The Campaign Company Blog

"We've Got the Power?"

TCC has posted a lot about the White Paper on Community Empowerment when it was still developing. We are pleased to that it is is now published and commits to:

• A local authority duty to promote democracy
• An extended duty to involve covering most crucially Police Authorities
• A £7.5 million Community Empowerment Fund
• £2 million in opportunities for people with disabilities to volunteer
• Extending mentoring and befriending
• A pathfinder "Take Part" programme on Citizenship education for adults
• £70 million "Community Builders" scheme to support independent multi-purpose organisations
• A duty on Council's to respond to petitions
• An extension in participatory budgeting to all local authorities
• Modest incentives for voting
• More Neighbourhood Councils
• Extensions of Neighbourhood Management by Council's and partners
• More "community justice" and pilot projects in "community payback" by young offenders
• The establishment of the Tenant Services Authority to strengthen the rights of tenants of affordable housing
• Direct access and shadowing by  young advisors of ministers and elected mayors
• A £6 million national institute of youth leadership
• Youth internships with Councillors
• Making it easier to have a directly elected Mayor
• More discretionary localised budgets for Councillors to act as a community leader on
• A new Asset Transfer Unit to help local communities act on the the Quirk Report
• A national framework for Community Land Trusts and 14 pilots

Whilst the debate on community empowerment will continue, the most important aspects at this stage of the process are:

• The additional monies that will be available. This is important in pump priming local activity. 
• The Asset Transfer process being strengthened. This area needs support to encourage demands to come from below, in order to realise the ideals of the Quirk Report. Any body should itself be made accountable to the bodies representing community groups such as the Development Trust Association and the recognition given to Community Land Trusts could also strengthen local communities.

Some organisations have expressed the concern that white paper is giving giving individuals rather than communities "control". However we at TCC think the proposals are actually the sort of approach that we have been advocating and acting upon for years. We recognises that to empower communities you need to empower individuals first. Community groups shouldn't feel threatened by this - they should feel genuinely empowered by it.

In saying the above we recognise this is an unfinished agenda. A lot is being proposed, but there is a lot more to consider. For example the need to make make Police Authorities and PCT's more accountable to the communities they cover is clearly now next on the agenda.

As a result rather than than just passively promoting the document, surely we should not just be talking to ourselves but instead organising a serious public information campaign by all engagement practitioners from across all the various sectors. We should not just leave it to the DCLG but collectively promote it. This would maximise its impact and its benefits to the public in the run up to it being approved as well as pushing public bodies to organise more pilots in advance of it.

The DCLG has produced postcards promoting the white papers key elements. Perhaps we should ensure they have a much wider distribution than usual?

Richard Wilson, the Director of Involve commented on need to treat community empowerment similar social networking software. In the same way that the web 2.0 makes many services as ubiquitous as electricity, we now need the scope for communities of interest, whether geographical or interest group, to be able to plug into democratic structures in the same way that one can plug into an online system. The fact that vast numbers are now mobilised by Facebook for social events shows the potential for involvement.

Finally we should add that the White Paper seemed to gain a reasonable degree of consensus from the main political parties. This should mean legislation happens quicker and there is a degree of stability to bed down some of the proposals.

 

 

Memo to Local Authorities: "Make me smile (come up and see me)"!

A useful report published today from the Young Foundation on the wellbeing and happiness agenda and empowerment. It adds strength to the case against the low aspiration agenda for the Community Empowerment White Paper argued by some who do not wish to leave their comfort zone and which I have previously blogged on.

The report presents evidence to make the case for three hypotheses:

• that wellbeing is higher in areas where residents can influence decisions
  affecting their neighbourhood
• that wellbeing is higher amongst people who have regular contact with
  their neighbours
• that wellbeing is higher in areas where residents have the confidence to
  exercise control over local circumstances.

TCC experience working with local authorities and their local strategic partners also seems to confirm these hypotheses. The insight we gather through social marketing for Primary Care Trusts (PCT's), provides a slightly different angle in looking at this issue, but also seems to confirm the case being made.

