How we make decisions ... in private

For those who wonder why I am thundering against my own council in today's Evening Telegraph ... it is because I genuinely believe in open government. So does the SNP, as far as I understand things, and probably all the other parties. Who would vote against Freedom of Information? But in practice, politicians don't vote for anything that make their lives more difficult. And they tend not to vote against the advice of their officials, who tend to err on the side of secrecy.

For example, the Scottish Government felt it necessary to pass a law forcing councils to consult their tenants on important housing issues. Now the Government has passed a law giving community organisations the right to participate in decision making which affects their areas, and much more than that. The Community Empowerment Act is hard going, but if anyone manages to work out what it means, it could dramatically change the way councils take decisions.

So how do we take decisions? Almost all proposals come from officers of the council. If we're closing a school, the law says we have to consult parents. So we do. But there is no duty to consult on most of the decisions we take.

The officers discuss proposals with Committee Conveners and the Leadership. They then bring their proposals to the Administration Group. There will be a paper which will have a recommendation. Sometimes we get two or three options; officers will give their professional view as to which option we should choose. These are private meetings and we may get three or four working days to read the papers. Sometimes the papers are only tabled on the day.

Except where consultation is compulsory, we may never know whether anyone outside the council has been consulted, or what they said. Or we may get a potted summary. Unless councillors themselves have specialist knowledge, the decision will be taken on the basis of the advice given by officers. In fairness, we have very talented and knowledgeable officers who do genuinely work for the good of the city, as they see it.

That's the decision made. There is the formality of taking the decision through the relevant Committee, but since the SNP hold 16 out of the 29 seats, there is very little chance of the Opposition changing anything. On occasion deputations come to the Committee meetings in the hope of putting forward a reasoned case and changing our view. I find they generally do not know that they are wasting their time; and they can be quite upset when I tell them how it actually works.

Now why does this matter? Taking decisions in secret, and relying only on the advice of the Council's officers, means that councillors are not exposed to the full range of arguments and information which they need. What's worse, secret meetings can mean that professional reasoning goes out the window and character assassination replaces argument. Sometimes character assassination emerges in public at Employment Appeal Tribunals ... viz some of the wilder accusations flung at former Depute Head Teacher Linda Ross.

The glorious exception to the rule is Planning, known in the jargon we love so much as Development Management. At Planning we are not bound by the party whip. In fact, we are not allowed to lobby each other for a particular decision. The debates at Planning are real, and I have seen several deputations swing the vote as a result of a well presented, reasoned argument. On occasion it goes the other way ... deputations can be so hopeless, arrogant or incoherent that councillors lose all sympathy with them. But either way, the real decision is taken at the meeting.

I can only remember one free vote at a political committee on a matter of real importance. That was the great Biomasss Debate, preceded by large public meetings, acres of coverage in the local media, and a barrage of very expert information from eminent academics, community campaigners and local businesses. Normally that would have counted for nothing, as the decision would already have been made in secret by a majority on the Administration. Nine of the sixteen Administration votes, cast in secret, would have been enough to ram the biomass proposal through the Council. Fortunately, the SNP Administration Group insisted on a free vote, and the biomass plan was scotched.

My view is that people watching or listening to pretend debates on fait accomplis will feel resentful. They will be surprised at the occasionally brutal chairing of debates and discourteous treatment of their elected representatives. They will demand better behaviour. This is one of the reasons why I believe broadcasting Council meetings is essential. There are others which I will write about in another blog. But expose us to the piercing light of public scrutiny. Please. It would do Dundee the world of good.