The Campaign Company Blog

Empowerment to the People!!

Richard Wilson Director of Involve has posted an article on the Guardian Blog about the "empowerment gap" and gives an excellent overview of how the government has sought to tackle it over the last decade.

I commented on it and made 3 points, which I expand on in much greater detail here:

• As Richard points out there has been a lot of progress, but as a result of many of these initiatives being driven by individual government departments through the relationship with relevant local agencies there has been uneven empowerment development across public sector bodies within localities. So for example, some sections of local government (eg, planning) may be far ahead of other departments in the local authority as well as compared to other local bodies like Primary Care Trust's (PCT's). There would be nothing wrong with this if it were a conscious decision arising out of collective local priorities, but this has actually emerged through many, sometimes unconnected, decisions made at various times in separate Whitehall departments. The next stage could be to develop a combined empowerment agenda at Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) level, to enable local public sector and voluntary bodies to advance together and become collectively more accountable to the communities they serve. Ways to achieve this might include: LSP's to jointly commission single public engagement units in each local government area which would benefit from economies of scale with duplication of savings ploughed back into more engagement; agreeing common local standards to various consultations; strengthening the scrutiny function in local government as well as perhaps even developing a formal scrutiny function for MP's over their own local public services?
• Capacity building is vital and part of this requires greater investment in community leadership support and training at a local level. This should not just be aimed at Councillors but should also be targeted at less well-off communities. TCC has already done work on developing local community champions for communities covering specific policy areas like recycling, but also in a wider role. This approach can help develop the local leaders of the future and widen their representativeness and diversity. This would be a broader approach than rely simply on the electoral process in a locality to throw up a small number of individuals who might then receive training from their local authority. Early intervention here can widen the pool of local leaders thus helping to build wider local trust in institutions.
• TCC, in working with PCT's, has discovered that in reviewing services there is an issue around "low expectations" whereby people may say a service is fine because they have no way to compare it with the equivalent in another area: eg you may find that people say they are happy with GP services, even when they do not compare well with somewhere else. This can also be linked to the wider "Delivery Paradox" whereby people say they are satisfied with their local service, but feel the same service is as a whole declining. So far the government has generally relied on league tables and delivery incentives from the centre to drive up some improvement, but if expectations are low in the first place, there is much less local pressure from below on organisations to improve. Greater local democratic accountability is clearly part of the solution, but is probably not enough on its own. Training up "expert residents" in local communities to learn more about what is happening elsewhere and be able to assert themselves as part of a wider community champion scheme might be a way forward to help build a critical mass for higher local expectations. We have formal twinning between Council's in different countries across Europe and even with the developing world, why don't we have twinning within the UK so Council's twin with other Council's to share knowledge and good practice with much of the work being done online to ensure value for money. Most local authorities will have historic connections with many others across the country so the decision over who to twin with could be quite an interesting process in its own right. Twinning could also be taken further so good practice is shared between twinned LSP's and therefore services in areas like health are twinned too.

Increased social capital makes for a more socially cohesive society. Community Empowerment provides an opportunity to challenge complacency at the local level, whilst making people feel they can influence more at a national level.

As Richard says in his article, we don't need countless repeat measures to tell us that. What we need is to use the current broad political consensus in this area to make some clear progress in wider local empowerment in the coming years!

From Elliptical Galaxies to Potholes......

I have previously mentioned Grid Republic as a social network for a scientific or medical purpose, whereby a community of people across the world get together to use their spare computing power to do distributed computing with a capacity in terraflops - ie very big - through a rather clever screensaver download.

However this is a passive form of science where one just allows one's computer to be used for a wider purpose.

Yesterday evening I discovered Galaxy Zoo - a far more exciting piece of scientific endeavour where you can directly contribute to the scientific work online.

In this case you are helping astrophysicists to map distributions of various types of galaxy (elliptical and spiral are the two broad forms, but there are lots of sub-groups) by joining the online team (now 115,000 strong since the project started in July 2007) assessing photos of over 200 million objects taken by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS). This will assist with a far greater understanding of the lifecycle of galaxies, many of which go through mergers to move from spiral to elliptical - our own Galaxy's probable fate.

Whilst computers can be used to assess many things, when it comes to indistinct photos of two merging galaxies edge on to earth view the eye and the brain are still superb tools. However the sheer amount of data being generated means scientists and their students do not have the time to do this themselves and should they be wasting their discovery time anyway?

This is a project where anyone online at home can help.

You need no prior knowledge to take part in the work. Once you join Galaxy Zoo you are given simple online tutorials and in order to start assessing pictures you then take a short online test where you have to get 8 out of 15 pictures right - this is because they get up to 35 people to look at each photo and then recheck any disagreements between viewers.

Having passed the test you can then assess photos. For someone like myself who spent every non cloudy night from the age of 10 to 11 outdoors in the evening doing astronomy, this is a much warmer experience and could get quite addictive in a Sudoku sort of way! I did 45 galaxies last night and have resisted doing it tonight only so I could blog about it.

Apart from its benefits to astrophysics, I have started to think whether such a system could be used in other more terrestrial areas of activity.

A few came to mind:

• Assessing the millions of earth satellite photos to identify issues such as climate change and land use. On a more local level TCC has a project called Carbon Crime Stoppers and I wonder whether a photo assessment system could work with that?
• It could be used for community engagement where residents could both submit and assess street scene photos that either other residents had taken of the Council regularly took from its front-line staff going about their daily duties with handheld PDA's. This of course would be a culture change for local government where it effectively employed teams of online resident non-professionals. However creating resident buy in with the prioritisation of street scene issues could be a great way of developing community cohesion in the future.
• Assessing biodiversity in local authority parks and gardens through the taking and assessment of photos. Again this could bring together communities in worthwhile projects.

