A 100-person group representing a cross-section of Auckland has sent a message to the city council on how the region should solve its transport problems, following two days of in-depth consultation.
University of Auckland based think tank Koi Tū ran a deliberative forum as part of an attempt to figure out how to meet the goal of a 29 percent reduction in vehicle kilometres travelled in a programme funded by NZTA.
The near $200,000 process saw Aucklanders surveyed on their transport views before hearing from experts and taking part in discussions and then being surveyed again.
Auckland Council lead transport adviser Michael Roth said significant changes in opinion showed the problem with current consultation processes which essentially gather uninformed opinions.
He said a big change in the sentiment towards time-of-use charging towards the positive “makes the point if we just go out with customer surveys we’ll get different results to what we get when people are really understanding of the issue.”
“So we have to be very careful with public surveying on this issue, because it is vulnerable to stakeholders and media who like to take a conflict position and focus on specific issues.”
The forum used a lottery system to generate a representative population sample of 100 participants for the purpose of engaging in learning and deliberation over two full Saturdays two weeks apart, plus online sessions.
The most favoured transport solutions following the two sessions included upgrading Auckland’s rail network, making it safer and easier to walk around local areas, providing more buses, a safe and connected bike path network and building more homes close to the city centre.
Roth said the forum was conducted in part as a response to Mayor Wayne Brown’s letter of expectation in which he called for Auckland to regain social licence for its activities and “deeply understand and respond to what matters most to Aucklanders”.
Brown’s response to the forum was to wonder why he’d been forced to endure regular processes of consultation at all.
“Isn’t this the best advertising for not bothering with any consultation at all, you should just do it,” Brown says. “Because once you do it, it’s okay … How can we send this wonderful information to Wellington to say buzz off, we don’t need to consult.”
Roth says he shares the Mayor’s concerns with how some public survey processes are done, but says that highlights why this kind of process was important.
Koi Tū deputy director Dr Anne Bardsley says deliberative forum like this can answer the problem of public constellation.
“I’m sure we’re all well aware that public opinion is a pretty elusive commodity and on many issues the public doesn’t really have fully-formed and unambiguous views,” she says.
“We all use information shortcuts when making decisions, and the conventional surveys that are put out there to gather public opinion tend to represent the public’s surface impressions which are from headlines and soundbites a lot of times.”
Time-of-use charging saw a significant bump in favour after the information sessions, with almost 40 percent of the group changing their view from negative to positive.
Brown has previously championed time-of-use charging as a way froward for Auckland, saying it would see motorways reduced to near school holiday levels of traffic.
“I am of the view that this should be on our motorways in the central areas of Auckland, which are the most congested, and this is also where public transport works best, which gives some people an option rather than paying the charge, but this will be confirmed in negotiations with the Government over the legislation required.”
These results will not be achievable unless substantial alterations are made to the draft Government Policy Statement on land transport.
And show how much the Minister of Transport’s reckons are just fact-free deluded thinking.
So pleased to see a “citizen’s assembly” format in use in Auckland, here called a deliberative forum! This is the kind of invigorated democracy we need in Aotearoa to solve complex problems. However, I wasn’t thrilled about the title to this article in my Newsroom e-mail. It took a negative slant (for the purpose of clickbait or something?) when in actual fact the use of deliberative forums such as this is wonderful, breakthrough news.
What is missing from this article is the surprising finding that More Motorways (or expanding roading capacity?) ranked last in this opinion poll, yet this is what the present government thinks will be popular.
Sounds like a great process. We should probably roll it out more widely. I often struggle with those surveys of opinion for that very reason – how can I form an opinion if I don’t have the info? Great article. We need more like this.
my understanding is that this has process has now been used twice – the first one was to look at options for future water supply for Auckland
How stupid and politically naive we Aucklanders are. Rather than agreeing to pay charges (which will be collected by a private company who will charge the city for this privilege of running the scheme, thus adding to the cost,) we should be demanding that our already expensive rates be put to better use in terms of public transport (light rail is/was a great move bringing Auckland into the 20th let alone 21st century.)
We should be insisting our government build motorways with future needs built-in rather than the narrow congested by-ways that we get and which some want us to pay for the dubious privilege of using.
Back in 2006/7 – I attended hush hush focus groups over these exact Same things. In several groups of 6 we thrashed out all these choices and trade offs and came to pretty much the same conclusions as 100 random people did here – when given the proper facts. Not soundbites.
Many of the countries we look up to do this sort of 100 random citizens making big decisions process and have done for decades. It works for them. So can for us.
If we believe and trust (as we clearly do) that 12 random adults can decide our toughest criminal cases as part of a trial by jury. If given the facts in a structured and deliberative way.
Then I’d trust that 100 such citizens can do likewise for services and Infrastructure decisions affecting 1/3rd the population.
If they are similarly treated as adults and given the facts and arguments for and against.
So more of the same please. Only this time can we make sure the politicians and their minions actually do what they are instructed by the 100 people who make up these groups.
Not just put them in the too hard basket for decades as was evidently done for the sessions I attended 17 or so years ago.