Minutes:
Question
The weighting method in the Council’s review of local deliberative processes places more emphasis on cost and speed than it does on the potential for discussion or the variety of participants.
It also excludes any weighting given to the ability of residents to influence the scope and content of the plan. With the weighting choice employed, the report was bound to reach the conclusion that a cheap and quick way of consulting is best.
With the Climate Emergency Plan supposedly having a budget of £71m, it is astonishing that the weighting for a few thousand pounds of cost were given such importance. With no consultation at all on the measures residents were prepared to see implemented, it is even more astonishing that these proposals only relate to the Plan as it stands and do not allow meaningful additions to the Plan to make the Plan as good as it can be.
Leeds, Oxford and Camden Councils have all had successful Citizens’ Assemblies. Why is this Council going to such lengths to rig the appraisal on consultations rather than simply opt for the most democratically legitimate and effective form of local engagement - a Citizens’ Assembly on the Climate Emergency?
Answer
Wokingham Borough Council recognises the vital importance of community engagement and participation in tackling our climate emergency. The Community Deliberative Process Options Appraisal was a robust investigation and analysis of fifteen varied options scored against factors locally important to the particular challenges faced in Wokingham Borough in tackling our climate emergency. The report incorporates information gathered from industry experts and case studies from other local authorities’ experiences in this field. Therefore, the report is a balanced score card aiming to guide decision making on the most effective options.
The processes explored would not exclude gathering information from a cross-section of the community and would ensure voices are heard from key stakeholders including young people, the voluntary sector and the business community. The selection process sought fairly to select the most appropriate processes for Wokingham Borough. The examples mentioned in your question above are cities which face different challenges and issues in tackling their climate emergency.
The climate emergency is an urgent problem that needs to be tackled in a time sensitive manner. Engaging and empowering residents and stakeholders to be part of the solution is a key stage of the way forward. Although initial implementation of the process may be scored on time efficiency, engagement with residents and stakeholders will continue to be an ongoing process and priority in the climate emergency agenda as set out in the Action Plan which is a living document and constantly evolving. This has not been about saving costs but about finding the approach that represents the best value for money. As has been pointed out there is a gap currently in our Climate Emergency Action Plan. Local deliberative processes are a vital way of ensuring that gap is closed in a way that is palatable to our residents and to the needs of our climate emergency.
Supplementary Question
I guess my point is that there is nothing in the current range of deliberative processes that are likely to come out of this that are going to empower residents to think that they can change the Plan. You keep mentioning that we cannot make residents do things. The only way that we can get people to change their minds is by having a citizen’s assembly. None of the other processes will allow that. So, my question is why do you not trust the residents of Wokingham Borough to have a proper say in this most important issue?
Supplementary Answer
I fundamentally disagree with you on that. I absolutely trust the residents of Wokingham Borough so much that I am prepared to put very specific questions to them and ask them for their opinion via a multitude of different engagement mediums rather than just by one, consulting on climate emergency as a whole.
I want to look at, for example, how we go about reducing the amount of waste that we generate as a community. If we did that as part of one massive climate citizen’s assembly, it would only be a minor factor in the time and effort that that group of citizens would be able to consider. They would have to look at a multitude of other things as well. What I want to do is break up climate emergency into a multitude of elements and do the most appropriate deliberative process for each element of it.