I've come to the conclusion that the word 'consultation' is probably the most misused word in public life.
As a Liberal Democrat I'm very much of the view that people should have control over the public services which affect their daily lives. But the reality is all too often that because those who run those services are convinced that they 'know best', any consultation that takes place only happens when the powers that be have already made up their mind.
This reflection is brought to mind by (at least) three examples:
a) new nuclear power stations - the Government has allegedly been listening to the public about whether or not to have new nuclear power plants; it got taken to court after the first consultation was so obviously flawed, but the second one has been completed and - guess what - they've come to the same answer!
b) resident scheme managers (aka "wardens") in South Gloucestershire sheltered housing schemes - residents have been 'consulted' about changes to the services they get, and in some schemes the wardens are highly valued and do excellent work; but guess what - the results of the 'consultation' is that all the resident scheme managers are going to have to go; so what was the point of the consultation?
c) Frenchay Hospital - no blog posting from me is complete without me banging on about Frenchay, but this was a classic; the public were polled by an independent polling organisation about where they wanted their new hospital; the public of South Gloucestershire and Bristol said Frenchay - so the health planners went for Southmead anyway!
Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that we should decide everything by a simple show of hands. But if you say you are going to consult people you should do it early in the process - ie before you have made your mind up - and should only do so if you really are willing to change your mind as a result of what people say. Otherwise the cynicism that is already very pervasive about our public life will only get worse.
Friday, 4 January 2008
When is a consultation not a consultation?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Granted, the consultation, may not have been as proactive as it could have been, and the minds of ministers may already have been made. But there's never been any shortage of publicity for the oponents of nuclear generation to get their points across. There is now an urgent need to initiate replacement of the aging generating capacity that will close in the next 10 - 15 years. For various reasons renewable energy cannot raise its game fast enough to fill the gap - it has been given the opportunity already by the government. We must act now using all proven technologies to provide the electricity this country needs in a way that helps us meet our CO2 commitments. Of course, this will include renewables and efficiency savings. However, I sincerely believe the LibDems are wrong not to recognise the role for Nuclear Power must continue to play if the CO2 emissions associated with electricty generation are to be reduced.
Thanks for the feedback.
Re 'keeping the lights on', the interesting thing is that no-one really expects serious new nuclear output until 2020 or beyond, and the 'energy gap' happens long before then. If the Govt. is to keep to its own target of 20% of our *energy* (not just electricity) from renewable sources, then it will have to do a huge amount more to support renewables. Support so far has been very limited, and I just don't agree that it has "been given the opportunity already by the government".
Germany has taken renewables seriously and has seen a huge increase in the use of solar power which has brought hundreds of thousands of 'green collar' jobs and a renewable rate probably three times the UK - it shows what can be done by a committed government!
Post a Comment