Policy Centre discussion meeting on consultation process, 28 June 2024

The Policy Centre held a discussion meeting on the subject of improving the consultation process on the morning of 28 June. 35 people participated - members of the Centre’s Advisory Council and representatives of business, government and charities.

The discussion followed the publication of the Centre’s research paper Improving the consultation process .

The meeting was chaired by Simon Soar, Director of the Centre. Opening comments were made by –

• Sir Mark Boleat, the Centre’s Senior Adviser and author of the research paper.
• Paul Wylie, Group Director of Policy, Government of Jersey.

There was then a lively discussion.

Summary of comments by Sir Mark Boleat

• Good consultation is essential to good policy making.
• There is substantial evidence on best practice which should be drawn on.
• The approach to consultation is critical –
  • Consultation must be real, and not going through the motions because there is a requirement to consult but with no intention of taking account of the responses.
  • Consultation should be viewed as an aid to good policy making not something that gets in the way.
  • Consultation is not a mechanical operation – meaningful engagement with key stakeholders is essential. Each response should not be treated equally.
  • Feedback is essential.
  • Consultation is not a substitute for decision taking.

• Perceptions of consultation in Jersey
  • The Policy Engagement Framework is good. One minor criticism is that perhaps it is over-engineered.
  • Practice seems to depend on individuals; policy is not always followed.
  • There is an over-emphasis on the views of individuals, rather views of those most relevant to the issue.
  • Use of closed question, online questionnaires as the method of consultation is not appropriate.
  • Where closed questions are used questions can be slanted or not on the key issues. This was the case with the wind farm consultation.
  • Often there is little attempt to obtain meaningful data on respondents and to identify respondents in responses to the consultation.
  • There is little meaningful attempt to get to “hard to reach” groups.

• Business, charities and interest groups can be more effective in contributing the policy-making process -
  • Always respond to relevant consultations if only to indicate agreement or disagreement with what is being proposed.
  • Clearly and honestly state who they represent.
  • Use evidence not anecdotes
  • Recognise what is possible, including that anything that involves changing legislation is more difficult that other policy levers.
  • Suggest realistic solutions.

Summary of comments by Paul Wylie

• The Government Engagement Framework was published in March 2023. It was introduced because the Government’s approach was not perfect then and it is not perfect now – but policy officers across Government do want to listen and improve.
• In particular, it was introduced because:
  • There were no formal guidelines or concepts across Government
  • Different techniques were used across different Departments
  • The diversity of respondents was limited and did not represent all islanders
  • However, the level of engagement and consultation also needed to be proportionate and right-sized for Jersey.
• When responding to Government engagement and consultation, it’s worth being aware of the 6 Policy Levers that can be used to meet the original policy intent. Too often, Western Governments jump straight for Legislation or Spending money, when other cheaper and quicker solutions could be used instead. The 6 Policy Levers are:

1. Tax – increase/decrease existing taxes or create new ones, in order to influence behaviour

2. Spend – more or less money to pay for certain services or infrastructure

3. Legislate – increase/decrease existing statutory requirements or create new ones, in order to influence behaviour

4. Oversee – create top down pressure for organisational change (from Ministers or senior officials). Introduce performance management structures and rhythms, in order to change the behaviour of a public service

5. Convene – bring together like minded groups and islanders so that problems can be solved together and provide tools for them to deliver instead

6. Communicate – use public communications campaigns to influence behaviour

• Policy Levers 1 to 3 were described as ‘hard levers’, as you pull them and there is good historical precedent that something will happen. However, they tend to cost more and take longer (for example, legislation can take approximately two years from start to finish). Instead, consultees could suggest ways that Government could pull the ‘soft levers’ (Levers 4 to 6), which can be cheaper and quicker to enact.
• The Policy Engagement Framework introduced published guidance for how policy officers should deliver and what islanders can expect from the different types of engagement. It introduced a simple pyramid concept which demonstrated the 4 different levels of engagement. It is underpinned at the base with regular, broad and generalised levels of surveys and data (Level 1) and goes through to a narrow point at the top with far fewer people involved but more intensive engagement (Level 4):

a. Level 4 – Producing – Most intensive; Fewest stakeholders – Islanders produce policy solutions alongside the Government, such as the Citizens’ Assembly or Citizens’ Jury;

b. Level 3 – Contributing – More intensive; Fewer stakeholders – Islanders contribute to policy development (the solution is subjective to change and can be persuaded). Through stakeholder meetings, workshops and targeted focus groups;

c. Level 2 – Endorsing – Less intensive; More stakeholders – Government seeks endorsement for specific policy proposal plans (the solution is largely decided but it could be amended or its effects mitigated). Through feedback on specific issues through online surveys and targeted focus groups;

d. Level 1 – Observing – Least intensive; Most stakeholders – Government observes public opinion on a range of issues through regular surveys, monitoring of data and generic focus groups.

• Skills and experience of stakeholder engagement has been embedded in the training and career development of all policy officers. A Policy Profession Standards Framework sets out in detail what good engagement / consultation skills looks like at each grade of the civil service and there are additional requirements at the most senior grades. All of this contributes to a requirement that successful engagement is an essential part of the job.

Summary of comments made in open discussion

• There was inconsistency between different parts of government. One trade association had recently been involved in three policy issues. On one the process was very good, on another it was reasonable while on the third issue there had been no consultation at all despite this being a legal requirement and being pointed out to the Government. There needs to be greater consistency.
• The diversity questionnaire should be used in the consultation response; it is important to know how different groups respond. Also responses should not normally be anonymous.
• Some viewed particular consultation exercises as selling a policy to the public rather than seeking views.
• Decisions were ultimately taken by the States Assembly, but many members do not ensure that they adequately understand the issues before they vote.
• Consultation exercises should be accompanied by information sufficient to enable people to understand the issues. The consultation on population policy a few years ago, for example, was accompanied by nothing, even though Assembly members had had an excellent briefing paper.
• On some issues surveys of large numbers of people were necessary.
• It was important to hear the views of as many people as possible, particularly those who are “hard to reach”.
• Government was not always in the best position to conduct consultation exercises.
• Research design was a professional skill. If professionals were not used then the result could be bad research. Not only was this likelyto cost as much as good research but the resulting policy could be very expensive because it could lead to wrong decisions. It is a false economy not to employ suitably qualified to design research.
• The Policy Engagement Framework has been in place for over of year. How is its effectiveness evaluated?
• Some officials seem unaware of the Policy Engagement Framework.
• It should be possible to know all the questions before a questionnaire can be answered.
• The Jersey Law Commission comprises experts working on a voluntary basis who are well equipped to consider policy issues.
• Similarly the Policy Centre Jersey can be commissioned to respond to consultation exercises.
• People don’t trust the consultation process; there is a need to build trust in the process, taking on board points made at the meeting. The quality of questions is important to build confidence in the process.

‍