The above are just tentative thoughts and I would welcome further suggestions.

What is interesting is that this sort of project could give young people a strong and empowered role in any local activity. Galaxy Zoo says it has young people from 8 years old upwards assessing photos.

Therefore in years to come both science and community cohesion could strongly benefit from online communities collaborating to solve problems. What might have started as project to understand galactic evolution could be just the thing to massively expand the collaboration between local authorities and the communities they represent.

Do as I say, not as I do?

We were recently engaging with a community where they were asked to express their views broadly for or against an issue. The issue as such was one where people in the office would also take differing views, if only for a spot of light-hearted banter.

The point I made in our discussions was that what was far more interesting was that those who were critical also expressed their views on the benefits and the same applied vice versa. Very few people were either completely for or against on this issue where you could actually express a clear yes or no. Clearly the depth of our engagement showed that people hold complex views on the subject..

I think one of the interesting areas that one discovers within community engagement is the difference between what people say and their actual behaviour: eg people say they disagree with something and then, when given the choice, behave somewhat differently.

We see this in people's views and actions with recycling, gambling, healthy living, using big shops when they say they really prefer smaller local shops etc. The current debate on the future of local post offices is a good example. People say they want a local one but usage is declining as people vote with their feet and use other service provision - some on the internet..

Some of this may be due to people weighing up incentives against what they perceive to be commonly held views. Thus we see people say they like their community to stay the same and will oppose an over-development next door to them, but if a developer offers them £50,000+ on top of the value of their property they don't then say "no, this will ruin the neighbourhood I am moving from, so I won't accept this extra money.

Organisations like the RSA are currently studying the dichotomy between views and behaviour as a driver for challenges such as "private activity, public despair", which we have previously blogged and its an area that there will clearly be more debate. As we are discovering in some areas we are working in, people have very complex views on "entitlement" both for themselves and others. The challenge for politicians and society is how much should we actually restrict people's choices and potentially damaging behaviour or how much should we debate with it in a slower process  of engagement?

In other words - how far do civil liberties go and how possible is it to impose one approach to areas of personal behaviour in a single state, let alone a complex global society where some people in future may see their on-line community as far more important than their local community. .

I used to think you could impose such an approach but now I am not so sure?

This is why social marketing is such an interesting area with much wider applications than what it is being used for at present and why I think TCC are well positioned to be at the centre of that..

I suspect it goes back to the point I made at the beginning that people rarely hold a single view on these issues (see The Political Brain for more info - it has much wider application than politics) and that immediate influences at any point in time are really important.

Googling Alone! - A quick way to assess local social capital

You may have heard of the book Bowling Alone by Robert Putnam where he surveys the decline of social capital and suggests how it can be revived. The evidence base is generally drawn from American sources, however the points he make are very much applicable to other developed democracies.

Putnam conducted a lot of research for his book, but many working in their community trying to assess social capital for their area do not the time or the academic resources Putnam had.

Perhaps there is a web 2.0 solution?

If you are reading this article, there is a good chance you use Google or another good web search engine. If you use Google a lot you may be aware of many of its search facilities. One of the most interesting is if you type a full postcode in you get many internet entries associated with that geographical area.

As someone who was a Councillor for 20 years, I was fortunate in having a pretty good understanding of the social geography of my area. As a result recently I started typing in postcodes for some of the wealthier areas of my borough and some of the poorest.

The results were reasonably predictable. In areas that were quite wealthy you would find postings for people who ran their own businesses or were in community groups. In poorer areas you would generally find websites that related to wider public sector bodies but little community or small scale enterprise activity. At times I found up to 10 times as many pages for a relatively well-off residential road with no other facilities compared to a poorer area of flatted social housing.

Of course some might say it is all about access to home computers between poor and well off areas and that in poorer areas it is the mobile phone that has much more usage. A fair point. However in this much more connected world access to and participation on the internet can be a reinforcing factor for developing social capital in wealthier areas. The fact that the gap is so wide in the number of Google pages is a useful proxy indicator for quickly assessing levels of basic social capital and social connectedness.

What can we do about this?

One idea I had was that Local Strategic Partnerships (LSP) could trawl every postcode in their locality and ensure they are connected with every group listed. I suspect there is good software that can automate much of this process. This in itself might go some way to increase the overall stock of social capital across a local authority area as more groups and individuals would be connected to key local stakeholders. A far-sighted LSP might even seek to connect people within a community together through encouraging the development of geographical based social networking software similar to Residents HQ that I have previously blogged about.

Another thought was for Local Strategic Partnerships to identify 10-20 postcodes with low Google pages and perhaps conduct a pilot survey of them regarding internet access. It may be that residents are not using free facilities in local libraries? Some extra publicity and perhaps even the sort of doorstep engagement that TCC recommends for many projects could be easily provided. This could be linked to an offer of simple computer training.

This sort of approach might go some way to connecting people up and creating the sort of network effects that can perhaps start to increase the stock of social capital in some poorer communities.

An E-Bowl of Sugar!

An interesting new approach to social networking, which is normally associated with widely dispersed communities.

This time it is to reinforce a real geographical community.

Residents UK is a social network site for people living within modern blocks of flats to communicate with each other. In other words people don't ignore their neighbours or have a chance meeting on the landing but actually move in and check out who lives in the block and who might share an interest with them or who can help them.

