Talking to our friends - It’s easy to criticise, but are there times when this is justified?

The weekend press has just enjoyed itself pointing out that the Prime Minister’s widely-advertised NHS Reform Summit on Monday managed to exclude many critics of the Government’s plans.

And it is easy to find such situations a soft target. Are consultations not meant to hear all sides of the argument? How can one take account of stakeholder views if they aren’t there? And won’t you just be listening to what people think you want to hear? Few people sympathised with the PM, and were sceptical when it was argued that he was just trying to persuade sympathetic waverers whilst sidestepping determined opposition from implacable opponents.

Now if Monday’s event was a major part of the original consultation, there would be merit in these criticisms. But of course it wasn’t. Whether the attendance profile is appropriate or not depends upon the nature of the event. Therein lies a particular lesson, for if you organise a discussion with that is called a Stakeholder engagement event, you should expect to be judged by the standards of consultation – and that includes listening to all relevant opinions. If on the other hand, you try to organise, shall we say a Project Implementation Workshop, then those rules may not apply.

In short, who we invite depends upon the nature of the event we are organising; hardly rocket science.

So imagine we are proposing a re-vamped Town Centre, and the outline plans have been approved, even though there is opposition in some quarters. Might it be okay to convene a meeting to consider the best ways to implement the Scheme? And would it be acceptable to exclude those opponents on the grounds that they still want a re-run of the original debate, and now the decision has been taken, it is time to move to other matters? Well, quite possibly yes; and it is probably happening day-by-day all over the country.

When therefore might it be legitimate to exclude critics?

Here are three generic situations:-

· Where decisions of principle have already been taken and dialogue can continue with technical stakeholders. This relies on everyone recognising that the debate is over, and that only implementation or specialist issues remain. There may not be consensus!

· *Where it is clearly not primarily a consultation*. If a public body convenes the session to inform and discuss, it may be right to have a selected audience. But if its main aim is to listen to views that should influence their actions, then selecting just those whose opinions it likes ... is wrong.

· Where the public has no expectation of a listening exercise. Regardless of what the organiser itself is planning, if public opinion feels it should still be in ‘listening’ mode, it will expect this to happen. It is tough on public bodies if they want to move on, but public perception is all-important

The trouble with this analysis is that it appears to give the public a veto. It’s like saying the debate isn’t over until people accept that it’s over.

But in reality, the public mood is often shaped by decisions and actions taken by those who consult. The Prime Minister’s problem this week may not have been in the kind of event he tried to organise – but in the way Downing Street spin-doctors gave it the unwise billing of being a ‘Summit’. Then he also had the unfortunate context that this is a Bill that should have gone through Parliament months ago, but is still mired in controversy, with the Government clearly scratching its head to see how to ease it through its remaining stages at Westminster. No wonder some people thought it was (or should have been) a ’listening’ exercise – and were concerned that only some voices would be heard.

The overall lesson is that public bodies and all other consultors should take care in designing a public engagement exercise. If it looks as if it’s a consultation – or if the public thinks it should be listening exercise – then listen they must – and not just to their friends!

Trigger points

• Is it a practice in your organisation for selected stakeholders to attend specific events? Can you defend your attendance list?
• In addition to the above, can you think of other situations where such a selective attendance list could be justified?
• Issues raised in this Topic are often discussed at TCI Masterclasses: • Consultation Before & After • Managing & Measuring Public Engagement • Localism in Practice

This is the 206th 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