Home
› The Values and relationships with the public
› International developments › Public consultation and communication
Public consultation and communication
The MAC report, Connecting Government, put a strong emphasis on the importance of public consultation. It argued that the very nature of Australia’s participatory democracy means that meeting the APS’s responsibilities for comprehensive policy advising and effective implementation of government policies and programmes is a two-way exercise, which requires the APS to have increasingly sophisticated professional skills and techniques in communication and consultation.2 The MAC report also emphasised that APS agencies need to recognise that the engagement of people and organisations is an increasing feature of whole of government work.
International developments
For many years, the Canadians have been leaders in cultivating relationships with stakeholders (mainly, the public) to better determine what services they want and need and how effectively (or otherwise) the government is delivering these. A conference on government-citizen ‘Dialogue and Deliberation’, held in October 2005, aimed: to establish means of regularly discussing public sector- citizen dialogue, both inside Canada and with other jurisdictions; to devise new frameworks for assessing and evaluating the policy impacts of ‘deliberative’ engagement; and to formulate a research agenda and plans for taking government-citizen interaction further, including in the area of service delivery.
The Service Canada objectives place particular stress on the need to serve Canadians better in service delivery terms while building ‘a citizen-centred government’. The Government of Canada is also committed through the Office of Client Satisfaction to regular assessment of citizen concerns (positive and negative) about the level and quality of service provision <http://servicecanada.gc.ca>
The UK House of Commons Public Administration Select Committee’s report, Choice, Voice and Public Services (17 March 2005) stressed the need for greater government preparedness to consult the public about the services it wants and how happy or unhappy citizens are with service provision. The Committee recommended that access to services and service information be simplified and that more attention should be devoted to measuring public satisfaction with public services. However, in its 18 July 2005 response to the report, the Government rejected this recommendation on the ground that Directgov, the UK government’s flagship website and primary channel for the delivery of electronic or online service provision, is more than sufficient for the task of ensuring a good level of service delivery of this kind, especially since Directgov is designed around people’s needs rather than the complex structures of government <http://www.publications.parliament.uk>.
In the lead-up to the third European Union e-government summit, an online discussion group, ‘Ideal Government: Europe’, has been established by Kable’s Government Computing Group (http://www.kablenet.com) to discuss what Europeans really want from e-enabled public services and to find out to what extent this view is being sought by governments. It also aims to assess how well citizen expectations are being reflected in these services, and to determine if this represents value for money.
international evidence
Community engagement can take many forms, such as surveys and market research; however, more formal consultation through open processes, web-based interactions, advisory bodies, consultative committees, taskforces and consultants permits more sophisticated and interactive participation.
In 2002, the Australian Government launched the Better Services, Better Government Strategy (2002)3 with an objective of enhancing citizen engagement, so that government agencies can use the Internet to improve the transparency of government processes and to provide an opportunity for wider public engagement. The strategy provides for government to connect more closely with its citizens and improve aspects of engagement such as online policy formulation, feedback and consultation. In late 2004, AGIMO organised a number of events that brought together key international and domestic experts in the area of governments engaging with citizens electronically. An E-Democracy Community of Practice, with membership from several jurisdictions in Australia, is developing cross-jurisdictional principles on online engagement. The International Conference on Engaging Communities, (coordinated by the United Nations and the Queensland Government) and the Enabling Government, Engaging Communities: An Online Perspective event strengthened linkages and opened dialogue on electronic engagement issues between jurisdictions, academia and the community, building on earlier work in the area of governments engaging with citizens electronically.
Consultation with stakeholders—Government policy, programmes and regulation
The 2005 agency survey enhanced the 2004 question that explored the extent to which APS agencies are conducting formal consultations on the development of government policy and programme delivery to look at agency use of formal consultation during the development of government regulation. Agencies were asked how often they consulted with the following groups: non-government agencies, industry stakeholders, tertiary education and research groups, agencies from state/territory and/or local governments, unions and members of the public about government regulation, government policy and programme delivery. For each option, agencies could respond usually, sometimes, no, or not applicable.
Thirty-five per cent of all agencies indicated that formal consultation in relation to the development of government policy with any of the identified groups was not applicable to their agency compared to 26% of agencies last year. In relation to programme delivery only 13% of all agencies indicated that consultation was not applicable (similar to last year’s 14%) and 39% of all agencies indicated that consultation was not applicable in regard to government regulation. When agencies that indicated consultation was not applicable to them are excluded from the following analysis, the remaining agencies are identified as ‘relevant’. The reasons why agencies responded that consultation was not applicable were not explored in the 2005 agency survey but may relate to the nature of policy and programme development in the year and/or government confidentiality requirements.
Consultation in the making of policy and programme decisions is widespread among APS agencies, although overall there has been a decline in the level of consultation reported since last year. The survey results show that 62% of all agencies usually or sometimes consulted with one or more of the specified groups about government policy, and 76% of these agencies consulted five or more groups. The former figure (one or more specified groups) increases to 96% when only relevant agencies are considered.
