stages of development and stages of life. Community provides safety. The strength of a particular community is depended on the social cohesion and the involvement of people in that particular community.

I’ve been fortunate to have been involved as a community development worker and Manager of the St Albans Community Centre and Residents’ Association for more than three years. I’ve also worked with several other community groups and organisations, and this has given me a unique perspective on community life both in St Albans and of Christchurch.

Starting from now, I will be writing a column called Communities Count. I will endeavour to answer questions about the health of our community, its organisations, their importance, their issues and problems, and the support needed to make them healthy. Most importantly, I will try to convince you that you need to get involved, and why.

For now, I would like to leave you with my favourite definition of a healthy community (the words ‘city’ and ‘community’ are interchangeable):

“A healthy city is one that is continually creating and improving those physical and social environments and expanding those community resources which enable people to mutually support each other in performing all the functions of life and in developing to their maximum potential.” (Hancock, T. and Duhl L., 1988).