It will be interesting to see whether it takes off and whether developers of these blocks encourage it? The danger is that it might increase social segregation by making such electronically "gated communities" even more cohesive and less connected with surrounding poorer communities.

I would therefore love to see a local council kit out one of its own housing blocks with home computers and encourage people to join a local block social network - a sort of "e-tenants association". Could such a network go some way to tackle the generally lower levels of trust in poorer communities and perhaps enhance community cohesion?

The Death of Communities?

The Independent on Sunday has coverage of a study by the Prince's Trust about community decline. The report claims that a third of people are predicting the death of their communities as traditional social networks decline in the face of rapid change in the composition of communities.

The report claims that:

"Most people believe the days of face-to-face contact are numbered, with 65 per cent saying that people in the future will have more contact through the internet than in person. Almost one in 10 Britons, nine per cent, admits to failing to meet other people socially on a weekly basis. And 15 per cent go a week without speaking to any of their neighbours."

More significantly from a community cohesion perspective the report claims that:

"Poorer communities are the least confident about the future of their community and the least satisfied with life in general. More than one in five people here said they had not spoken to a neighbour for at least a week, while eight per cent have not spoken to a neighbour for at least a month."

The Independent also reports on laudable actions by government and the voluntary and private sector to support those poorer communities. Whilst one can always argue for more resources, a more important issue is how we use existing resources better. Two things come to mind:

• Investing in community assets so they draw in a wider community of people to increase social interactions and strengthen social networks.
• Supporting people in the community to act as local champions and advocates - perhaps through a relaxing of some inflexible benefits rules to enable them to be better supported in the work they could do talking to a range of local people.

TCC, working with the New Deal for Communities (NDC) Network as well as with local authorities on community cohesion, has come to the view that it is investment in some of those smaller changes that can make a bigger change in the long-run.

If we are to either sustain or rebuild social networks and community cohesion, it can only be through engaging with the people in a community and helping them to identify the shared challenges that face them and their neighbours. Only when you identify those challenges can you create a potential for dialogue across other cultural and social barriers.

Shameless Marketing

The Chatsworth estate is heading for its second election (remember shopowner Kash was elected to Chatsworth Council at the end of series 3) and this time, if I've viewed the preview clips correctly, this gritty Mancunian housing estate will be electing their own Young Mayor.

As a programme, that I'm a great fan of, which has taken social commentary to, occassionally unbelieveable, dramatic heights I can't help wondering what might be in store for our candidates and what the writers have decided should be the moral tale told with this next election.

Previews of story lines for the episode (5) suggest that 'Debbie spots a chance to provide free egg and chips to everyone on the estate' (courtesy of the Radio Times) - could it be a bribe to help her chosen candidate get elected? Well, like me, you'll just have to wait and see whether the writers have decided that participation in elections should be equated with spoils politics - even if the spoils, in true Shameless style, is free egg and chips.

On a more serious note though, well done to the Shameless team for a piece of Shameless marketing for youth empowerment and participation. With any luck there'll be new young mayors or young leaders springing up in local politics all over the country - joining those already in post in places like Lewisham and Newham. And, as its the biggest focus in the UK for all those politicos this year, we can only hope that the candidates for this years London Mayor and Assembly elections are tuning in and thinking of new ways to involve young people, not yet able to legally vote, in the decision making that affects their lives.

Private Optimism, Public Despair - What can we do?

It has been long known that there is a general perception gap between what people might think of their local hospital and what they think of the NHS in general.

Matthew Taylor, Chief Executive of the RSA, writing in the New Statesman has talked about these difficulties but goes much further with an important and insightful article which looks to the future. He says:

"This perception gap is not restricted to public services, as a recent BBC poll on families confirms. Some 93 per cent of respondents described themselves as optimistic about their own family life, up 4 per cent from the previous time the survey was conducted, 40 years ago. Yet more people - 70 per cent, across race, class and gender - believe families are becoming less successful overall."

He also adds to the point by Polly Toynbee, that we have blogged, on the lack of advocates to tell good news in the public services when it happens:

"In the burgeoning industry of reputation management, it is generally argued that people are much more likely to tell others about bad experiences of services than good ones (5:1 is the usual ratio)."

He argues that trends such as the rise of individualism and the decline of some forms of collectivism combined with the rise of pretty much self-organising global capitalism moving at a rapid pace have created this private optimism and public despair, adding that:

"Globalisation is the gravity of modern society: an unstoppable force that will knock us over if we try to defy it."

Since the collapse of the cold war two systems in 1989 no single person or authority is in control even if some parts of the world are more powerful than others.

He points out that people still see the same broad problems as they did 100 years but now see rapid change as a challenge and seek greater comfort in those close to them.

However, he strikes an optimistic note saying that people are more affluent and healthy and yet there is a danger of some missing out on the celebration:

"Progressives want the world to be a better place. We bemoan its current inequities and oppression - yet if we fail to celebrate the progress that human beings have made, and if we sound as though the future is a fearful place, we belie our own philosophy. Instead, we need to address a deficit in social optimism that threatens the credibility of our core narrative."

Addressing social optimism is clearly a project for everyone. We have previously blogged about Richard Layard's case for increasing overall happiness and David Cameron has talked about the government having a mission to improve people's general wellbeing.

Matthew Taylor makes the case for a New Collectivism to tackle what he describes as the social optimism deficit:

"It is in working with others on a shared project of social advance that we can be reconnected to the sense of collective agency so missing from modern political discourse. It is the attitude of the spectator that induces pessimism, the experience of the participant that brings hope. The problem is not that change brings fear and disorientation (there's nothing new in this), it is that we lack the spaces and places where people can renew hope and develop solutions."

