Binding consultations - A positive sign of things to come ...or is this Boris’ first big blunder?

The new Mayor of London has made a remarkable pledge:- “I will consult the residents in the (Congestion Charge) zone and on the border on whether we should keep the Western extension, and whatever the result I will abide by it".

On the surface, here is a clear, unambiguous commitment, no doubt welcomed by all those who criticise politicians for ducking and weaving on tricky issues where opinion is divided. Indeed, it is possible that Boris is catching the mood of the moment by letting people determine more things for themselves; we’re not consulted about the winner in Strictly Come Dancing or The “X” Factor; we vote. And are not initiatives like Hazel Blears’ Community Kitties a recognition that people participate if they think they can directly influence the result. But there is a downside. Here are five reasons why offering a “binding” consultation may not be so clever after all:-

1. If you’re going to decide something solely on the basis of how many people support or oppose it, go the whole hog and organise a proper referendum. That way, everyone has an equal opportunity to vote, there is less scope to cheat and opposing sides in an argument can enjoy broadly equal access to the media. Using consultation as a surrogate plebiscite won’t work. 2. Determining the result may not be straightforward. Even if one were to try to do so on the basis of the number of responses .....who do you count? In Boris’ case, deciding which respondents are “residents” and which aren’t won’t be easy; what about commuters into the area? And what if you sent in three responses? Or, heaven forbid, what if campaigning pressure groups organise mass responses ....from goodness know where? 3. Effective consultations are much more about qualitative debate than just counting votes. How will Boris judge who wins the argument? Will he appoint experienced assessors to read and evaluate all submissions? This is certainly feasible, but don’t expect that the general public agrees with them. 4. Offering any community a “veto” on new developments creates a culture of opposition. Planners already complain that the only people who participate in planning dialogues tend to be those who want to oppose something. If this is combined with a tendency to rely on the numbers game, one just encourages all the critics to organise like mad and do the consultation equivalent of stuffing the ballot-box. Well organised opponents can then always win even when they have a weak case. 5. Sometimes the clinching arguments in a debate come from hard-to-reach or seldom-heard quarters. That is why consultation best practice is to lean over backwards to listen to such groups, and redress the traditional bias in favour of the usual suspects. Offering a binding consultation without suitable safeguards to ensure that the debate is fully inclusive will perpetuate existing power structures.

Now in the case in point, these criticisms may not all be relevant. Boris Johnson may be so relaxed that it matters little to him which way the decision goes ....he can live with either result. But future consultations he initiates may not be like that. He may have a more determined view. Or there may be other factors he has to consider – cost, timescales, consistency with other policies etc. Where the will of the people is but one of a number of factors that will influence a decision, telling them that their view will be paramount is a mistake.

Binding consultations is like a genie let out of the bottle, for once you promise to abide by a result in one consultation – it may be difficult ever again to revert to the conventional mode whereby the decision-maker listens to the argument .... and then makes up his or her mind. Whether the Conservative Party intends to adopt this as its normal approach to consultation will no doubt emerge over time. After all, there may be a case for selecting those (few?) consultations where the consultor has a completely open mind and declare that they will be binding. Provided, of course one can distinguish them from the rest, and educate the public to tell the difference.

In the meantime they, like us, can observe what happens in London. It should be fascinating to watch.

Trigger points

• Consider whether there are situations in your organisations where your reputation among stakeholders would be enhanced by declaring consultation to be binding
• Is there sufficient clarity in your communications so that the public’s expectations re the outcomes of consultations are appropriate?
• If you are consulting a particular locality, have you defined the range of consultees sufficiently precisely and ensured that all relevant stakeholders will be heard?

This is the 110th 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