Still too much top down: stakeholders queuing up to demand consultation

A month ago, we published a Briefing Paper entitled Exit from Lockdown: the case for consultation. In it, we made the case for decision-makers at both central and local levels to engage and consult on issues which affect millions of people.

It acknowledged the difficulties; the need for speed, the challenging trade-offs, and the inevitable winners and losers. But it also highlighted the dangers of losing support as Governments and Councils struggle to revive the economy whilst maintaining public health protections. We were not necessarily recommending lengthy formal consultations – though there are issues for which that would be perfectly justified – and feasible. Instead, we recommend a more consultative approach. Stop taking decisions without having a dialogue with those most likely to be impacted.

So this is written with the mainstream news full of tales of frustrated stakeholders:-

• The aviation industry furious that its views on the proposed quarantine arrangements were not being properly heard; the Union representing Border Force upset that front-line staff only received the details with 72 hours to go…
• The TUC still smarting after being given barely a day to look at proposed new regulations for social distancing at workplaces
• Teachers still unhappy that they had not been consulted before Government announced its 1st June re-opening day for schools in England.
• The Association of Directors of Children’s Services (ADCS) have denied being actively consulted by the Government on important legislative amendments
• General Practitioners furious that Lockdown rules were relaxed for shielded patients without any notice...or dialogue.
• Hospital Trusts given inadequate notice of compulsory masks for all staff, and unhappy they were not consulted before the Minister’s surprise announcements in England
• City Mayors demanding more involvement in planning for possible local lockdown.

We take no side in the debates that rage over what is or is not the right policy. But the case for better consultation is unanswerable.

What is going wrong? Are civil servants and officials too busy? Or are Ministers too keen to grab a timely headline and allow insufficient time to discuss their plans with stakeholders? Are they perhaps afraid of ‘leaks’ and need to preserve secrecy until the last minute? Are they so scarred by allegations of having been too slow at the beginning that they can’t contemplate any delay between planning an initiative and implementing it? Are they worried about losing control?

Whatever the reason, the danger is alienating the very people whose co-operation is much needed. It also increases the danger of poor decisions; centrally-based decision-makers are seldom as well informed about the facts on the ground as those who work there day-to-day. Worse still, it perpetuates the idea of We know best – an idea now decidedly at odds with a society where skills and knowledge are more evenly spread throughout society – and less concentrated in the civil service.

This attitude is not just found in central Government. Overbearing bosses can still be found in public institutions. Regulators have a somewhat patchy track record on public engagement, and council cabinets are not always as consultative as they might be. This is as much a local issue as a regional and national one, as local leaders tend to take their cue from Ministers and their departments…whether centrally or devolved.

Three things need to happen:

1. Stakeholders themselves must openly demand involvement. There may be times for quiet, diplomatic, relationship-building to secure long-term influence. Not now. Be heard now. See our article: Exit from Lockdown: are stakeholders being heard?Ensure better media coverage of consultation-failures. In general, journalists are yet to recognise how potent a story this can be, though the NHS Confederation fury about face-masks was well covered. We need better local press/broadcast stories.
2. Opposition parties in all administrations, need to press the case for consultation. Until recently, they have been trying to support the Government on the main thrust of its pandemic management, but surely now is the time to demand a more consultative approach to Exit-related decision-making.

No-one will change the culture in Whitehall overnight. Neither will they probably overcome the bunker mentality that arises when Ministers feel under siege. They may be younger administrations, but there is scope to improve the culture in Edinburgh, Belfast and Cardiff as well.

But this is one case where change might come not Top-Down but from the Bottom-Up. The Black Lives Matter movement – like the earlier Me Too, End World Poverty, and Climate Emergency campaigns, show the potency of grassroots inspired lobbying for change. With pressure to avoid returning to the ‘old normal’, will enough people and stakeholder organisations support the cause of Serious Listening, or similar? If not, expect the queue of disillusioned stakeholders to get longer.

TRIGGER POINTS

1. Briefing Paper 38 is called Exit from Lockdown: the case for consultation
2. A summary article is called Exit from Lockdown; making the case for consultation
3. Read the BBC’s account of the failure to consult NHS Trusts over face-masks
4. The Institute has launched a Consultation Restart service to help members and supporters re-set their engagement and consultation programmes.

This is the 360th 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.