It was challenges like this that brought TCC into being and where we try to assist organisations. He then refers to the sort of change making we should all be attempting together:

"The institutions of the new collectivism must be devolved, pluralistic, egalitarian and, most of all, self-actualising."

This is the sort of approach that this blog argued for and it good to see the arguments so well set out here. He gives a number of examples of where this happening:

"Today, there are signs of a yearning for new ways of working together. There is the growing interest in social and co-operative enterprise and the emergence of new forms of online collaboration. Gordon Brown's citizens' juries are a tentative step in the right direction, albeit without much fun or risk-taking..."

and

"Tackling climate change offers a fascinating opportunity to interweave stories of action at the individual, community, national and international levels."

TCC is working in places like EC1 in London on increasing recycling whilst linking it firmly to the whole issue of climate change through initiatives that engage with young people.

He concludes by making a call for people to build the institutions of the new collectivism:

"Despite the huge impersonal forces of the modern world, people are prepared not only to believe in a better future, but to work together to build it......This potential will be fulfilled only when we provide spaces for collective decision-making and action that speak to the same vision of collaboration, creativity and human fulfilment that progressives claim to be our destiny."

Many of these new institutions of this new collectivism already exist: NHS Foundation Trusts, New Deal for the Communities (NDC's) aspiring to run community assets, social networking sites like Ning, Facebook and Myspace. These are a different set of institutions to perhaps those of the 1945 welfare settlement, but they are a potentially strong mixed economy of institutions nevertheless, and they and other new institutions need support to build a collaborative new collectivism for the future.

In addition there is also challenge for long established institutions, such as local government, to respond to this agenda and to ensure they can relate more effectively to the places where people are optimistic such as within the family unit, whatever size or shape it now comes in. That also means they have to make themselves more accommodating to the places that people are optimistic so they can engage within that space.

Institutions, in whatever form they come and new or old are the arguably finest piece of (social) technology we have created. The Saturn 5 may have put men on the moon, but it was the institutions of the state and their agencies and contractors that put that immense machine together, and educated and trained the men for that mission. Institutions or whatever age encourage collaborative and collective action so as Matthew Taylor has stated the more we strengthen them through peoples involvement in them the more likely we are to rebuild trust and social optimism.

Spieling about health

A fascinating article in today's Times ''Spiel at the wheel?'' discusses how taxi drivers are being harnessed as word of mouth marketeers, with an interesting example about one cabbie promoting the delights of a holiday in Bangkok following a 5 days all expenses trip to Thailand! And - as people become more and more overwhelmed by traditional forms of advertising confronting them in every aspect of their day to day lives - new and different approaches such as 'word of mouth' marketing are having increasing appeal.

This is absolutely our experience at The Campaign Company. In our work with NHS organisations - particularly foundation trusts - we have done considerable work helping Trusts build their membership communities. (Working with over 50 Trusts we've recruited over 160,000 public members - about 1 in 5 of the current public membership) We've found that traditional forms of advertising - the leaflet, the poster, the join on-line form have limited impact. People are much more responsive to a direct ask - particularly one-to-one. And we take this a step further by encouraging 'member get member' recruitment and the development of 'Membership Champions'. Someone who has already joined will be be a powerful advocate to their friends, family and those in groups and organisations they belong to. They'll know how and when to get attention and be able to hone the message to the person they are talking to - because they know them well. And they will be listened to - because they are trusted and known to them - the 'word of mouth' approach in the FT context!

And in their foundation trust members, NHS Trusts have a fantastic resource at their disposal - these people are so well placed to become the 'word of mouth' advocates not just about membership but about the Trust itself - health marketeers! And as 'Patient Choice' becomes more of a reality - Trusts must embrace their FT members as a key element of their marketing mix. These are the people out there in the community; they are the people in the pubs, clubs, workplace, playgroups, bus queues, school gates. Of course - not every member is a 'word of mouth' marketeer - the trick for the Trust is to learn more about it's members - segment and stratify - and find those who are. Then it's about building the relationship - giving them the information and then sinply 'getting them talking'!

And taking this a step further - these people are just so well placed to pass messages back - let the Trust know about the things going well - but more importantly provide quick feedback about things not going so well.  Bad news always spreads so much faster than good news - so Trusts need as many mechanisms as possible to get that valuable 'early warning'! 

Making Disempowerment History?

Quite a significant speech today from Nick Clegg, the new Leader of the Liberal Democrats, on reform of the public services.

Whilst most coverage will focus on his comments on schools, hospital and taxes, a significant theme of the speech was his comments on community empowerment. The Lib Dems have generally been strong promoters of devolution to local government and local Councillors, but Clegg went further saying:

"This also means embracing a wider understanding of empowerment: not just of local authorities and politicians, desirable though that is, but of pupils, patients and parents too.

Individual power must be an everyday thing, not just reserved for the moment a vote is cast in the ballot box."

This again strengthens the consensus in this area, thus making it easier for the government to move forward with wide public support.

The strengthening of Local Strategic Partnerships to increase joined up public services locally is one important aspect of public sector reform, but this must be combined with empowering local communities to take control of their local institutions and work together with such Partnerships to solve local problems. Not just hospitals and schools, but also smaller community assets. TCC has worked with residents in New Deal for Communities (NDC) areas, young people and with Hospitals developing their membership to make the aspirations of politicians for "pupils, patients and parents" to exercise their "individual power" as an "everyday thing", a reality.

Power to the People - but do they really want it?

The world of participation and engagement is awash with industry terminology and catchy phrases but experienced practitioners will know that realising progress in empowerment and in devolving any kind of real power to the people is still an uphill struggle regardless of the language you use.

