New Tricks - What do we need most – new methods ....or a new attitude?

250+ people at the Neil Stewart Associates conference on Community Consultation – Empowering Communities last week waited for Hazel Blears, but unfortunately she was unable to appear; neither was Caroline Flint, her announced replacement. But had they showed up, no doubt they would have repeated the current policy that local authorities – and all their partners must do more to engage with local people ...or in the words of Section 138 of last year’s Act – to inform, consult and involve.

It is no longer even controversial; from Chief Executives down, everyone accepts that public bodies ....and also private Companies working in the public space - do better if there is an effective dialogue with those whose lives are impacted by decisions these organisations take. The question is not if .... but how? This is where the action is. In England, a range of new devices are on offer:

• The “duty to involve” may not add much to those who are already committed to a consultative culture. But for those who haven’t yet got the message, it’s powerful re-inforcement • The “duty to co-operate” should provide much-needed muscle to oblige a whole range of partners to work together. The small print is important too, for it makes it harder for organisations to pay lip service to collaborations • The Councillor call for action, whilst temporarily postponed, raises an important principle – a more formal opportunity for issues that remain unaddressed to be ventilated with all the attendant publicity ..... • Local Involvement networks (LINks) have already started work on representing the views of patients and the public on health and social care and may prove to be a role-model for other networks of interested stakeholders. • Participatory budgeting is being strongly encouraged – with a roll-out plan currently out to consultation (See trigger points below) • A legal duty to respond to Petitions is also on the cards, though many Councils already have formal arrangements to do so.

And there’s lots more – tenant participation bodies, parish plans, citizens’ juries, deliberative events and the rest.

None of these are bad ideas. Indeed some of them are very good and have much potential.

But, new techniques, of themselves, do not create the culture change that Ministers and academics insist is required. It is only if their use is accompanied by a better sense of when public participation makes a difference can we make real progress.

In the same conference last week, Ben Page of Ipsos-MORI forcibly explained that there is still relatively little evidence that having more opportunities for involvement makes people more satisfied with public bodies. The correlation that clearly does exist is with improved communications. Councils and agencies that do a better job of explaining themselves to their citizens clearly get rewarded with a better public image.

So the message is this. Use the new tools and mechanisms, by all means, but invest simultaneously in telling people what they’re for, and in explaining how they can help in the eventual outcomes. This needs a fresh attitude that sees public involvement not just as a tick-box exercise but as an essential step in performance monitoring and change management.

Trigger points

• For a comprehensive account of the CLG “Empowerment Agenda” see the Action Plan on Community Empowerment click here
• Bookings can still be taken for some of the joint Consultation Institute/IDeA training courses on Comprehensive Engagement Strategies.
• In May/early June, the Institute expects to host two roundtable events as part of CLG’s consultation on participatory budgeting.

This is the 109th 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