Viewpoint – Auckland deserves better

In recent weeks, there has been significant coverage in the media about the ‘toxic culture’ that exists within Auckland Council. In the most recent example, Councillor Christine Fletcher, a former Member of Parliament and mayor of Auckland City, said she’d been called a ‘f—–g b—h ’ and a “f—–g fat b—h” at council meetings.

By any measure this amounts to appalling behaviour – repeated foul-mouthed abuse of a female councillor, during a council meeting, inside the council chamber. If it had occurred in any other workplace the male perpetrator would have been facing serious disciplinary proceedings, if not sacked already. Instead the individual responsible  remains both protected and enabled within the council hierarchy and there have been  no consequences. That sends a chilling signal for the balance of this term – in effect that some people can literally do or say whatever they like. Other councillors who’ve also complained about bullying have been told to ‘toughen up’ or more crudely, to ‘grow some,’ by so-called colleagues.

If it were limited to this repugnant behaviour that would be bad enough but it actually goes far beyond this. Last month, I wrote a formal letter of complaint to the CEO detailing a ‘chairs’ meeting at Council in June where some of the chairs of council committees signalled their intention to target councillors who had voted against the record rates increase and ‘to make an example of them’. In effect to potentially remove services and projects from the areas those councillors opposing the rates increase represent.

Since Auckland Council’s inception members have been free to vote however their conscience dictates, without fear of retribution and secure in the knowledge council planning and funding processes are treated with objectivity and fairness.  

What was being openly advocated at this meeting, however, amounted to little more than a political predetermination to target individual councillors and their communities. If effected, such conduct would impact significant numbers of Aucklanders who, for whatever else they might think, still assume their council’s decision-making is not motivated by personal or geographic malice. 

Some of us are well aware from experience that dissent in this council comes at a personal cost, but the idea that specific communities could be selectively punished is totally unethical and quite abhorrent. 

In these circumstances Cr Chris Fletcher’s subsequent call for an independent Crown observer has merit. For one thing is very clear, no change will come from the current leadership or from those who seek to minimise such poor treatment of colleagues or worse still, collude in it. For let’s just call this out for what it is – bullying, misogynistic behaviour and a gross abuse of office that should not be tolerated – by any elected member or by the Auckland public they are meant to serve.