BLOGS WE LIKE
_____________________________
Neighbourhoods
Partnerships

_____________________________

« April 2007 | Main | June 2007 »

Memo to Mr Brown - Making petitions count, not counting petitions

At end of the Involve event - see previous posting - I had an interesting conversation with its head, Richard Wilson. Our conversation got on to the Downing Street petition website and I made the point that whilst 1 million strong petitions on road charging clearly represented a strong opinion, it was a potential waste of a lot of "user-generated content" when you added all the efforts to create it together.

I suggested that instead of a petition being just time limited with no quantity limit, there should instead be a "tripwire" where a certain quantity triggered an action by the government.

For example if a petition reached 250,000, the government would establish a "Citizens Jury" to deliberate on the subject for a week, like a real jury, receiving "evidence" from both sides of the argument - including perhaps an online survey of the petitioners - and the report would then be published on the Downing Street website with an official government response. This would also be reported back to all the petitioners.

It struck me that the receipt of a response from an independent jury would be better for government and petitioners than just a government response alone. It might also do something to improve trust in government a bit more.

Gordon Brown has promised parliamentary reform early in his new government. Hopefully ideas like this can be fed into the debate in the coming months.

Gasping for Air - Is politics losing out?

On Monday I went to a talk sponsored by Involve entitled "The Competition for Citizen Air Time: "Is the future of British Public Engagement Political, Charitable, Social or Corporate?"

As can be imagined with an event of such a long title with a question mark at the end of it, as well as such a large number of speakers, it was inevitable that no definitive conclusions would come from the discussion. However the value was in the excellent content rather than the specific conclusions. In many ways it reflects the move to a more “open source” tentative era we may well be heading to.

Each of the speakers had interesting points to make and the Stella Creasy as chair posed some useful questions for speakers to respond to:

Simon Atkinson – Ipsos Mori

  • Decline in traditional politics
  • Shift to other types of “political” activity – rise of NGO’s, Charities, ethical business etc
  • Greater Concern over the environment – greater awareness of the need to recycle

Scott Keilor – Starbucks

  • Starbucks now runs “Coffee House Partnerships” – where socially concerned people meet to tackle environmental initiatives and issues like knife crime
  • Starbucks have now adopted policies where they actively seek to connect with their local communities
  • Are Café’s the New Town Hall?
  • Are Charities the new political parties?

I am not convinced that institutions have been replaced. Rather I think these are additions to existing democratic processes. In the case of coffee houses (the internet of the 1680-1750’s) in many way we are seeing a return to a lost tradition. Interesting point on charities, but my response would be we have a far too narrowly drawn charities law that is allowed to subsidise independent education but doesn’t subsidise the civic work of political parties. I don’t expect any politician will have the guts to widen that in the near future!

Andy Martin – Cancer Research

  • Charities – shift from a transactional relationship (money in the bucket) to a more participatory one.
  • Nowadays political parties have much less connection with the public
  • The three main parties have a combined membership of 570,000 whilst cancer Research has 2.5 million regularly donating.
  • Charities are waking up to the political muscle they have with their size of their membership

This again illustrates the narrowness of charity law. Apart from unions do employers have an individual giving scheme for political parties as they do for charities?

Arlo Brady – Freud Communications

  • Reference to Mars Bar apology to vegetarians in the news – consumer power
  • Companies are having to be more honest to compete when consumers are more sceptical
  • Polling and Focus Groups worked well in the 1990’s but are much less effective now in determining the message.
  • Much greater need for authenticity and social legitimacy. Eg Fast food companies not seen as trustworthy on leading on the issue of obesity. Same can be applied to politicians
  • Happiness is more likely to increase if poorer people feel part of a community.

I’m a bit of the sceptic on the happiness agenda as so much of it is determined by issues around relative status, which are hardly resolvable in a complex society of 60 million people. Nevertheless we should add community cohesion to the sort of agenda that includes spending more on mental health and talking therapies. It’s arguable that community itself is a form of “talking therapy”.

