Originally published 19 May 2009. This article is retained from the tCI archive. Law, policy or practice may have changed since publication.
No-one can now deny that the MPs expenses issue has done immense damage to the reputation of Parliament. True, it’s a diversion from serious policy issues, and that there’s a lot of hypocrisy flying about with a holier-than-thou media salivating at yet another poke at elected politicians. But the damage is real. And there’s a lot of collateral damage too; elected members in local government and public servants in a wide range of public bodies will suffer from this serious erosion of trust.
Set against the recent debate on the relative merits of representative and participative democracy, it makes for a fascinating development. Guido Fawkes or Iain Dale have not been elected, but have acquired tremendous influence as part of the blogosphere. And thousands of ordinary citizens are discussing the situation online in a wide range of forums. Facebook is full of people’s opinions; Twitter may restrict you to 140 characters, but you’d be surprised how much anti-politician venom can be expressed in a few short words! Opinion polls are having a field day, and the BBC and other broadcasters, having encouraged the culture of user-generated-content are spoilt for choice as people send in their thoughts – 90% of which appear to be of the plague on all their houses variety. If, instead of jamming the airwaves, these correspondents gathered together we would surely have a modern day lynch mob. Sharpen the guillotine, someone!
Alternatively, if someone can organise a swift consultation, can we not decide on the future composition of the House of Commons, re-organise their pay and conditions, move some constituency boundaries, and while we’re at it ... abolish prescription charges and let in all the Gurkhas. We stray towards the absurd, just to make the point that mass participation, with or without the new technology tools has limitations and that a healthy representative democracy is required to translate popular aspirations into workable policy.
Far from being an opportunity for consultative politics to flourish, mistrust of the electoral process is corrosive for both types of democracy. For, in truth they are not competing models, but complementary ones. Having extensive dialogue is great, but our system needs someone ultimately to take decisions, and to be answerable. If people don’t trust these decision-makers, they are less likely to take part in the debates, less likely to be honest in expressing their views, and such consultations lose credibility and influence.
In short, for consultation to thrive, consultees need to have a minimum level of trust in those that will eventually take the decisions. A meltdown in public confidence in the overall system is not good news for consultation.
Fortunately, extensive public engagement has a positive role in helping to resolve this current crisis. Here are three suggestions
1. At national level, Ministers, their Civil Servants and Parliamentarians need to become even more transparent. Most members of the public had but the sketchiest insight into the Freedom of Information Act until last week. They now all know that this was the law that Parliament passed and then tried to by-pass in order (so it will appear) to protect their dark secrets on expenses. Many other exemptions to this legislation may now be re-assessed, including that which allows policy-making to escape external scrutiny. The presumption of transparency may become an important goal for the future – and this will lead to more open debates about policy. All positive stuff. 2. At local level, Councillors and Chief Officers may face a backwash from the national scandal, but have the opportunity to demonstrate that they are better listeners that their Westminster counterparts. Public bodies such as NHS Foundation Trusts, some Police forces and the better-managed Councils are already following the ‘You said ...We did’ model, and provided this resonates, they will reap a reward in better image and higher levels of trust. 3. eParticipation systems become a vital investment for public bodies. Ironically the Parliament that failed to sense the mood of the country regarding their own conduct is right now passing legislation requiring Councils to implement ePetition systems and proposing other measures to ensure they pick up community concerns. Clever Managers will not economise on such investments; they will implement them properly so that citizen intelligence is genuinely obtained.
Trigger points
- The content of this Topic will be considered in this week’s event. A few places remain for Technologies for Participation
- Public bodies interested in securing recognition for their consultation and public engagement activities may wish to consider the Institute’s newly announced Consultation Excellence Scheme.
- The ‘duty to respond to petitions’ is included in the Local Democracy Bill, and will be examined in details at the forthcoming Roundtable organised by the Institute in association with Public-i. This roundtable is scheduled for June in London and is entitled Petitions in Practice.
This is the 136th 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