Programme delivery appears to trigger greater consultation than policy development, with 85% of all agencies indicating that they usually or sometimes consult one or more of the specified groups on this issue, and 73% of these agencies consulted five or more groups. The former figure (one or more specified groups) increases to 99% when only relevant agencies are considered.
Consultation in the making of government regulation is not as widespread as for policy and programme decisions. Fifty-five per cent of all agencies usually or sometimes consulted with one or more of the specified groups about government regulation, and 56% of these agencies consulted five or more groups. The former figure (one or more specified groups) increases to 90% when only relevant agencies are considered.
‘Industry stakeholders’ was the key group usually consulted by relevant agencies for the development of government policy (77%), the delivery of government programmes (73%) and government regulation (66%) (see Figures 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3). The percentage of relevant agencies consulting with ‘industry stakeholders’ increases to 92%, 97% and 87%, respectively, for the three activities above when those agencies that sometimes use this group are also included. Findings were similar to last year for engaging this group in formal consultation for both the development of government policy and the delivery of government programmes.
The percentage of relevant agencies usually consulting the public about the development of government policy is 43%, rising to 81% when those agencies that sometimes consult this group are included (see Figure 4.1).
Figure 4.1: Formal consultation with stakeholders on government policy development, 2004–05
Source: Agency survey
‘Members of the public’ are usually consulted by 52% of relevant agencies in relation to programme delivery; this percentage increases to 88% when those agencies that sometimes consult this group are included (see Figure 4.2).
Figure 4.2: Formal consultation with stakeholders on government programme delivery, 2004–05
Source: Agency survey
Consultation with the public is low for government regulation with only 24% of relevant agencies usually consulting the public about the development of government regulation. This rises to 67% when those agencies that sometimes consult are included and is comparable with other stakeholder groups (see Figure 4.3).
Figure 4.3: Formal consultation with stakeholders on government regulation, 2004–05
Source: Agency survey
The government has also put in place a mechanism for informing the community and stakeholders about why and how particular regulatory decisions were taken, including any community consultation that preceded the decision itself.
Regulation Impact Statement (RIS)
A RIS formalises and documents the steps taken in developing good regulation. It is prepared by a regulatory department and/or agency and seeks to ensure that regulation achieves its objectives in the most effective and efficient way. It identifies the problem, outlines objectives and assesses the economic, social and environmental impacts of a range of feasible options for addressing the problem. The level of analysis of each option should be commensurate with the impacts of the proposal, and departments and agencies are encouraged to use quantitative cost/benefit analysis when appropriate. The RIS then documents community consultation, proposes a recommended approach and outlines implementation and review mechanisms.
RISs are intended to provide a basis for more informed decision-making and to enhance accountability and transparency by informing the community and stakeholders about why and how particular regulatory decisions were taken. RISs are integrated with—and reinforce—other regulatory quality control systems, such as regulatory plans.
regulation guidance
Overall, the agency survey result suggests that there is more consultation with a wider variety of groups occurring among relevant large agencies than among relevant small and medium agencies. This is consistent with last year’s results when relevant agencies are considered. Examples of consultation processes undertaken by relevant agencies include:
The Australian Government, in partnership with the states and territories, has undertaken an extensive programme of investigation, evaluation and trials to find the best model for the health information network. This has been done in consultation with stakeholder groups and members of the community.
Work on a staged national implementation of HealthConnect has begun in coordination with the states and territories and in full consultation with consumer and health care provider groups.
Area Consultative Committees (ACCs) work in partnership with the Department of Transport and Regional Services (DoTARS) to provide advice to government on important issues facing Australia’s communities and to identify opportunities, priorities and development strategies for their regions. ACCs are uniquely placed to respond to issues in their regions and provide a vital conduit to government on local, social and economic conditions.
AGIMO is seeking public comment on the Australian Government review of Government Information Technology and Communications contract arrangements.
agency case study
There is scope for some agencies to increase the amount of consultation occurring, particularly with members of the public. One means of obtaining the general public’s view on policy and programme delivery issues is through the use of representative surveys in addition to surveys of the agency’s direct service users. As Connecting Government4 pointed out, in some circumstances there can be considerable benefits from agencies taking a more effective approach to consultation, by identifying areas where greater consultation and communication would be appropriate and developing targeted processes to ensure that consultation and communication occurs. There may, for example, be areas where agencies could be more proactive in community consultation.
2 Management Advisory Committee 2004, Connecting Government: Whole of Government Responses to Australia’s Priority Challenges, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.
3 AGIMO, Better Services, Better Government (2002), <http://www.agimo.gov.au/publications/2002/11/bsbg>
4 Management Advisory Committee 2004, Connecting Government: Whole of Government Responses to Australia’s Priority Challenges