In saying this, I don't fully agree with Richard Layard's arguments over the happiness issue and that you can improve things across the board to similarly match the rise in GDP. For example any complex human society will have sadness at various points in life such as a family bereavement and other stressful episodes that happen such as divorce or bankruptcy. Nevertheless the public and voluntary sector can do much to help the least happy 10% through the recently agreed extra expenditure on talking therapies in mental health.

Whilst some of the wellbeing and happiness agenda may be ambitious at times, surely part of the empowerment agenda should include an attempt at increasing wellbeing. If a local authority can't always make people happy all the time, surely it can try to empower residents to increase local human interactions that in themselves will "make people smile a bit more". This can even be be measured in how people react to a local authority in surveys and qualitative local discussion groups.

TCC have worked for local authorities such as Newham where we have developed community engagement programmes for Neighbourhood Forums along the lines of "shared challenges" such as local community led "Clean Sweeps" of Neighbourhoods. Watching whole families of all ages and from very diverse backgrounds turn up to don their luminous jackets and work together to litter pick local public spaces, in my experience, puts a smile on most people's faces!

The forthcoming Community Empowerment White Paper should address well-being issues and assist local authorities in putting a smile back on the faces of their many local communities!

Time to end the poverty of aspiration over engagement?

There does seem to be a worrying trend from people who should know better to attack the proposals in the Community Empowerment draft bill as not being of great relevance to an apathetic public. This was the case made by David Walker of Guardian Public Magazine writing in Guardian Society today.

Sometimes you expect to come across a poverty of aspiration within poorer communities but it's depressing to hear it from the editor of a journal read by many public sector professionals.

The argument seems to go: "If people claim to be generally satisfied with their public services just let sleeping dogs lie".

Just as modernisation is occurring in specific services such as health and education, the community empowerment bill is promising similar modernisation in public engagement. This will create a new "balanced scorecard" for public services that doesn't just measure public satisfaction, but also measures public involvement.

Of course we also need more emotional intelligence from public servants in dealing with the public - that requires additional training programmes as well as feeding back to staff the views of the public in real time . However that still doesn't far go enough. And we shouldn't be satisfied with a 33% turnout at local elections. But there is a clue in the fact that during the Poll Tax era it reached nearly 50% and that in the recent Boris v Ken contest there was a significantly increased turnout of in the mid forty per cent mark in London. We know people will engage if the issues are important and the choices are clear.

David Walker  compares "cold" local election voting and "X Factor" reality shows. But he draws the wrong conclusions. Why is reality show voting (when it is done properly and not rigged!) popular? It's because people actually feel empowered in the context of what they are taking part in. They are not just passively watching but collectively creating programme content and in effect "writing the script for the following week" by determining who comes back. How often does that happen in local government? Just as important as the immediacy, is that the results of their voting appears in the popular magazines they read and also provokes a conversation the next day around the water cooler. Where is the equivalent infrastructure in the public services that encourages this debate around a decision? You can't simply do it with a glossy leaflet!

He also confuses antagonism for creative tension over the issue of "personalisation v collectivism". I think he is far too pessimistic. This creative tension dates back to when humanity first created societies of towns and cities which allowed both public spaces but also individual endeavour.Of course there will be political choices that need to be made over resources for places like sport centres. But why is there a contradiction between this and allowing local communities to build up a wide range of locally owned community assets? Why should such choice be restricted to an existing building or facility? It could also include land for development too where the debate could be what they use it for. More affordable eco-housing v a new community centre? If local democracy is just seen as a remote Council making decisions for people, of course voter turnout will stay at 33% but we know that regeneration and stock transfer ballots are far higher so the potential is there to help people feel they have a much greater stake in their community.

The Community Empowerment Bill gives us an opportunity to build on the current relatively rare three-party consensus that exists to do something quite exciting in the coming year. Whilst we need to be realistic, we should not start off pessimistic.

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.

Registering to Vote - Making you Count!

