Well, I have filled in my feedback online for the annual budget and long term water thinking. I have taken every opportunity to urge the Council to try using citizens’ assemblies. They would be better than this kind of tick-box feedback which does not facilitate deliberative recommendations. The current methods of feedback are mostly AFTER the event in that Council already has formulated its ideas instead of seeking widely representative thoughts from the ratepayers through sortition BEFORE. Pro-active consultation not retro-active, which it is easy to suspect is fake in that the Council’s mind is already made up.
Link to a talk on BBC radio 4: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/m0002z9g?fbclid=IwAR2IK_FIKGYOInG4vxqrW0t3vUpIRZYkWU6b6f4t7csYj-ipxX9nddGBurs
Currently I am trying to get to talk to someone in the Shape Auckland / People’s Panel to discuss the possibility of the Council going for a citizens’ assembly. What I have sent them so far is:
1. General outline of the proposal
Auckland Council decides to organise a citizens’ assembly as an experiment in participatory democracy and as an expansion of its valued consultations with ratepayers. The assembly, which will number some 100 participants chosen by sortition from the electoral roll, will meet over a number of weekends from mid-May 2019 and will consider up to three issues which the public have chosen. The process of choosing which issues will be considered will be; public suggestions to a website that the Council has set up, followed by public voting on those suggestions. The Council will edit the suggestions only to avoid having duplicates or near duplicates, and to eliminate trivial, offensive or illegal ideas. Voting on the suggestions will be online, and each person wishing to vote will be issued an identity and password which can be used only once. This is to prevent multiple voting from skewing the results. The final three topics will be published.
The intention to hold a citizens’ assembly will be advertised both in Our Auckland and in the Herald, as well as local newspapers, and to the press generally. It will also be announced that participants in the assembly will be paid a per diem of $150 and their travel and other necessary expenses (which could include childcare) will be reimbursed.
Invitation and selection of participants
In many ways the tricky bit of organising a citizens’ assembly, especially for the first time, is recruiting and selecting participants. First off, unlike jury service in the courts, there is no legal obligation to take part. So an important element is willingness to take part, and it is essential to make taking part sound and be attractive, and also to remove, where possible, any practical or cultural barriers to people being willing to take part. In this regard, valuable advice might be offered by some of the Advisory Panels, and also marae within the Council’s area.
Usually, the selection of participants is a three stage process. Firstly, a large number of personal invitations is sent out to randomly selected citizens. In New Zealand this probably means selecting registered voters from the electoral rolls. Selecting a set of names at random from each of Auckland’s electorates or wards is relatively straightforward. If the aim is to have around 100 final participants, then it will be necessary to send out around 10,000 invitations. This is because the response rate is usually quite low. The invitations need to be personal, that is addressed to an individual, to explain what is being asked (to be willing to go on a list from which the final 100 participants will be chosen, again by lot), what the assembly will be like (with links to further information and illustrations for those with internet access), and how often and for how long it will meet and how the per diem and expenses will be paid. It also needs to explain how the ratepayers themselves are selecting the topics to be considered.
It would probably be ideal for the invitations to be hand-delivered, so that issues of people having moved can be sorted out, and to allow for instant response to questions, given the unfamiliarity of the process. It might be possible for at least some of the delivery to be done by local volunteers, organised through the Local Boards, and those volunteers, or some of them, might later be trained to be table facilitators at the assembly itself.
The second stage in the selection process is the random selection of 100 or so names from the data base of those who have indicated their willingness to participate, assuming that there is a large enough data base for this to be a valid exercise. If there is not a large enough sample to conduct a second selection, then the next stage is to examine the list to check whether there are any obvious omissions or distortions compromising representativeness, and to seek to rectify any such identified by issuing extra invitations.
The aim is to have around 100 willing participants and some backup names as alternates should illness or other events cause participants to drop out.
Organisation and procedures of the assembly itself
The basic procedural outline of assemblies which have been held elsewhere are:
An initial session to sort out practical matters, to divide the participants up (randomly) into say 12 tables of 8, each with a trained facilitator, and to remind participants that they are asked to think about the issues not principally as individuals but broadly as citizens of the wider Auckland community.
For the chosen topic there is then a learning phase, with presentations from stakeholder organisations and experts to set the scene.
Next the participants work to understand the issue, where necessary by directing questions to experts and officials, and also by receiving further submissions.
When they are ready, participants then set themselves to deliberating, each table on its own, with only the facilitator present. Their aim is to agree, so far as possible, on a set of policy proposals to address the issue.
Once each table has reached the end of its deliberations, a wider session takes place, with a representative from each table presenting their proposals and general discussion of a set of proposals which can be presented to Council, and widely published, as agreed by the assembly as a whole.
Where does the Governing Body stand in all of this? In commissioning the assembly it agrees to publicly and directly respond to (though not necessarily to implement) each and every proposal put forward by the assembly.
Although the assembly is not open to the general public, its proceedings should be recorded, preferably by video, so that after the event the public can see how it operated. Commonly such video records also interview participants, after the event, to give their reaction to taking part. The experience of participating in a deliberative assembly is an important element of the democratic benefits anticipated, particularly if such assemblies become a regular feature so that the number of those who have participated grows over time.
These proposals will be added to as time allows. However, at present they are just put forward by one individual, and therefore from the Council’s point of view, easy to ignore. So if anyone feels like joining and supporting the general idea, particularly if you live in the Auckland Council area, you could use the form at the bottom of the home page.
4. Wildly expensive?
Detailed costs can only be worked out during real planning if this became a real exercise, but experience elsewhere suggests that the cost of an assembly such as has been suggested here would be of the order of a few hundred thousand dollars. A relatively minor sum in the overall Auckland budget for a huge democratic advance.
My WordPress guru tells me that all those who have returned the form and whom I have entered as users should be able to log on and contribute. I am sorry if it bugs folk to have to do it this way, but I am interested in people willing and able to put time into assemblies, whether for XR or any other difficult issue, and just posting stuff won’t cut the mustard. So I need to be able to keep the site focussed. Also, if the fact that the site is not totally dedicated to XR is a turnoff, that’s too bad. Participatory democracy is for all, and if XR gets the first show off the ground, great, and a great example of participatory democracy. But there are other policy areas badly needing the PD treatment. We could set up an Auckland XR group and let someone other than me manage that group?
- We could do with a good simple logo to symbolise a citizens’ assembly. Any ideas.
- We need a form of invitation to send out asking folk to join the list of those willing to take part in an assembly on climate change, if chosen. I was thinking of a flyer of some kind that can be popped into letter boxes. It would need to contain information of what on earth a citizens’ assembly actually is, with pointers to further information, perhaps on-line. It would need to indicate what sort of a time commitment would be needed, maybe three or four weekends spread over a number of months. Would saying that participants would be paid an honorarium per session (how much would be reasonable?) and also paid their expenses to get to the venue and fed and watered during the sessions to help removing obstacles to folk getting on-board? Anybody know someone with the skills to design an invitation?
- Once we have a suitable general purpose invitation we could start creating and working through random lists of registered voters, delivering the invitation and later chasing up responses by knocking on doors. There will probably be considerable inertia to start with, until what is afoot becomes more widely known. If each parliamentary constituency, or group of adjacent constituencies, has enough members of Citizens’ Assemblies Aotearoa the recruitment of potential participants in assemblies should be doable.
- When we reach a couple of dozen members, we should draft a slightly more formal set of aims and rules, and appoint the appropriate number of officers so that we can open a bank account and start looking for funds. Experience elsewhere suggests we will need maybe $500,000 or more for a set of assemblies say at two centres in the North Island and two in the South Island.