Polly Billington – Today Programme

  • Referred to Matthew Taylor’s comment that the media “wind people up”.
  • Public sector has received more money, but they and politicians have expected public to be grateful and are surprised when they are not.
  • Referred to the “Pauline Fowler” view of participation: “”let’s have a cup and tea and talk about it”. Is this enough?
  • Media freedom is vital but also wrapped up in debate on changes to civil liberties
  • Freedom of expression can be constrained by the need to reach consensus. Need for greater appreciation of deeply held differences in views.

John Denham MP

  • Politics is still important – it’s a place where people take responsibility for their lives
  • The act of campaigning is important whether for an issue or a party
  • The range of political choice is narrower, reflecting economic change and wider agreement on the way forward in a globalised world
  • All parties support greater public participation nowadays

Realistic response to the other comments. The answer is that there is no easy answer to the changes that are occurring. Only more work required to engage to retain community cohesion. That is where TCC is able to contribute!

Questions/Comments from the Floor and Responses.

  • Rise of the Internet – “Time person of the Year” in 2006 was “you” for the rise in user generated content on the web. The expansion of the internet will even impact on 16-24 DE class. The internet is morality neutral.
  • France – Turnout increased to 86% - Clear choice was presented to the electorate thus increasing turnout.
  • Change Happens – “5 fruit and veg a day” has shifted from a “nanny state” concern to a mainstream view.
  • Role of Government – John Denham: should government use ethical consumers to act as its champions to push the actual changes it wants? This is an interesting point that should be explored further.
  • Shift in Airtime – More ethical consumers with a portfolio of causes – not a single ideological position any more. More time is actually spent on “political activity” – it is just less party political. I would add that political “productivity” is massively improved. Less can do more nowadays.
  • NGO’s – Greenpeace now admit they got it wrong over Shell Piper Alpha being sunk in the North Sea. Opportunity for political parties to move away from simply responding to NGO agenda and developing their own distinct position.
  • Consumer Militancy – More middle class revolts eg bank charges – some polling evidence this is increasing
  • Resources - People’s measurement of “currency” in order of importance is: time, energy, space, money, information. Time is rated much more than information as we have so much information and so little time.
  • Consultation – Local Authorities only consult in narrow parameters which doesn’t encourage people.

MySpace or HisSpace?

US media has recently reported that Barack Obama and his presidential campaign team have taken control of a MySpace site listed under his name, created by a fan.

Originally set up by 29 year old Joe Anthony after being impressed by Obama's keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention, the page boasts a friend list of 160,000 members – way more than any of the other hopefuls. After Obama officially announced his intention to run his campaign worked with Anthony to provide content and share access to the friend list, however the campaign is now reportedly concerned about an outsider controlling content and the responses going out under Obama's name. It has also been reported that as Anthony increased the time he spent working on the site he eventually asked for some renumeration, which the Obama campaign has not paid.

MySpace eventually reluctantly stepped in to settle the dispute and decided that Obama should have the rights to control the page. The rights to the 160,000 person network however were given to Anthony, so now the Obama campaign is busy trying to re-build it from scratch – at time of posting he is almost up to 78,500 friends – check out his page here

A disgruntled Joe Anthony has written on his personal blog that:

"Apparently, the message here is, as an individual if you have too big of an impact you're just a liability.

This is how Obama lost my vote, and one of his strongest supporters."

With (MySpace) friends like that….

Power to the Young People

Launching his campaign for leadership of the Labour Party, Gordon Brown has called for a ‘servant state’ which would include ‘youth budgets with young people making their own choices’. The Young Mayor for Lewisham and South Kilburn NDC Youth Board are great examples of young people being empowered through making real choices about real budgets to improve their local areas. I’m currently also working on a project in East Sussex which involves young people being given a budget in order to improve their local environment. It’s a follow-up to a previous piece of Emotimap work we conducted for East Sussex County Council a few months ago. As a result of that project – which has been blogged about on these pages before and involved young people ‘mapping’ their feelings about their local neighbourhoods, ESSC is now able to provide some money to enable young people in Peacehaven and Hollington to practically address some of the issues they identified. Young people will oversee this budget, select which parts of their areas they want to improve (through a vote in local schools and youth clubs), and work in partnership with the wider community to effect real change in their local community. So far lots of great ideas have been suggested, ranging from making the local shopping centre more ‘youth friendly’ by brightening it up with art work, through to cleaning up local parks and streets and having a big event for young people and the wider community. I’ll update these pages as the project progresses so watch this space!

