Originally published 4 September 2006. This article is retained from the tCI archive. Law, policy or practice may have changed since publication.
The Prime Minister had a bad press the other day!
Nothing new in that you may say: but the occasion for criticism might have raised a few eyebrows among those who organise public or stakeholder consultations.
The charge against Tony Blair is that he has effectively pre-empted the proper consideration of the Energy Review - a formal consultation document issued in January with a closing date of April 14th. His speech to the CBI dinner was on May 16th and his critics allege that it effectively overrides anything that comes out of the wider debate. In other words, to use the terminology of the salesman, the PM went for the “pre-emptive close” (n.b. textbook example – “I'm so glad you seem to agree. Now, what shall we do first?”) Now Blair is not the first decision-maker to have strong views about a subject and to feel fully entitled to express an opinion. He might argue that he kept his counsel whilst the public debate was held, and avoided steering the discussion whilst stakeholders were preparing their various submissions. Nor did he rush into the debate within minutes of the deadline – in fact he waited over a month. This is enough time for his civil servants to have compiled their initial analysis of the public response. Surely no-one suggests that officials will present different evidence just because the PM has indicated his view?
But the counter-argument goes like this. The integrity of the consultation process requires all participants to have 100% confidence that those commissioning the exercise have an open mind between various options put to the public (or a declared preference if they have one). Stakeholders need to be sure that their views will be properly considered and, if it looks as if the decision-makers had already made up their minds, opponents feel that they have totally wasted their time!
At a time of consultation fatigue, we need to minimise the “Why Bother?” syndrome. So when the Scottish First Minister came out in favour of the ban on smoking in public places right in the middle of their extensive consultation - no wonder its supporters cried Hooray, but the opponents cried Foul.
We probably need firm Guidelines as to when it is permissible for decision-makers to go public with their own views. Too many Council Leaders, Chief Executives and even Ministers are at risk of inadvertently perverting the consultation process without clearer guidance on when it is appropriate and when it is not. For example, are there situations where a Chief Planning Officer can come clean and say: “This is our preferred option ……and here’s why we support it; however before taking a final decision we want to know your views……”
The truth is that many consultations are initiated by one public body in order to influence another organisation, and where there can be real debate as to who is the decision-maker. Many of the recent consultations run by English and Welsh Police forces on the subject of proposed amalgamations were undertaken against the background of very clear preferences expressed by local Police Authorities anxious to retain their autonomy. Did this undermine the purity of the consultation and make it just a request for public support?
If decision-makers from the Prime Minister downwards could be persuaded to be more candid and tell us exactly what they have and have not decided upon, life would be simpler…and we might avoid unnecessary consultations. The trouble then, of course is that everyone who disagrees with them would immediately demand that a proper consultation was carried out!
Maybe a case of damned if they do, and damned if they don’t!
Trigger points
- Do decision-makers in your organisations acknowledge the convention of avoiding controversial statements during a relevant consultation period?
- Have you published any Guidance (e.g. to Elected Members)?
- Would you be interested in helping the Institute develop Guidance Notes on this subject?
This is the 61st Tuesday Topic; a full list of subjects covered is available for Institute members and is a valuable resource covering so many aspects of consultation and engagement