American colleagues wax lyrical about their state proposition system where the man and woman in the street get the final say, through referenda, on policy issues of the day. Don’t misunderstand me I’m not an advocate for referenda. I am however an advocate for people who are affected by policy decisions being given an opportunity to have a greater say in their design and delivery. I’m not suggesting revolution just evolution.

I detect a willingness in Whitehall to embrace the devolutionary and empowerment agendas – pilots in participatory budgeting; the new duty to involve in the local government and health sectors in England and Wales - but would ask whether a majority of the great Britsih public are actually willing to take the opportunities and responsibilities that these agendas offer the man and woman in the street.

The British psyche is a paradox between the desire for strong leadership and the longing to be listened to. We are never more vocal than when telling decision-makers what they’ve done wrong but rarely want to be those decision-makers who are so often the target of mistrust, abuse and, on occasion, outright loathing. It’s a vicious cycle and one that is a challenge to break as the very people who shout loud when things go wrong are the same people who need to be encouraged to be, in their own eyes, at the other end of the abuse that people like themselves dole out.

There are encouraging signs on the horizon - the levels of participation by young people as candidates and as electors in the Young Mayor elections in the London boroughs of Newham and Lewisham and the numbers of signed up members of Foundation Trusts in the Health Sector - but more innovative thought and approaches are required by public sector organisations on how they can encourage the man and woman in the street to be party to the decisions rather than just party to the criticism of them.

A Bright Idea?

Just seen an advert for London's first Light Bulb Amnesty on January 11-13. where you can trade in up to two traditional light bulbs for two free energy efficient light bulbs.

It is being promoted by the Mayor of London Ken Livingstone, who says that changing one light bulb can save up to 110kg of CO2. If every Londoner used energy efficient light bulbs, London could save 575,000 tonnes of CO2 and £139 million a year.

This "Amnesty" concept can be used to promote other environmental positives. Indeed TCC has worked with London Borough of Newham on environmental events where residents can trade a bag of recyclable rubbish for a bag of recycled goods.

We've heard of gun and knife amnesties and now we have a light bulb amnesty, but I am also sure that there are other potential "amnesties". They could for example promote healthy eating and smoking reduction where you can trade something unhealthy for something healthier. TCC is currently working on social marketing projects to promote specific behavioural goals for a social good. Amnesties could be one of the ideas amongst many that could be applied to promote positive social change.

The 120 Days of Christmas!!

Heading back to the office in the cold wind today, it struck me that why do we have such an excellent mid-winter festival and then make our January and February's look so dreary?

A simple solution that struck me was that people and organisations should keep up their Christmas lights until the end of February. Indeed I think Christmas lights should be on from the beginning of November so the 4 darkest months are lit up!

Now I know that some might argue that in an era of climate change we should not be so wasteful, but the costs to the economy of sickness and mental illness in January and February should make us see the bigger picture. In any case we are rapidly moving to low energy lightbulbs so I think the level of energy usage should not increase for the extra time lights are on.

Richard Layard has written extensively about the science of happiness and has been successful in campaigning for extra government support for Talking Therapies. I don't necessarily agree with him that you can substantially increase overall happiness for everyone in a competitive market economy where change and innovation will always make some people unhappy at any given point. However I do agree with Layard's case that we can make things better for those who may suffer depressive illness. It is also well known that the middle of January is the worst time of the year for this.

Little things such as lighting up the dark days of winter with a continuing display of lights should make everyone feel a little better as they head back from the office in the 8 weeks after the Christmas holidays!

Closer to Home - Taking to the Streets!

Last week, we took to the highways and byways of north Cumbria to find out what local people thought about the proposed changes to the healthcare services in their area. 

After a successful day in Carlisle, the team travelled south to Penrith on Tuesday, before making our way through the lakes to Millom on Wednesday.  This was followed by a beautiful coastal drive to Whitehaven and then Workington before finishing up the week in Maryport.

While many claim society is becoming more apathetic by the day, we were met with the same response we get in all of our engagement with local communities : people want to be consulted!!  They are pleased - and sometimes quite surprised to be asked for their views - are are keen to find out what changes are planned and have their say.

We spoke to hundreds of local people in GP surgeries, libraries, shopping centres and hospitals about health issues ranging from acute hospital reform to GP home visits.  The overwhelming sentiments were:

• People in Cumbria want services closer to their homes
• People do not want to travel as far to visit their relatives in hospital
• People support the PCT's commitment to Community Hospitals

Above all, it was fascinating to talk to interested local people about issues that affect them so closely.  Thanks to everyone who found the time to talk to us - it's much appreciated!

In line with the PCT's commitment to engage with as many people as possible, we will be returning to north Cumbria in January to visit some even more rural areas such as Brampton and Keswick - Watch this space!!

Community Day - a new Bank Holiday?

Just had a look at the website for Community Day which is backed by voluntary organisations such as NCVO, NACVA and CSV as well as the TUC. It calls for a new UK bank holiday that they would like to see introduced to the UK's calendar.

They suggest it could fall during the Autumn half term break in October, breaking the long run of 16 weeks without a holiday between August and Christmas.

The website says it would be a bank holiday with a difference. It would be one day in the year with a special focus on celebrating and promoting voluntary community activity.

Whether or not they are successful, the idea of celebrating community activity in a special way on a certain day can only assist in building public trust and helping make democracy work.

Using Plain English or Dumbing Down?

