 
DCLG Forum
Method(s) Used
Name of person who posted the project:Laura Miller
Location of project:United Kingdom
Date when the project started:2006
Date when the project ended/project ongoing:2006
Background to project:In July 2004, the ODPM (now the DCLG) started a debate with local government and partners on the future of local government under the banner of �local:vision�. local:vision sought to develop a shared agreement of what the roles and functions of local government should be in the future in order to deliver improvement in public services.The forum began with a debate on local strategic partnerships. Topics on local government reform and neighbourhoods were subsequently added. Lastly, a discussion topic on cities and towns was incorporated. Policy teams were particularly interested in developing an ongoing dialogue with their stakeholders by a means that was efficient and logistically advantageous. To this end, representatives of policy teams were nominated to login to the forum regularly and facilitate the discussion. Purpose of project:The local:vision forum was initiated with the publication of their local government discussion paper, The Future of Local Government: Developing a 10-year vision, which identified a number of issues and challenges that it felt should be considered as part of a debate on the future of local government.Policy themes included in the local:vision debate are:
The Hansard Society was asked to evaluate the success of the forum, which had been set up so that everyone with an interest in local government could discuss and post comments on a number of issues likely to be included in the Local Government white paper, as well as wider issues relating to local government. Project activities:Deliberative consultation � to obtain experiential feedback on policy analysis and decisions - on the three main themes in the discussion paper (see above).Project results:Strengths
Potential for improvement
The use of online deliberative forums seems to have suited this department well. Given its varied policy responsibilities, the forum allowed the department to support a number of policy discussions simultaneously whilst administering them centrally. Technology was important in this respect, but it was also vital that the various departmental teams (policy, web and communications) coordinated closely. The department�s stakeholder base was initially sceptical but gradually the forum was used more regularly and the substance of contributions became more focused on the consultation areas. The participation rate was low but steady; nevertheless the numbers spectating were high suggesting a great deal of interest in the subject matter, forum and the deliberation taking place. The majority of participants stated they registered to share their views, to be able to access and debate the views of others (both government and otherwise) with an interest in these issues, and to learn more about local government policy. However, a large segment voiced suspicion that their views would not reach ministers and not be addressed. The forum was seen as a valuable opportunity to have open debate away from intermediation and �spin�. Participants welcomed the forum as a means of holding the department to account. In post-consultation surveys, a small majority of respondents felt the policy teams had participated sufficiently in the forum. However, they said that the deliberation between participants was more visible than that between participants and the department. Respondents felt that they had learned more from other participants than from the policy team representatives. Most respondents believed that the forum had achieved its goals. Though many were concerned about how representative the participant base was and the extent of the department�s commitment to public engagement, almost all respondents said that online forums were a credible platform for dialogue between the public and the department and that they would participate in future. The departmental teams involved in the forum looked forward to the prospect of engaging with the public in an asynchronous and deliberative format. The forum, they said, provided useful insights into the public�s understanding of local government policy and its implementation. It was also a useful means of gauging the success of departmental communications and the breadth and depth of the department�s active stakeholder network. Support from ministers and senior officials for enhanced public engagement is strong. Before the �Digital Dialogues� initiative, the department had been considering how online applications might support its public engagement activities. As a result of participation in the initiative, the DCLG has expressed an interest in exploring forum-based methods of consultation in the long-term future and has begun scoping a specification for procuring the necessary technology. The local:vision debate will be drawn together in a white paper which is intended to provide the beginning of a new settlement between citizens, communities, local and central government that enables the best possible outcomes to be secured for all communities. Participant�s posts in the forum will be recorded as contributions to the debate and will be considered as proposals are developed. After a period of stasis over the summer, the department reopened the forum in September 2006 � allowing follow-up on the themes previously covered and adding new ones, and acting on learning from their involvement in Phase One of Digital Dialogues. Contact details:eDemocracy ProgrammeHansard Society 40-43 Chancery Lane London WC2A 1JA e - edemocracy@hansard.lse.ac.uk |
Recommended Case Studies
|
