Whose views are we hearing?

A large number of public consultations seem destined to mobilise one group of people in particular – those who are immediately affected by proposals that cause them concern. Think of the number of occasions councils have had to consult on changes to their library services. Or the rationalisation of Accident & Emergency departments at local hospitals. A large new housing development can also motivate near neighbours to become active opponents.

Whenever there are ‘winners’ and ‘losers’, it is the ‘losers’ that tend to become most actively involved. It is no surprise. They feel their interests are threatened; maybe their services are being withdrawn or facilities they rely upon are no longer going to be available or as accessible. Common law has evolved (per the Shropshire day centre case in 2014) to the point where service users have a legitimate expectation of consultation in such circumstances. No wonder therefore that public bodies structure their engagement exercises so as to comply with that requirement; a highly focused consultation is therefore not unusual.

The worried public therefore tends to be consulted. But what about the wider public? Are their views significant? Under what circumstances might their reactions influence decision-makers even more than those immediately affected?

Some years ago, TfL consulted people about the possible route for a ‘West London Tram’ Those who were physically adjacent to the planned route responded in numbers, and were almost universally opposed to the scheme. Supporters from elsewhere in the London Boroughs affected saw things differently. They sympathised with those whose properties would have been affected either by the disruption of the scheme or a permanent tram line. But they would have argued for the greater good – a modern public transport system with economic, environmental and social benefits. So, in parallel with the consultation, TfL commissioned a telephone poll of a structured sample of that larger area, and maybe predictably obtained a very different result.

Decision-makers often have to wrestle between the interests of specific service users and the whole community. It is not always an edifying spectacle. During the years of austerity, Ben Page of IPSOS-MORI has frequently reminded us that most people were fully behind expenditure cuts – provided they affected other people’s services … Even so, it is helpful to know the wider population’s priorities and preferences, and to detect which of many services it feels most strongly about. There are few supporters of seldom-heard groups and the milk of human kindness is often in short supply. But Councillors or Ministers who neglect to research the overall community sentiment will be flying blind on key decisions. If you believe in evidence-based policy-making…this is part of the evidence.

So what matters most? Consulting the worried or the wider public? Almost certainly, you need to do both. They need not be separate exercises as in the TfL example. A well-designed consultation can yield valuable data from both types of stakeholders. In general, the worried will take the initiative, and they will find you, assisted probably by campaigners who will mobilise their supporters. If you want the wider public, you may need to go out and find them. Hold meetings that will attract a broader range of people. Secure the involvement of representative institutions like Parish Councils. Meet the Women’s Institute, or the Rotary Club. Visit local pubs (popular, that one!). Hold deliberative events; Use citizens panels. There is no shortage of dialogue methods.

What we lack is a realisation that the techniques for engaging the worried are different from those we use for the wider public. In between these two categories of course, there could be lots of other groups or individuals affected to a different or lesser degree – which is why stakeholder mapping remains one of the most critical forward planning steps of all. No serious consultation should proceed without such an analysis, and, if done properly, would reveal the extent to which the whole community should also be engaged. The other indicator is the anticipated reactions of those working in the political system. Stakeholder mapping must extend to elected politicians and other sources of political influence, for, as is now widely recognised, The Politics of Consultation has to be appreciated and understood. But we would say that, wouldn’t we?

TRIGGER POINTS

1. The Institute has taught stakeholder mapping for years – and now its distinctive take on this important technique is going to be available through online training.
2. The legal reference is to the case that decided that where a public body wishes to close a facility, it must consult its users: R (ex parte LH) v Shropshire County Council [2014] EWCA Civ 404 and which is considered in the Institute’s Law of Consultation training course
3. The Politics of Consultation is now available at a special discount to Institute members

This is the 339^th 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.