Never having learned to drive, means I use the bus a lot which means I get a bit of extra time to devour more of a newspaper - that way giving me a few extra new thoughts on a wider range of subjects. Being in TCC also means I like looking at how other people get their message across and also how we can Make Democracy Work!

When you combine this together you get blog postings like this!

As I got off the bus stop I always look at the bus stop advertising. This is not because I am an avid consumer - indeed I am probably quite a non-materialist really. It is because social marketing campaigns - an area which TCC works in - are often advertised at bus stops.

This time I saw an advert for registering to vote for the London Mayoral election. I didn't think it was a good poster - it wasn't a great design and didn't really encourage you to register, though I suppose it was helpful as an information item. There is clearly a need to advertise registration as up to 1 million Londoners might not be registered to vote in May in the GLA elections. As I walked on to the library I then mentally challenged myself as to what I would do instead!

It struck me that what real incentive was there to make young people want to register? Having your say is hardly tangible in a mature consumer democracy like the UK. It is not as if a young person is going to struggle like many South African voting for the first time after a lot of queueing in 1994.

Many young people may also make the ostensibly rational consumerist calculation, that "will my single vote make any difference"? Until we teach more about the science of change at an earlier age and that small acts really do make a difference either by making a big change on its own or being part of an amplification of a change this rationalisation will continue to exist. As Bobby Kennedy said in South Africa in 1966:

"Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centres of energy and daring, those ripples build a current that can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance."

In addition for some sort of Tipping Point to occur, such as the collapse of a pile of sand, it needed a single grain of sand to move.

Collapsing sand and Bobby Kennedy's soaring rhetoric might be an interesting explanation to me, but are not a great incentive for others leading busy lives in a reasonably secure democracy where voting and politics in general are lower down their priority list.

The insight I had at the bus stop and on the way to the library - where I am now typing this blog posting - was that it was the act of registering itself that was the problem. For all the centuries of developing democracy, is a vote every few years a great return on filling in a form?

Unlike the past when the registration form was one of the more important things you filled in every year, we all now fill in hundreds of forms a year, many online and many much more exciting or important than the humble electoral registration form. In other words, in an era of mortgage applications, bank loans and overseas holidays, the poor old electoral registration form had fallen down the hierarchy of important acts that you do.

What we need is to make registering to vote a lot more of a key thing, not just for young people but for citizens of all ages.

In recent years the main debate on registration has been on security and voting fraud and whether there should be individual registration or household registration. As one can imagine, this has not been a great encouragement to either registering or voting.

I think this is a false choice as with all the digital databases we now have we can actually have both types of registration, with one acting as a check on the other. Where an individual registration conflicts with a household return, the local authority electoral registration unit should check the issue out. This might require greater resources to operate, but my other suggestions below also recommend more resources being spent on this key entrance point to democratic participation.

Below are a few of my ideas for reforming the electoral registration process for all voters that not only assists with registration itself but also encourages voting:

• Should first registering to vote be done at schools like an internal Citizenship ceremony. With the school leaving age soon to be 18, this could be a key role for them and the culmination of years of PHSE lessons.
• The registration form should come with a standard booklet explaining all your opportunities to participate. Some would be things that already exist. Some extra forms of participation are suggested below.
• The registration form should offer you text message and email notice of public debates hosted by your local authority where Councillors are available to answer questions a few times a year.
• Many people say they want to have their say. The registration form should offer you an online local authority level discussion area where the local strategic partnership and your MP will hold online sessions so they can be questioned, with online votes on issues etc.
• It should offer you an opportunity to register for annual free draws to meet the Prime Minster and the cabinet and opposition party leaders perhaps with a few days holiday in a London hotel thrown in to make it more of a holiday.
• For young people how about a free draw to enable some to have their child trust fund topped up or your university tuition fees written off. Over the next few years we will see people realise how valuable the child trust fund is and that adding to that will become an increasing incentive to many families.
• You could request to join a political party and specify which one you wanted to join. This would have to be a party registered with the Electoral Commission, but the local authority would then pass your name on to the relevant national party to follow up if they wished.
• You could request to become a school governor or to sit on a local government outside body or a local community group or charity. The local authority could then add you to a list that the Councillors could use to draw from a wider range of experience. This approach might even help with improving political party recruitment and making them more representative of their communities.