Apparently the Local Government Association has published a list of words that public bodies should try and not use if they want to communicate effectively with local people. Whilst I can understand why we should avoid some of them ('contestability' and 'place shaping have always been two of my favourites!), others seem perfectly reasonable-are terms such as 'good practise' and 'level playing field' really so arcane?Certainly no worse than old cliches such as 'It is absolutely vital that residents are told how to access services' which is trotted out in the LGA Press Release announcing its'non-word' list!

'Closer to home' gets closer to the people of Cumbria

We have been working with Cumbria PCT over several months now on their 'Closer to Home' consultation for the future of healthcare services in north Cumbria. This week our team, led by Matthew Upton, are taking to the streets of north Cumbria to give local people their opportunity to have their say about the proposals.

Today - Monday - it was Carlisle! Among the places our team have visited - The Lanes Shopping Centre; Age Concern and the Spencer St and Grosvenor House GP surgeries. And so far - so good! People, who would not normally get involved in such a consultation, have welcomed the opportunity to learn more about the ideas and options for the future and have been more than willing to share their views.

What did they learn today?

• people are concerned about the future for everyone in Cumbria - not just what might benefit them in Carlisle with real recognition of the clhallenges faced in providing 21st century healthcare in a very rural county;
• people are keen to hear more about service improvements in Cumbria and especially Carlisle that can mitigate the need to travel to Newcastle - especially in the winter!

And - two of the people Matthew and the team spoke to had featured in the DVD we had filmed for the PCT in September - now that makes it a very small world!!

See the DVD and learn more about the consultation at www.closertohome.org.uk 

Is Civil Society Prepared for the Future?

Geoff Mulgan wrote in the Guardian yesterday about the Carnegie UK Trust Inquiry into the future of Civil Society. He was Chair of the Inquiry and in his article summarises some of the key findings.

Quite a few findings were pessimistic. Societal fragmentation, inequalities, racial tension, loss of public spaces (both physical and intangible) and increased fear through raised security against terrorism were all issues that could challenge civic society.

Third sector involvement in the delivery of public services was expected to modestly expand, but there was an issue of the private sector displacing the third sector in areas where it was established.

At the same time there was much greater debate, public awareness, government interest and cross-party consensus over the need to support civil society than the past and no senior politician ever argues "there is no such thing" nowadays!

Geoff Mulgan concludes by posing the question:

"So is civil society prepared for the future? Probably not. Most organisations have to live hand to mouth, juggling short-term funding and perpetual minor crises. Even the bigger ones rarely get much time to stand back and look at the bigger picture. Many are on a treadmill chasing after contracts and new funding."

This is probably the biggest challenge out there. Only through more wide ranging community engagement and public debate can we perhaps address the question posed.

Advice for Campaigners

An interesting article by Chris Stalker, head of campaigning effectiveness at NCVO in Guardian Society this week examines some of the issues faced by campaigners at a time when "people power" is being enthusiastically welcomed in government circles.

As well as setting out some of the challenges faced by voluntary sector in its relations with the government - some of which I personally think are a little pessimistic, - the article also makes some telling points regarding how the voluntary sector campaigns:

"We must be clear about what we want to achieve, and have a narrative and model for change. We must target and influence the relevant decision makers, be agile, and monitor and evaluate for impact. The importance of assessing and demonstrating impact to stakeholders is critical at a time when campaigners are increasingly in the public eye and when weak campaigns can be exposed for setting inappropriate objectives around promotion of the organisational brand and growing levels of funding support, rather than explicitly seeking social and political change."

This is sage advice and something that TCC stresses in both the advice we give and the hands on engagement we do in partnership with many organisations.

Internet TV - An aid to Democracy?

Two websites have just been launched that cover political campaigning and political participation by young people. Both are internet TV channels. Is this a new trend?

Catch 21 is described as "the political internet channel run by young people for young people".

CampaignTV is a broadly pro-Labour site that has just been launched and featured in an article in the media section of the Guardian today.

Sites like these join established political internet TV sites like 18 Doughty Street.

With a General election now unlikely for at least 18 months and with the speed in which websites can become essential to use in just a few months, will Political internet TV be a key communication medium by then?

The "Velvet" Banking Policy Change

The queues were very orderly, indeed many were very elderly. They did not trust what those in authority were telling them.

They were here to ensure what they had worked hard for was protected.

By their actions they were seeking change. And through their unplanned co-operation they achieved it!

Berlin or Prague in 1989? Moscow in 1991? Kiev in 2004?

No, Croydon in 2007.....and many other places across the UK.

Northern Rock customers made a judgment call that they wanted security for their money. Current guarantees up to the first £30,000 were not enough for them.

Over then last few days we have seen mass participation in changing a government policy. 1,000's of people were brought together by their individual circumstances.

What are the lessons of the last few days?

For the government, any similar financial crisis nowadays is likely to feature images of elderly people. Many young people either won't have the savings and are more likely to deal with their finances online or by phone. Gone is the era when governments of whatever hue needed to be seen to be tough taking on interest groups. Now it is more likely that it will be facing the general public self-organising. Speed and flexibility in responding will be crucial. The much smaller queues today, demonstrate the announcements yesterday had an effect.

For companies and public bodies, if you get into this situation, you should be making some contingency plans as part of your risk management to engage with your customers in any long queues. Making them feel their concerns are being listened to would be a great start in responding to such events in future.

This is unlikely to be the only time something like this happens. We live in a much more complex world of “just in time” and higher financial commitments, so a crisis in a financial sector in another country (ie sub-prime mortgages in the U.S) can easily have a knock on effect on a building society 3,000 miles away!

Engagement with the public is even more vital in uncertain situations like this!

The end of "Business as Usual"?

