People from the Gibbston community attended a Queenstown District Council Meeting with tape over their faces as a protest this week. I was very disappointed I couldn't join them because I was in Christchurch. The protest was about our community not being allowed to present to Council on the Fast Track Gibbston Village proposal.

It feels like there's a significant anti-democracy move afoot. Here's the list of ways we are being blocked from learning about or commenting publicly on the Gibbston Village proposal:

1. Gibbston Valley Wines won't show us their Gibbston Village application. They say there's nothing important in it for us to see. We would like to find that out for ourselves. If there's nothing to see, why can't we see it?
   
   
2. An Official Information Act request to the Ministry for the Environment (with whom the application was lodged) for the GIbbston Village application was denied. The basis for denial of my October request was that all Fast Track application information would be provided on the MfE website by 28 November. On 29 November there was no information on the website. Phone calls to MfE got me nowhere. Late in the afternoon, an email came from the Ministry saying there is so much Fast Track information, and other unexpected and unspecified delays, so the applications will be made available on 20 December.
   
   The 'soon to be publicly available' reason for denying an OIA is generally supposed to be a maximum of 6 weeks delay. A sneaky move on the part of MfE, giving a date 4 weeks away then giving another date a subsequent 4 weeks away? Will we get another delay in December if the Bill hasn't passed – are governnment trying to minimise opposition to the Bill until it is law?
   
   Well avoided, MfE.
   
   
3. An Official Information Act request to the QLDC for correspondence with the applicants was denied. This was also denied on the basis the application would soon be publicly available, but primarily on the basis that the advice provided to QLDC on the application might be interpreted adversely and therefore damage the business prospects of those providing information. 
   
   Does this mean we might not like businesses who provide information on a Fast Track proposal? Or we might not like the advice they have provided? If the advice is poor, why would Council hide it? Really, the excuse sounded like...an excuse.
   
   Well avoided, QLDC.
   
   
4. Our MP, Joseph Mooney, cannot find time to meet with us to discuss our concerns about the Fast Track Bill and the Gibbston Village application. We've tried for in-person meetings this year, in-person meetings next year, or Zoom as a back-stop. No meeting is available. By the time Joseph meets with us, if ever, the Bill will have been passed so he won't have to tell us he supports it.
   
   Well avoided, Joseph.
   
   
5. A local economist, Benje Paterson, hung up the phone when a Gibbston community member rang.
   
   Would you like to work with us on an economic assessment of the Gibbston Village proposal?
   
   No, I really don't think I want to work with you.
   
   Oh, sorry, perhaps because of a conflict of interest?
   
   Bleep. Bleep. Bleep.
   
   Not even a Goodbye. 
   
   Definitely avoided, if not well! 
   
   If, in small world New Zealand, Benje or someone who knows him reads this blog, I'd love to know why he couldn't even be polite.
   
   
6. Glyn Lewers, QLDC Mayor, has specifically banned presentations on any Fast Track proposal at QLDC meetings. The first part of Council meetings is a public forum where people can raise issues relevant to the Council. The Mayor has decided Fast Track applications are not relevant to the Council. Insider information suggests this ruling is supported by few Councillors; it is being driven by the Mayor.
   
   The Mayors rationale?
   
   A) The Fast Track Bill isn't yet passed into law. However, the Bill is before Parliament in its final form. The stated intent of the Fast Track legislation is to have minimum time for the process in which applications are approved.  This is 'Fast Track'. Once the Bill is passed, we could have a tiny window of opportunity to make our views known to Council before they are asked to comment. There will be only twenty days for commentary to be provided to  Fast Track Application Assessment Panels once commentary is requested.
   
   B) If Councillors hear the community speak, the Mayor says Councillors might be prejudiced when it comes to making submissions to the Assessment Panels. Councillors might be prejudiced by hearing what the community wants? And I thought Council were our representatives who need to know what community wants so they can represent it. I obviously don't understand local government.
   
   C) Council has no decision-making role on Fast Track – it's a government process. However, the same individual has presented on climate change to every public forum for the last several years. The Mayor thinks QLDC has a final say on climate change? Not to mention, why is prejudicing Councillors (point B above) a problem if they have no say?
   
   Well avoided, Glyn. This wouldn't be because you are trying to wrap up a regional funding deal so are cozying up with the government, would it? You are effectively being muzzled by our politicians? The politicians who won't meet the community are also preventing local government from hearing the people?

Evidence is mounting that democracy in New Zealand is in far worse shape than I would ever have guessed. You never know what you've got till it's gone.