Just one
example: The Australian Capital Territory’s Government was considering the way
new technologies and other reforms could be employed by Canberra’s taxi fleet;
inevitably it launched a public consultation process. People could access a
discussion paper online and send in their comments for a set period of time.
Nothing
wrong with that, you might say; good to involve people who might use taxis; an
example of government keeping in touch with those who elected it.
I beg to
differ and this is why.
Firstly,
you will not get feedback from a representative group of taxi users. You will
get feedback from the few who happen to see the news article and are motivated
to make a reply.
These are often
people who have a particular barrow to push. They want a taxi-rank a convenient
walk from their home; they want a noisy taxi rank moved from outside their flats
to somewhere else – anywhere as long as it does not annoy them; they want guarantees
that taxis will arrive within 10 minutes of them calling one 24/7 etc.
Secondly I
believe that governments are elected to govern and should not be running back
to the electorate every time they have to make a decision. They are ones who
have all the facts at their disposal (or should have); they are the ones who
have the resources to employ expert advice, or to study the results of similar initiatives
elsewhere and to learn from mistakes made.
Governments
have become timid, afraid of making an unpopular decision that will affect their
chances of getting re-elected next time round. But hard decisions have to be
made and should not, indeed could not, be left to the electorate who, in the
most general sense, would prefer a world where there were fewer taxes and more
services.
Squaring
that circle is what governments have to do, even if it sometimes means
offending people who may, or may not have voted for them. It’s what democracy
is all about.
Finally,
you do not always get honest answers from those consulted — and here I might
recall a public consultation that was done many years ago in the United Kingdom,
not by a government, but by the International Publishing Corporation over the
launch a new national newspaper.
IPC was a
part owner of the Daily Herald, a
staunchly leftist trade union-backed publication that was losing serious money.
IPC decided to have a relaunch with a new name geared to the aspiring young
middle class (the Yuppies of today).
It
employed market researchers who came back with the finding that this cohort wanted
a “more intelligent and thoughtful” newspaper — and that was how the Sun appeared in 1964 — and quickly began
to sink.
The Sun struggled on for a few years, losing
circulation at an even greater rate than the Herald, until IPC sold it to Rupert Murdoch who doubled, then tripled
its readership on a solid diet topless models, celebrity scandal and sport.
As
columnist Matthew Engels later remarked: “People aren’t going to tell complete
strangers with clipboards they want to see breasts on Page Three.”
No comments:
Post a Comment