An asset to the community?

A major report published today says local people should be given greater control over how key assets in their communities are run - such as local community centres and other public facilities.

Making Assets Work, the report on Community Management and Ownership of Assets by Barry Quirk, Chief Executive of Lewisham Council argues that transferring public assets to communities not only leads to more responsive services that meet local people's priorities but can also create more confident empowered communities with greater civic spirit.

It concludes that there are no substantive barriers to prevent councils transferring assets into community management or full ownership. Powers already exist for this but the report finds that many are not fully aware of them, or are not using them to full benefit. Therefore a change in culture is required so that every community has the chance for more active citizenship, a greater role in running services and owning assets, and improving wellbeing in their communities.

This is a very welcome concept and is likely to build local social capital where it happens, but one wonders what incentive local authorities have to encourage this, bearing in mind such a transfer might be a loss to their own capital asset base.

In order to drive this forward it really needs local social entrepreneurs to act as drivers for change. Step forward the local Councillor in their community advocate role. A small amount of legislation in the next Local Government Bill could give them a specific duty to push this to encourage community ownership of assets.

Strengthening powers at a local level is likely to be the catalyst to build assets at a local level and strengthen local communities.

 

"We-Think" you have a point!

If you want to help write a book, why not help Charles Leadbeater, who wrote the excellent “Living in Thin Air” on the development of the Knowledge Economy, to write his new book “We-Think”. He has published it in advance as a draft for people to comment or amend:

When you think about it, it is a rather exciting business model as the more people comment on it the more who are likely to go out to buy it and then be an advocate for it to all the people in their own social network.

The concept doesn’t just stop with publication. Further editions and overseas versions will be revised online too so more people will get drawn into the project to further act as its advocates.

This could change the way knowledge is disseminated and we could move from an era of "final documents" to “permanent drafts” some of which might become the joint work of a range of contractors and clients. As a result consultancy work may also evolve into far greater diversity with smaller chunks of “clickworker” activity as the economies of scale change and significant “long-tail consultancy” emerges.

The potential blurring of organisational boundaries will nevertheless be an interesting area for contract and copyright lawyers though, but Geoff Hodgson broadly predicted this sort of thing in his scenarios involving tacit knowledge in Economics and Utopia in 1999.

Leadbeater is going to talk about “We-Think” in more detail at the Hay-on-Wye Festival and asking for a final round of comments for his book.

It is also worth noting that the A-Z of other shared content projects on the “We-think” website is really good for learning about all the other key collaborative creativity and wiki projects out there.

It's a really worthwhile project. "We-think" he may be on to something!

"A shared national consensus"?

Gordon Brown launched his campaign to become Prime Minister today and had quite a lot to say about the future of democracy at national and local levels:

“Just as my first act as Chancellor of the Exchequer was to give away power to the Bank of England to restore trust in economic policy, so one of my first acts as Prime Minister would be to restore power to Parliament in order to build the trust of the British people in our democracy.

“Government must be more open and more accountable to Parliament. For example, in decisions about peace and war, in public appointments and in a new ministerial code of conduct. But this is just the beginning.

“Over the coming months I want to build a shared national consensus for a programme of constitutional reform that strengthens the accountability of all who hold power, that is clear about the rights and responsibilities of being a citizen in Britain today"

“I think we also need a constitution that is clear about the rights and responsibilities of being a citizen in Britain today. I think that would immeasurably help our country unite around shared purposes, if people felt that the responsibilities and rights of citizens were clearly understood.”

He also suggested this could include new citizens’ powers along the lines of schemes piloted in parts of the country to require senior police officers to report to the community and granting citizens the right to petition and to be consulted on local budgets.

Some of these areas for debate were flagged up as future challenges in my earlier blog on the many changes that have occurred over the last 10 years. However there were areas not covered such as electoral reform, local government finance and powers and sensitive areas such as the role of provider diversity in the NHS and it will be interesting to see whether they are also part of such a debate?

Developing a "shared national consensus" on many of the issues raised today is surely to be welcomed and Oliver Letwin's recent speech (also blogged here) indicates opposition parties may well be receptive to this approach. This would enable any changes to have the stability to prove themselves over a number of years.

