Critics of current participation frequently point out that much of it amounts to ‘going through the motions’. By this they probably mean that individuals or groups are keen to be seen to be doing something, but that their hearts are not really in it. Half-hearted may indeed be an accurate description.

This argument surfaced regularly in recent debates about the Local Democracy Bill. The new duties – to promote democracy and to respond to petitions – have both attracted the criticism that they are essentially cosmetic exercises – designed to make public bodies look good, rather than provide meaningful new machinery to enhance public involvement. Even the Government seems a little unsure. Its calculation of the likely cost of the petitions provision suggests that CLG is not anticipating many more petitions; yet the whole point is to motivate communities to express their views more frequently. If they believe something will happen, they will be more likely to take initiatives and take part in the dialogue. In a word this is about the credibility of processes.