Polly Toynbee in today's Guardian comments on Gordon Browns speech to the National Council of Voluntary Organisations in London on Monday where he said politics could not be "business as usual".

The Prime Minister's Speech was made at the same time as the announcement of plans to  to set up independent citizens juries to help the Government formulate key policies - the first jury will meet later this week on the subject of children with a second on Crime and Communities - and a citizens summit to help formulate a "British statement of values".

He also announced a cross-party Speaker's Conference to help tackle the issue of low voter turn-out. Mr Brown said that this rarely-used device would "address the problems of the political system itself" to tackle the problem where "once 84% of people voted, and that was 17 out of every 20, in the last election it was less than 62% - 12 in every 20. In the 1950s 1 in 11 people joined a political party, today it is 1 in 88. Once political parties aggregated views from millions of people, now they need to broaden their appeal to articulate the views of more than the few. In 1987 nearly half the electorate identified fairly, or strongly, or very strongly with a political party, now only 1 in 3 do so. 20 years ago 4 in 10 people trusted the government to put the needs of the nation above those of political parties, more recently it has been only 1 in 5."

The speech itself again reiterated the commitment to greater local involvement where people will influence their beat policing, their local NHS, the help carers get and what schools offer.

Polly Toynbee commented today that, "Brown is right to point to vibrant expressions of civic life in parallel but apart from the political process. Millions of people do good things that never intersect with the waning life of local political parties, joined by only one in 88 voters".

She cautions that, "These promises are tricky. Will each participant protest when not all their views are acted on?"

However she also criticises those who, "dismiss this ambition to reach outwards, the obvious riposte should be: "What would you do?" Now that only 62% bother to vote and millions say Westminster is out of touch, doing nothing is not an option. Let the sceptics offer their own solutions."

Whilst her comments cover the overall proposals, something that she did not refer to was the Prime Minister's answer to questions after the speech where he was challenged to commit to provide more training and support to enable the less articulate to engage. His response was to say, "The Commission on Volunteering in England is proposing, as I think people here know, that we do far more to help train people. I want us to provide some more finance to enable that to happen. It is clearly a challenge for the future that more training funds are available for this and I think we should see it as a central part of what we can actually do to back up the great work that different voluntary organisations are doing and we will try to do that."

If this commitment is significant, then maybe we can say it is the end of "business as usual"?

Young People to lead on environmental change

A new report from the Sustainable Development Commission, Every Child’s Future Matters, calls for local authorities and young people to lead on environmental change, and calls for schools, youth services and community groups to empower young people to do this. TCC has recently been working with schools and youth groups in EC1 on recycling and climate change – aiming to empower children and young people to be recycling champions in their local areas. In East Sussex we have also been working with the County Council, young people, and the wider community on participatory budgeting projects which are seeing young people having a genuine say and making a positive impact on their local environment. The SDC report explores the influence of the environment as a whole - from road traffic to green spaces to climate change - on children and young people’s well-being, and provides evidence that the environment can deliver the Every Child Matters outcomes. Does anyone have any other examples of how local authorities and other bodies are working with young people on environmental change? Read the report here

Young People and Participatory Budgeting

Over the last few months we have been working on a project for East Sussex County Council to help young people to participate in deciding how to spend £20,000 in two projects in Peacehaven near Brighton and Hollington in Hastings.

We think this is really important work and reflects important trends in both youth engagement and local government participatory budgeting as was shown by recent speeches by ministers Hazel Blears and Ed Balls. Indeed the Prime Minister has taken a deep interest in this subject recently hosting a "Youth Cabinet" where the Young Mayor of Lewisham - a project we have helped develop for that Council - took the chair in the Cabinet room!

The current East Sussex project follows on from a previous TCC ‘Emotimapping’ exercise there. Over a month-long period local residents from the two areas - including many young people - told the County Council how they felt about their area. Using large scale maps and MSN Messenger-style ‘emoticons’ - expressing emotions such as ‘feel safe’ or ‘feel scared’ - young people identified local places and described how they felt about them. They then went out ‘on location’ to film and interview one another talking about these places and what they thought could be done to improve them.

Common themes were identified in both areas and young people had various ideas about what could be done to improve their neighbourhoods. Suggestions ranged from making public transport cheaper and more accessible, to improving street lighting, cleaning and litter and graffiti, and providing more constructive activities for teenagers.

As a result of this consultation work the County Council agreed to provide money to enable residents in the Peacehaven and Hollington areas to practically address some of the issues they identified.

Following consultation with local residents, Councillors, MYPs (Members of the Youth Parliament), school pupils, community groups, and other stakeholders, a short list of ideas was drawn up for each area and a vote held.

More than 1,000 young people cast their votes in a ballot for how £20,000 of County Council grant should be spent improving their communities in Peacehaven and Hollington. In Peacehaven it has been decided that the money will be spent on organising a community event which will include cleaning up local parks and producing artwork for the local shopping centre and youth club. In Hollington the budget is likely to be spent on play equipment for a local park, improving the local youth centre, and holding a Community Sports Day.

In the coming years participatory budgeting is likely to be an expanding activity for youth services and local government. We are pleased to have assisted East Sussex County Council in leading the way in giving local people a say!

Communities on the Web

It is quite likely someone will have mentioned the online social network Facebook in some context to you, whether to wax lyrical or to warn you of its dangers.

Not to be outdone the Campaign Company now has a page or two on there. We are interested in exploring the development of these online social networks and I'm sure we will publish our views and conclusions here in due course. We are are also developing wiki systems to make this blog and website much more interactive. More on that in the future.

