Auckland's Failing Climate of Democracy

There are all sorts of definitions of democracy. For example, "the ​belief in ​freedom and ​equality between ​people, or a ​system of ​government ​based on this ​belief, in which ​power is either ​held by ​elected ​representatives or ​directly by the ​people themselves..."
Many definitions suggest that a characteristic of democracy is: "freedom of speech and press...."

Twenty or more years ago, before debates about climate change had overtaken discussions about democracy, much of the discussion about what democracy was and how it manifest at local level, concentrated on the idea of the climate of democracy. Which is a way of thinking about the civic culture that exists in a community - how it develops and what fosters it - so that the community is predisposed toward, or educated to accept and expect, democratic processes and political activities in public life. This idea is that democracy cannot be imposed by laws or treated as a social add-on. That it is built into society and its institutions and becomes a conscious and maintained state of mind of the people.

Some western democracies build it into the school curriculum, so that students leave school with a grounding in civics and an understanding of politics and that it is normal for people to hold different values from each other requiring processes, negotiation and understanding to reach jointly agreed decisions.

I accept that not everybody wants to involve themselves in public minded activities and processes. Life's too short, they might say, and prefer to concentrate on their own individual pursuits and objectives. It has always been thus. But I think we have seen a number of structural changes in Auckland that are causing its climate of democracy to fail putting at risk its ability to act for the common good, in the public interest, whatever that might be.

When I was first in local government - councillor on North Shore City Council, board member on Devonport Community Board - I gradually came to understand how local democracy functioned here, and the role it performed in maintaining the local climate of democracy. Most meetings were attended by reporters from the North Shore Times Advertiser (NSTA). Local issues were extensively reported. Councillors were named and shamed. I remember how anxious councillors would become on NSTA publication days. They wanted to see how they'd been quoted, what angle the reporters had taken. And these newspapers were very widely read, but often not by the section of the community busy with their own lives and objectives. The impression I gained was that the avid readers of the NSTA were the ones who voted in the local elections at least, and were often the "go to" people in the community for others wanted some guidance on who to vote for.

School projects focused on local issues that became hot topics: sewage on beaches, cycle lanes, public transport, recycling, water demand statistics. Students would phone councillors. Take clippings from the NSTA. Debate the issues with their parents. All of these activities fostered what I'll call North Shore's climate of democracy.

And this is what we are losing. Local government amalgamation, centralisation and corporatisation has pretty well gutted local communities of the nucleus of local democracy. The same issues exist, but without that institutional focus, local communities are disempowered and their ability to make a difference reduced. The NSTA still exists but its utility is diminished by the loss of local government purpose. Many resort to individualism which is understandeable, but given we are a species that has adapted to working successfully in groups, we are unlikely to be as successful as we could be working more collectively on shared problems.

It is interesting to reflect that free speech and a free press is seen by many as an essential component of a thriving democracy. It is OK to walk down to your front gate and voice your concern for all to hear who open their front doors to listen. Previously you could go to community forums and vent your spleen, get a few nods of agreement, and if there was merit maybe even lead a change. Increasingly individuals resort to facebook (or even a blog) to express themselves.

Which brings me to the role of a free press in a democracy. Newspapers of record - that reported most of the important decisions or issues of the day - form an essential part of the body politic of a local democracy. Reports, opinions, think-pieces, investigative journalism, letters. All of these components would be contained within those pages. Not friends sharing with like-minded friends, but a diversity of views and ideas and stories and articles. It is the range and breadth that we will lose in Auckland as NZ Herald quietly divests itself of writers and reporters, and as the pages of the newspaper shrink in content and devolve into an expanded stuff.co.nz.

That's why I think Auckland's climate of democracy is failing. And it will need to improve to develop the sort of conscious and engaged communities that will be a pre-requisite to an educated, engaged and organised response to atmospheric climate change on the one hand, and to changes in urban form on the other.