Transparency door opens a crack

Mr Campbell has taken a small step for information sharing, now he needs to take a giant leap for transparency

What do the Auckland Transport board, Taupō Council Reserves and Roading Committee, and Waitākere Licensing Trust have in common? Their meetings are open to the public and you can also catch them later on YouTube.

A multitude of local authorities – city and district councils, conservation boards, produce boards – provide agendas, minutes of meetings and, most likely, tea and coffee as well, in the name of openness and transparency.

But in health, we now have a void where once we had 20 years of regular, open-to-the-public health board meetings. It’s a hard act to follow.

I have said it here before: open board meetings don’t necessarily bring transparency, but they are a useful tool in the toolbox of democracy.

Health is out of step in having pulled out of the open meeting fraternity.

The public should be able to learn as much about their health system as they can about Auckland ferries and buses, Taupō reserves, and what’s happening with beer-swilling and gaming in Waitākere.

The new health system aims to be transformational, so needs to up the ante on this particular aspect of its culture.

Both Te Whatu Ora – Health New Zealand and Te Aka Whai Ora – Māori Health Authority have done well with live-streamed stakeholder engagement events, which allow for questions to be posed, and are recorded for later viewing. A growing cascade of emailed updates is available detailing news from various taskforces and hui. But the board meetings, where decisions are made, remain closed.

The agencies are providing a brief agenda of what is to be discussed at the meeting and posting online afterwards a summary of key matters discussed.

Te Whatu Ora board chair Rob Campbell has taken a further small step back out of the wilderness that is boardroom secrecy.

After a recent Te Whatu Ora board meeting, a follow-up Zoom meeting enabled those reporters who had expressed an interest, to receive an update on proceedings.

It was set for around 15 minutes. Mr Campbell, joined by chief executive Margie Apa, presented key points and the three reporters present had about five minutes to ask questions. No chance, of a cup of tea and a biscuit.

I like to think it was a trial run for something bigger and better. Because there are two problems here: the fact Mr Campbell decides what is of interest from the proceedings, and the ridiculously short five minutes for questions. Really, is it any wonder people believe the media are all about quick and dirty?

But actually, the board chair’s control of what is to be shared is the bigger concern.

At a minimum, the public should be able to see a full agenda and have access to all reports tabled, unless there is good reason to withhold them.

Open meetings are governed by rules that allow boards to withhold material where the board deems it necessary. At this point, the media or public can ask for the material, the request can be rejected and the rejection appealed…it’s the circle of life, in information terms at least.

Mr Campbell has taken a small step for information sharing, now he needs to take a giant leap for transparency.

We need to find a novel, effective means of providing transparency in the governance of the health sector and there must be ways for the public to interrogate decisions made.

These reforms, with their call for transformation and collaboration, should be the ideal breeding ground for such a solution.