What Role Do Politicians and Governments Play, If Any, in Public Participatory Processes?

CHAPTER 6 SUMMARY

What role do politicians and governments play, if any, in public participatory processes?

Introduction

A cornerstone of our ‘representative democracy’ is that politicians deliberate in reaching decisions on behalf of the people. However, politicians rarely have the time and resources to fully engage with the debate and heed a full range of views before making a decision.

This chapter focuses on what role politicians should play in public participatory processes, such as those outlinedin Chapter 5. Some critics worry public participatory processes couldundermine the authority and responsibility of elected representatives; others believe they can enhance the democratic process leading to a system of ‘participatorydemocracy’.

Examples of political/government involvement in collaborative dispute resolution

Overseas examples: the United States

In the United States,governments are increasinglyusing alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes to resolve land use disputes and are sponsoring the outcome through legislation. This is often taking place using community collaboratives, which are designed to advance a shared vision or resolve a conflict, by the exchange of information, joint agreement or action.

EXAMPLE: FloridaSpeaker’s Advisory Committee

A highly successful example is the Speaker’s Advisory Committee on the Future initiated by the Florida House of Representatives in 1987, which used a ‘appreciated planning’ collaborative model. Over a two year period, the Committee published a set of long term issues and goals which led tonearly thirty legislative initiatives.

EXAMPLE: Forest Jobs and Recreation Act (FJRA)

Another example is the FJRA, a Bill designed to better manage public land, which has been introduced into Congress by Senator Tester but not yet passed. The Bill originated as three distinct collaborative citizen efforts, which involved bringing the community together behind a common vision and allowing parties to be heard in the shaping of proposals. The people behind the three initial projects worked for three years to develop the bill by meeting with the public, surveying locations, modifying proposals and building community support.

Senator Tester was supportive of the collaborative process and became involved in the project when he recognised the need for better management of public land.

EXAMPLE: Owyhee Public Lands Management Act

The OwyheeInitiative Implementation Act (OIIA), which sought to end decades of public lands conflict,was introduced to Congress by Senator Crapo in 2006 after an eight year collaborative effort. Senator Crapo became involved in the process after being asked by the Owyhee County Commissioners, one of the involved parties, to mediate discussions that could lead to collaborative agreements. In his speech to Congress he emphasized the collaborative effort to resolve land use conflicts.Whilst the OIIA has not yet been implemented, President Obama’s signing of the Omnibus Public Land Management Act 2009 provided a dramatic step towards its implementation.

The Forest Jobs and Recreation Act and Omnibus Public Land Management Act appear to be good examples of bills championed by members of Congress to protect the long-term public interest and interests of stakeholders.

Overseas examples: the United Kingdom

In the UK, interest groups, voluntary organisations and residents groups are increasingly seeking to be involved in policy decisions that affect them at all levels.Advocates argue that such participation invigorates civic life, improves communities and decision-making, deepens democratic traditions, balances community views and reinforces social and environmental equity. On the other hand, critics argue that increased participation erodes the position of elected councillors and representatives, threatens clear lines of accountability and can entrench NIMBY (‘not in my back yard’) attitudes (further discussion on NIMBY attitudes can be found on page 77 of the full report).

EXAMPLE: Sustainable Communities Act

The United Kingdom introduced the Sustainable Communities Act 2007 topromote the economic, social and environmental sustainability of local communities.The Act was premised on the idea that local people will usually know how best to promote sustainability in their community. Itrequires the Secretary of State to invite local councils to make proposals as to how the government can assist in “promoting the sustainability of the local communities.” Local councils are required to consult a panel of local representatives before making the proposal.

The Act was introduced as a Private Members Bill by a Conservative Party member of parliament, Nick Hurd,and passed through Parliament with the support of all major political parties. After the first invitation for proposals in 2008, over 300 proposals were submitted by 100 local councils.

Australian examples

Unlike the USA or UK, Australia does not have a tradition of legislation being sponsored by individual politicians. There are a number of Australian institutions outlined in the paper, such as the Murray Darling Basin Ministerial Council, that have been established under direct ministerial control to deal with specific resource use issues. While involving or reporting directly to a minister, they also have a degree of perceived independence with wider input from non-government appointments to their boards.

EXAMPLE: NSW Healthy Rivers Commission(HRC)

The HRC is another example of an institutionestablished under direct ministerial control to deal with specific land use issues. The HRCreported directly to the Premier of NSW, who took the commission’s reports to Cabinet where they were published and subject to consideration. After Cabinet consideration, a Statement of Intent was published incorporating Cabinet’s decisions on the report. Audits of implementation of those decisions were also conducted and publicly reported on by the Commission. However, many of the reports took from 12 to 18 months to pass through the Cabinet process, both prolonging implementation and demonstrating the need for greater political understanding of their nature and impact.

Citations and sources for the above can be found in the full paper, pages 74 - 78.