An unforced error is a term usually associated with commentary on the game of tennis — but it has much wider implications.
An unforced error is usually the result of one’s own failure rather than anything your opponent does.
This is exemplified by Dunedin city councillor Marie Laufiso. Her attack on a fellow councillor Lee Vandervis is very much an unforced error of judgement — a "double fault" if you will and entirely of Ms Laufiso’s own making.
The University of Otago council recently committed what can only be described as a grievous unforced error by their refusing to release information to the wider public (via the ODT) as to the cost of a Maori carving.
Some unkind soul might refer to the resultant direction from the Ombudsman for the council to release the cost of the totem as "an own goal", to use another sporting analogy.
It is, in fact, far more serious and reflects a much wider attitudinal problem.
We all commit unforced errors from time to time, but it usually comes back to bite those of us using our own assets, which tends to ensure we don’t commit the same error again.
Not so with other people’s money.
It appears there will be no personal consequence for members of the university council. Spend your own private money as you will but not so the public’s money which is compulsorily acquired through rates and tax.
The ease of spending public money without consequence is usually the domain of central government which has taken such action to a hitherto undiscovered art form, so the university is far from being alone in its refusal to release information.
Unforced errors (in judgement) are commonplace as city and district councils seek to withhold information that could be fairly described as an embarrassment if released into the public arena.
All manner of skulduggery is employed. The citing of commercial sensitivity is a great favourite of councils, as is the need for fairness towards a "natural person".
Even rivers are now deemed to have all the same rights as natural person, so any information on rivers which may not suit a position held by a council can now be held as an excuse so as not to hurt the river’s feelings, reputation (and its supporters’) sensitivities.
Another unforced error and favoured ploy by authorities (if accountability is to mean anything), is to release screeds of reports and background material that holds little relevance to the particular request.
This can be a preferred option for many councils as the applicant is inundated with vast amounts of irrelevant information, thereby ending any further enthusiasm for more attempts at gaining the truth of a given matter.
It is, however, the increasing trend to withhold information by informing the Official Information and Meetings Act applicant that due to the cost of retrieving the required information, the applicant is required to deposit a sum of money with the council before proceeding with the search. Such a search can involve the onerous task of hitting the search button on a computer.
This can result in a charge-out rate of many hundreds of dollars. Indeed, this writer has been informed that a $1200 deposit could be needed before a particular search could begin.
To make matters worse, the required information is never available for 20 working days, despite often being found at the push of the aforementioned computer search button.
Central government is a lot more forthcoming with OIA requests: not because it feels any wave of democratic obligation, but because journalists tend to be more persistent than mere lawabiding rate- and taxpayers making very occasional requests.
Whether those in authority understand it or not, the release of unfavourable information is just as important as the release of good news along with the discussion that led to a given decision. So unforced errors continue to abound along with their close relative, the unintended consequence.
John Philpot Curran’s quote is worth remembering: "The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance, which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."
■Gerrard Eckhoff is a retired Central Otago farmer and former Otago regional councillor and Act New Zealand MP.