Its not just Facebook, where communities and social networks are developing. Second Life even has its own money, exchange rate and developing market economy. If you meet "Campaign4 Yue" on there, that is me, though I am still finding the processing power required to move around a bit daunting!

Some may think these communities are escapism or frivolous, but it can be argued that they add to the richness and complexity of social relations. There are also online communities that work together on cracking serious scientific number crunching issues through linking together down time on computers and using screen savers for practical purposes to build what is currently a 4 terraflop global supercomputer. If Facebook is the Face of 2007 then Grid Republic could be the story of 2008.

What all these sites illustrate is that people want to engage with each other in a range of social interactions - some fun, some serious. It sounds a bit like real life to me!

Many of these online communities reach out to groups that are sometimes difficult to engage with by traditional means such as young people.

Just as democracy is the "least worst system" for resolving differences in real life, then there will need to be similar systems of deliberation and choice online to resolve issues.

If we want to make Democracy work well we have to apply ourselves to all situations whether its a local community or an online community.

The Jury's Out

At the Labour Party Leadership Hustings in London on Saturday, Gordon Brown talked quite a lot about Citizen's Juries and how they should be used more to deliberate on local issues.

This sounds like a good idea as they allow far more in-depth discussion on a given issue.

Whilst they are not a replacement for other forms of democratic process they can certainly add to the richness of a debate.

However in order for that to happen there needs to be support from central government to encourage more of them to occur and for them to be seen as a regular part of local engagement processes.

In the rush to get decisions made - and the Planning White Paper springs to mind - there is a danger that they will be seen as something that is unnecessary.

That need not be the case. As Jonathan Upton of TCC recently pointed out in a presentation he gave to an event organised by the Consultation Institute, the trick is for community engagement to start early and be ongoing.

If that approach becomes the norm, then a wider range of engagement tools, including Citizen's Juries, can be employed to develop options or even wide consensus on a host of controversial local issues.

Let's hope the Jury's in before long!

Citizen Brown says "Power to the People"?

Many times I have heard political parties saying they should engage with the public more outside elections. Are we now going to see some action?

Yesterday Gordon Brown announced a radical shake-up of the Labour Party. The Guardian reported that:

"Mr Brown's plans include establishing policy forums in every constituency, as well as regular questionnaires to members, and "citizens' forums" designed to improve Labour's campaigning edge and engage local people outside the party."

This sounds very welcome, but the proof of the pudding will be not the strong local Labour Parties that will be able to put this into practise, but whether there will be assistance to make this a reality in the 270 seats where there are no Labour MP's.

Labour's Deputy Leader candidates also set out their stall over political participation yesterday on the Power Inquiry website. There were some interesting ideas, which I have commented on in italics.

Alan Johnson - greater use of technology at a local level. There is a need for customised tools to enable this to happen.

Hilary Benn - an annual statement for each local party. This sounds like a clever move away from traditional resolutions to a more discursive approach.

John Cruddas - ring fencing of local party money and direct elections to constituency section of the National Policy Forum by the entire membership. This may make the NPF more relevant to members.

Hazel Blears - supporters should be able to sign up for text alerts and greater use of social networks such as Facebook. These could be linked into local web based services to link local and national technologies together.

Harriet Harman - more engagement with people in their workplace. Interesting idea, but needs more detail.

Peter Hain - policies should not be bounced through media headlines. Good in principle, but will it never ever happen?

Whoever wins, I suspect many of the ideas suggested will be taken up by the successful candidate

On wider issues:

• All bar Hazel Blears were sympathetic to a serious debate on a Written Constitution.
• A majority were in favour of considering further electoral reform. Harriet Harman and Hazel Blears were the strongest against this.
• All were in favour of a majority elected upper house, though some preferred the retention of a non-elected element.
• All were in favour of more participatory and deliberative forms of democracy to supplement traditional representative forms.

Overall, it is clear that whoever is elected, there is a likelihood that the new party leadership will be looking at further change, both internally within the Labour Party and on a much wider level, with a new round of constitutional reform to build on the reforms from the early period of the outgoing Blair government.

Sign of the Times?

Could the furore over the London Olympics Logo have been avoided?

Perhaps it might have been if the choice of the logo had been made by the public in the first place following a public design competition.

Rather than spend public money on an expensive ad agency, the money could have been ploughed into wider community engagement where:

1. A design competition was held across London reaching out to a wide range of individuals and groups of all ages.

2. A stakeholder group including representatives of ordinary Londoners drew up a shortlist of designs.

3. The shortlist was then voted on through phone and internet polls as well as perhaps a public opinion poll.

This would have secured a design with much greater consensus behind it as well as sending the message that London 2012 was going to involve people from the outset.

In launching the current logo, London 2012 Chair Sebastian Coe said:

"London 2012 will be Everyone's Games, everyone's 2012. This is the vision at the very heart of our brand. It will define the venues we build and the Games we hold and act as a reminder of our promise to use the Olympic spirit to inspire everyone and reach out to young people around the world. It is an invitation to take part and be involved."

Fine words, but I think they missed a trick with a logo that could have been chosen by "everyone"!!

Brownian Emotion

Just read an interesting quote in this weeks New Statesman (p15) which reports on Gordon Brown's recent talk at the Hay Book Festival where last week he said:

"Ten years ago, even a few years ago, I felt you could pull a lever and do things; there was an assumption you could dictate from on high. But I don't think you can solve problems without involving people."

This is exactly the sort of point we would make. It will be interesting to see whether this clear intent is realised with serious announcements and proposals for draft legislation over the coming months that make greater involvement a reality of the ground.

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 i