Yesterday I was contacted by those organising the hearings on the Super-City legislation, that I have made a submission on, asking whether I wanted to present my submission in person. As I do, I will get to speak to the select committee next Wednesday evening. This is a step in the right direction from what happened last time I made a submission, where I wasn’t even contacted to ask whether I wanted to present my submission in person. Eventually I got 10 minutes via teleconferencing to summarise what I said on the RMA Amendment Bill and answer a few questions that were put to me. In the end it worked out OK, although it would have still been much better for me to have actually dicussed my submission with the select committee in person – you just can’t quite achieve the same impact over the phone.
But anyway, this time I will have that opportunity to talk to my submission in person. However, due to the large number of people making submissions (apparently around 700 people and/or organisations wish to be heard) I will be limited to five minutes. FIVE MINUTES? Wow, in such a short space of time I really don’t know what I’ll have the chance to say – especially as that time frame includes opportunities for members of the select committee to ask me questions. Whilst of course I won’t re-read my submission, it is very useful at a hearing to reiterate which points are particularly important and why – and also to potentially discuss compromises that they might be thinking of which would be acceptable to me. I have absolutely no idea how this is supposed to be achieved in 5 minutes.
I understand that 700 submissions is a lot, and that the select committee will be sitting for 14 hours a day to get through everyone, but heck this is not about a minor detail. This is about the future of Auckland’s local government. This will fundamentally affect the way Auckland operates for decades and decades into the future. I have spent many hours reading through the legislation, discussing with other people what parts of it I think work and why, and what parts I think don’t work and why. I put a lot of effort into formulating my submission and I think I got it pretty damn good in the end. I am sure that many other people have done the same thing and feel passionately about ensuring we get this legislation right.
Five minutes is a slap in the face to be honest. Why is it so hard for the government to get consultation right?
It’s unfortunate that you won’t have a great deal of time to appear before the committee, but you’ll just have to make the best of what little time you have. You may have already read the published guidance for oral submissions, but if not, it’s p.12-14 of the following document:
http://www.parliament.nz/NR/rdonlyres/6092F83E-CE78-4C66-A50A-CC4490DC9034/103478/makingasubmission2007_1.pdf
Generally the idea is to make the best use of your time by restricting yourself to briefly establishing your credentials in the subject area at the outset and then making two or three key points that you believe to be the most important – examples of potential flaws in the legislation and/or ways to improve it. There’s no need (or time available) to go into huge detail, and it’s likely that the committee will have heard a great deal of similar evidence. The key is to offer constructive advice, with suggestions that will appeal to the widest possible range of committee members. With that in mind, it would probably be useful to do a little background work on the policy interests of the committee members, if you have time.
Committee members:
http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/MPP/MPs/MPs/Default.htm?pf=CommitteeShortName&sf=Auckland+Governance+Legislation&lgc=0
In addition, you can always offer to send the committee particularly important articles if you believe they would add to their understanding of the issues. They may take you up on the offer, but on the other hand, they may have a great deal of paperwork to wade through already.
As a minor, technical point, the select committee’s consultation on the bill isn’t determined by the Government – the select committee is a creation of Parliament and makes its own decisions on hearings. It’s very unusual for a committee to be conducting hearings for as long as 14 hours daily. The amount of time given to submitters to appeal before the committee is a reflection of the level of interest in the bill and the amount of time available to hear submissions before the committee has to report back to the House.
Five minutes is insulting to the democratic process. Only enough time to introduce yourself and clear your throat. What is this – talkback radio. Thanks for your call, got to go for an ad break!
Thanks for that info Ethan. Yeah I guess I’ll have to be EXTREMELY CONCISE in what I say. 10-15 minutes seems a far more reasonable opportunity to pick out the key points of my submission and then give the committee time to ask me some questions.
I realise that it’s the chair of the committee who makes up the rules. Interestingly though, in this case the chair is John Carter – the Associate Minister of Local Government! So I think I’m somewhat justified in saying that it’s the government who can’t get consultation right.
Why is it so hard for the government to get consultation right?
Perhaps because everyone seems to think that government won’t pay any attention anyway? It was at least as long ago as the Rogernomes that it was made clear that if the government was determined to do something it would ignore any ‘consultation’…
And certainly this Supercity has all the hallmarks of a done deal behind closed doors, especially since King John seems to have anointed already. (Makes me wonder whether when he was Police minister he didn’t found out what all the hidden skeletons were :p)