Authoritative consultees - Some of those we consult speak with greater authority than others, but few can rival the claims of those who have been elected!

One of the most persistent urban myths about consultation is that it’s a numbers game. Reducing complex issues to a yes/no vote is always a risky business, and it is one of the reasons why quantitative surveys are gradually losing ground to more qualitative and more participative methods.

For, in consultation, consultees are not always equal. Whilst everyone has an equal entitlement to be heard, the weight that should be given to the views of particular consultees in any given situation has to reflect the circumstances of the engagement exercise. If the aim is to gauge public reaction to a new traffic scheme, the numbers in favour could well be critical. But if, for example, the consultation is about reconfiguring certain specialist health services, the views of healthcare practitioners or maybe the groups representing patients suffering from relevant medical conditions are likely to be of greatest use to its organisers. The rationale for many thousands of representative bodies is that they bring together the views of large numbers of members. Often this is far from easy. The average doctor is seldom an expert on detailed provisions of medical ethics; the average town planner may similarly care very little about planning consents for wind farms. Yet the BMA in the one case and the RTPI in the other have to employ policy people who can develop coherent positions on a wide range of issues, trying hard to go with the grain of their members’ views. Imagine them as consolidators of knowledge.

There is, however, a degree of scepticism about many representative bodies. Some are felt to place more emphasis on advocacy than knowledge. Others have their authority questioned, possibly by competing interest groups or by dissident members, when there is a difference of opinion. This may be why the Department of Communities and Local Government’s Guidance on the duty to involve appears to lean so heavily towards engaging with “citizens that are representative” rather than rely on representative groups.

But there is one source of authority that is still under-valued.

Elected members often feel by-passed by some of the modern techniques of consultative democracy; at times, they see the more traditional representative democracy as being under threat. Dame Jane Roberts’ Councillors Commission Report articulates the disillusionment very well, claiming that elected members often feel sidelined. There is a universal cry, not necessarily for more powers, but for more flexibility to do what’s necessary locally. This is one of the drivers of the Government’s empowerment agenda, and the new duty to promote democracy.

Yet decision-making is only one aspect of the role of Councillors, and in the current climate, of equal importance is the role of spokesperson on behalf of local people. When any local service provider launches a consultation, should Councillors not be the first and foremost consultees to be involved? Are they not the classic key stakeholders?

Too often the very people who can claim a legitimacy lacking in others are themselves the last to hear about policy consultations. On occasions, they are officially discouraged from taking part – on the grounds that they might become involved in taking decisions later in the process and should observe a quasi-judicial detachment in the meantime. With most Councillors now effectively back-benchers, this is nonsense.

The new duty to involve provides Councils and other public services with the opportunity to re-define their approach to listening to citizen “representatives”. They should place elected members at the centre of any new arrangements and ensure every single one of them is offered guidance or training in public engagement processes. It’s true that election turnouts may be low, but the authority that the ballot-box confers is still real – and amounts to a greater public endorsement than hundreds of representative bodies, no matter how prestigious.

Elections confer legitimacy, but they also help the elected be more authoritative as consultees. We should treat them as such.

Trigger points

• Are you re-designing your consultation processes in the light of the duty to involve?
• The Councillors Commission Report is still a current analysis of the current situation. To see the report click here
• Have you considered improved training for elected members to help them play a larger role in public engagement?

This is the 133rd 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