Some might disagree with some of these ideas or might have other, even better, suggestions. My fundamental point is that filling a form for a single democratic purpose that has been unchanged for many years, is not enough in these more complex times. The form should be transformed into a gateway into a whole range of participatory democratic activity. That way we all should have more opportunities to make democracy work!

You tube becomes "Viewtube"!

Youtube has brought all the UK Political Party Youtube sites into one portal to make them easier to find.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown launched the site appropriately through a Youtube Video!

This should be a useful resource to all citizens or "netizens" in the coming years and is likely to receive a lot of hits at the next General Election. It should reach out to groups such as young people, who are hard to reach through other campaign techniques.

It will be interesting to see whether unofficial videos made by individuals rather than political parties are also placed there?

TCC uses web 2.0 systems such as Youtube and wiki sites for community engagement where the public can add their own content on websites. We believe this has a lot of potential for social marketing and community cohesion work as well as more general campaigning.

As online video becomes easier and cheaper to upload, we could see entire debates conducted through video blogging (Vlogs) and through sites as Youtube. This has potential to revolutionise how the public express their views and could make politicians much more accountable to the public they serve.

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.

Students are not Revolting?

An article in today's Guardian Education section starts off by posing the question: "are students these days too cool for political protest or are they simply finding new ways to do it"?

The government's minister for higher education Lord David Triesman features in it as a 60's radical student leader and will probably be grateful for the coverage on those days rather than the recent coverage on political donations that has featured his name as a former Labour Party General Secretary!

How accurate was York student newspaper Nouse when it ran an article headed "Apathy: a modern form of protest?" following the flop of the top-up fees protest last year?

What the article doesn't cover is the fact that the composition of higher education students has changed from 10% of 18-21 year olds at university in the 60's to up to 43% of that age group nowadays.

It is therefore likely that student political involvement is more likely to reflect wider changes in society. Less trust and direct involvement in organisations reflect what is happening outside universities with the general public.

The article recognises the greater use of online protest such as the use of Facebook and this Blog covered the National Union of Students (NUS) led victory over the HSBC Bank on interest free overdrafts in August.

However we must also recognise that for every Facebook victory there are likely to be a proliferation of campaigns that are less successful.

Clearly there is no single solution to encouraging student political participation. What is needed is a range of engagement activity that includes active organisations, individual participation and online involvement.

The NUS is currently debating how it can improve the way it operates and last week voted to overhaul its governance arrangements to increase student participation. Encouraging student involvement is also a challenge for the government, pressure groups and political parties.

This is vital as today's student's will eventually be the David Triesman's of tomorrow!

Young people in Lewisham don't need burgers to vote!

The recently published "Representing the Future" report from the Councillors Commission, suggests that voters should be offered incentives such as council tax discounts or fast food vouchers to persuade them to vote in elections.

However, the results of our most recent Young Mayor for Lewisham election prove that incentives aren't needed to get young people interested in democracy. With a turnout of 45% - well above the 34% turnout for Lewisham's adult mayoral election - this election continues to show that the following are the key ingredients for successful engagement:

1. Involve young people from the start - it's young people's slogans, designs and ideas on how to raise awareness that inform the election communications
2. Make it real - young people are voting for a Young Mayor who has a budget of £25,000 to spend on improving the lives of young people in the borough. They will have real authority.
3. Feedback on achievements - the Young Mayor and the Young Advisors who support him / her let their peers know what they are doing and how previous Young Mayoral budgets have been spent. If young people can see that their vote has made a difference they are more likely to listen and learn. (visit www.binvolved.org.uk to find out what the Lewisham Young Mayors have been up to over the past few years).

So adults listen and learn!

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?