The road to consultation has two distinct aspects – procedural and substantive. Organisers of consultations these days are quite familiar with the necessary preparations for such a formal engagement exercise. We normally refer to the procedural elements as pre-consultation, and expect it to cover discussions with key stakeholders about the form the dialogue should take – methods, venues, timings and so forth; expect these to take place in the weeks and months leading to the start of the consultation period.

In contrast, the preparation of proposals – or the substantive issues to be covered in the consultation – is an entirely different matter. Sometimes it is a short, sharp burst of policy-making activity, maybe in response to unexpected events, and requiring intensive research. Examples of this can currently be found right across the country as public bodies wrestle with expenditure cuts and find the available budget, the projected savings and the shape of alternative service delivery methods changing week-by-week. In such an unstable situation, no wonder it becomes difficult to offer consultees a consistent set of proposals.

But let’s consider those that take longer. Sometimes much longer – where it is a particularly ‘long and winding road’ to a consultation. We are familiar with the term consultation fatigue, but usually we refer to the weariness of those taking part in the exercise. Here we may be considering option-development fatigue!

Coming soon to public services somewhere near you may be proposals that have been kicking around for years. The NHS is a case in point. There have been rumours for years that hospital functions may be centralised, amalgamated or even withdrawn from some sites. Ditto for Police Stations, Fire stations and, of course, Libraries. In many cases, these have been examined on-and-off for years. Studies may or may not have been published; stakeholder groups may or may not have involved; opposition groups may or may not have formed. Shall we just say – such proposals won’t exactly be a surprise!

And the truth is that sometimes too much preparation can be as bad as too little. There are at least three drawbacks:-

• It is not always easy for the ‘problem analysis’ to take account of changing circumstances, or absorb new evidence
• Positions come entrenched; advocates and opponents alike have months if not years to organise
• The public – having heard so much about the proposals – just assume it’s a done deal

None of these are, of course, insurmountable, but they do need someone steering the process with a steady hand. A real anxiety at this time of headcount reductions is that public bodies are losing programme management know-how as well as invaluable corporate memory.

Another scenario that causes concern is that draft proposals – argued over earlier and withdrawn following public pressure – are resurrected, and the previously victorious opponents accuse the consultor of bad faith. This needs a clear communications strategy and a convincing narrative of what may have changed since last time.

Ultimately, however, there are issues where the long and winding road – however navigated – brings matters to a head, and a consultation acts as the penultimate act in the decision-making drama. No wonder attention is focused on the way in which options were developed and, in many ways, the longer and more convoluted that process, the more scope there is for mistakes.