Making Democracy work requires shared commitment and investment over many years and recent pronouncements by senior politicians indicate we could see a significant move forward in this area over the coming period.

No doubt this blog will have much further to comment as we explore the issues that need to be debated first before the country can achieve any such national consensus!

From inside the Ministry of Justice

Jeremy Gould the webmaster for the Department of Constitutional Affairs (or now the Minister of Justice, which is so Orwellian it sends shivers down my spine) has started up a blog about his work and Digital Media and Government. It'll be interesting to get an insiders take on the activity and attitudes to digital media and participation in government, particularly as Jeremy has been one of the people working with Tom Steinberg and the Cabinet Office on a review of government engagement and use of social software.

I was also pleased to spot that Jeremy has The Campaign Company on his blogroll, always nice to know people are reading :)



What sort of Localism?

In Tuesday's Guardian, Polly Toynbee, analysing the local election results claimed that localism was not important and that securing proportional representation for other elections was a far more important issue at present.

The danger with this argument is that it disregards the significant polling evidence that where people feel their views are being listened too locally and they have a meaningful way to take part, they have much greater local satisfaction. Many regeneration schemes in deprived communities across the country have shown this as evidenced by the level of participation in their community activities.

The evidence she puts forward for 4 star councils changing hands politically whilst poor performing Councils don't is not borne out by the evidence as Council's such as Hull demonstrated last week. The assumption seems to be that voters judge Council's on their star rating, when that is itself a central government construct rather than anything localist in its own right.

Voters take a much localist approach with 4 star Camden changing hands due to its position on parking charges - a localist policy if ever there was one.

Despite it being a national furore in recent weeks, the public expressed their view in various ways on the frequency of rubbish collection. Again this was a opinion expressed on what were initially locally made choices, even if it then later became part of a national debate.

Polly Toynbee herself has chronicled in her Guardian column people's local satisfaction with services and contrasted it with their dissatisfaction with the same services at a national level. Surely this local satisfaction is down to the hard work and engagement of those who work in these front-line services?

She has also been a superb advocate for services like Sure Start, in which many parents go on to become staff in the service - surely a hard indicator of participation by those previously hard to reach?

She is or course right to say that "voters are disaffected....not because they yearn for more meetings", but there are many ways to engage with people that do not require conventional meetings as TCC knows from its own experience in this field.

Naturally there is a tension in the localism debate between the provision of universal services and the requirement for local discretion, but there does seem to be an emerging consensus around; firstly the development of more local organisations such as NHS Foundation Trusts with a large membership base; and secondly the requirement of minimum levels of service that seeks to reduce the worst aspects of postcode lotteries.

On the day she published her article, the Daily Telegraph reported that in a speech to the Policy Exchange think tank, Oliver Letwin was saying there was a divide between Labour as what he described as a "centralised provider" and the "framework state" provided by the Conservatives. Whilst Gordon Brown or David Miliband would no doubt respond that that is a caricature of government policy, nevertheless all of this goes to the heart of what sort of localism should evolve in the coming years. Process is part of it but then so is the minimum level of service.

So far there has been no public debate on what a "national minimum service" should be for every locally provided service. This is an area where there will be clear differences between the main political parties and surely we all need to know what the differences are? Polly Toynbee could be a powerful advocate for such a debate.

Localism is not a panacea to voter turnout, but then neither is proportional representation as European election turnouts show. The only practical way to reduce disaffection and increase turnout in an era when there is a consensus on many of the big political and economic questions is to increase the amount of face to face contact that parties spend with voters on the doorstep in weak areas as well as strong areas! That requires activists and the only way to give then a good reason to come back to all the parties is probably a substantial shift of party funding to local parties so they can engage with all voters and not just target voters in target seats.

Localism isn't just about how to provide services, it is also about strengthening political engagement too!

Rhion's consultation blogspot

Our friend Rhion Jones has just launched his consultation blog. Every day we stories in the paper highlighting the worldwide trend towards consulting people on all aspects of public and commercial policies. Rhion aims with his blog to comment on all aspects of this – and as Programme Director of The Consultation Institute (and probably the world's most prolific writer on public and stakeholder consultation!), he knows his stuff! Watch this space - http://rhionjones.blogspot.com/