Memorandum by Novas Scarman
The Novas Scarman Group works with grassroots
and marginalised communities across England and Wales, supporting
personal and community development. This response draws on many
years experience of working with people trying to influence the
system on a wide range of personal and collective issues, who
often feel that the authorities are deaf to their concerns. In
the past six months we have run eight regional roadshows about
campaigning and influencing, involving over 600 people from regional,
local and grassroots voluntary organisations. Some of the experience
and thinking which informs this report is developed in the Scarman
Trust report on Learning Power: a contribution to the national
skills strategy, available online at: http://static.novas.org/files/learning-power-262.pdf
OUTREACH
We warmly welcome the Parliamentary Outreach
Service. It contributed workshops to many of our recent regional
roadshows. These were very well received and have lead to 20—30
requests for workshops at a more local level. The Service has
shown itself to be responsive, flexible, informative and willing
to engage with people on their own terms as citizens.
In my view, the Service can best add value by having
a visible presence within civil society through community and
voluntary sector support providers; adult and community learning
providers; and anywhere that citizens come together to share concerns
about public life, such as school governing bodies, voluntary
youth services, parish councils, Local Involvement Networks (LINks),
public libaries and the like. By making contact with people through
such networks, they can offer workshops to a wide range of people
on their own terms, on their own ground.
One additional activity would be interactive
Voter/Citizens Information Sessions (see Annex 1), to provide
an introduction to the role of parliament and politics in a democratic
society.
Another additional activity would be to raise
awareness, capacity and responsibility within public services
at all levels about the democractic rights of citizens to be heard.
For example, ECHO is a tool for public agencies, support
providers and partnerships to see how open they are to community
influence, developed by and organisation called Changes. This
complements the Axis of Influence, a discussion tool for
community groups to improve their confidence, skills and understanding
to have a voice. For more information, see www.changesuk.net/
or www.dosti.org.uk/influence
For many community organisations, local government
and local services have more influence on their lives and are
often more important than Parliament, so one request from the
roadshows was for a "local democracy"' outreach service,
helping people to understand how the system works and how to have
voice at a local level. Many people turn to their MP because their
local services are not sufficiently responsive.
In this context, one thing that could be doing
differently is to integrate the Parliamentary Outreach Service
into "Democracy Hubs", as proposed by the Power Inquiry,
chaired by Dame Helena Kennedy QC. A Democracy Hub in each local
authority area would help people navigate their way through the
democratic system, by providing:
— access to information on all aspects
of the political system, from local to global governance;
— workshops and short courses
— non-partisan support for people wishing
to influence decisions
— outreach to local communities, pro-actively
offering information and support
(For more information, go to: www.powerinquiry.org)
In my report on "Learning Power",
I proposed that all public services should have named "Democracy
Champions". This is a member of staff, elected members or
paid, independent outsiders elected or appointed to champion democracy
within the Department, service, local authority or area, including
schools, PCTs, colleges and other services. Their aim would be
to increase effective public participation in decision-making
and democratic accountability to citizens. Democracy champions
would:
— Assess participation levels (who takes
part, how and by how much).
— Assess the effectiveness of participation
(what is the influence, impact and outcome of participation).
— Increase channels of participation, their
effectiveness and reach (ie make sure they are inclusive and effective).
— Ensure easy access to information, policymaking
and decision-taking.
— Extend rights to campaigning and influence.
— Encourage or facilitate provision for
learning campaigning, advocacy and practical politics.
They could have an independent statutory role,
appointed through Parliament rather than local or national government,
as agents for democractic participation and citizens' collective
responsibility for government.
This would be a proper extension of the role
of Parliament and the Parliamentary Outreach Service.
In response to the final question in this section,
I would say that there are most definitely not sufficient routs
for the public to make their views know to Members of the House
of Lords. Most people are not aware of its role and do not see
it as having anything to do with them as citizens.
In my personal experience, Members of the House
of Lords have played a vital role in bringing issues to the attention
of Parliament and Government, not just through debates in the
House and amendments, but also through the "convening"
role that Members can play, for example, Lord Northbourne in bringing
together organisations concerned with parenting education and
support, or Lord Archer in convening people concerned with democractic
global governance.
Given that Members of the House of Lords are
not elected and do not represent geographical constituencies,
I suggest that Members could have a much clearer connection with
areas of policy, so that citizens concerned with particular policy
areas would know who could bring their concerns to the attention
of Parliament. If the House of Lords conducted more "thematic"
discussions, and scrutized legislation from a wider perspective,
as it often does, then it would be much clearer to the public
what it is for and why they should bother making their views known
to its Members.
Annex 2 summarises an approach to reform of
the Upper House which aims both to deepen citizens' involvement
in the Parliamentary process and to strengthen its role as a national
forum for deeper consideration of public policy than is possible
at present.
ONLINE COMMUNICATION
AND ENGAGEMENT
The development of online communication channels
by Parliament is welcome and impressive, particularly the "Bill
Tracking" system, although this could obviously be developed
further with social media tools and forums.
However, most people need someone who is sympathetic
and knowledgeable, able to listen and willing to help them find
their way around the information and how to use it. For this reason,
extending the Parliamentary Outreach Service and creating "Democracy
Hubs" at a local level, embedded in existing information
and community services used by ordinary people, is essential.
Otherwise most of the investment in new technology will mainly
serve the professional campaigners and lobbyists who know their
way round the system.
Annex 1: Outline proposal for Citizens' Information
Sessions
Annex 2: Citizens' Policy Forums: Civil Renewal
through House of Lords Reform
These proposals draw on the work of Novas Scarman
and support its role in promoting social justice, inclusion and
effective citizenship, but they are not an official position of
the Board or Management Team, who have not had the opportunity
to discuss these issues.
May 2009
| 
