UK politics

Tory blog Ian Dale’s Diary is alleging that Labour’s consultation process (the epitome of which is to be the laughable ‘citizens jury’) is a complete sham; and worse, that attendees are being paid cash in envelopes for their participation.

£75 for a Consultation? That’ll Do Nicely…

The word “consultation” means different things to different people. To me (and hopefully you) it would mean asking local people what they think of a particualr policy or plan. To New Labour it means something entirely different, as you are about to discover. t’s from the Dr Ray’s Focal Spot blog. In this post, Dr Ray, a hospital consultant describes the consultation process for the closure of a local District General Hospital. Perhaps I shouldn’t be shocked by this, but I am…

Yesterday evening I had an insight into the workings of Nulabours “consultation” process on the planned closure of NHS District General Hospitals and replacement with dumbed down polyclinics.A few weeks ago invitations to attend a public consultation were sent to consultants at our Trust. We were only given one day to reply for the meeting in the near future even though we have to give 6 weeks notice of leave because of “choose and book”. Obviously this meant that most of us could not attend but one consultant did take up the invitation.The location of the meeting was kept secret until three days before the event and when this consultant was eventually told the location and turned up in Birmingham for the “Citizens Jury” it turned out that medical staff were outnumbered 2:1 by laypeople specifically chosen by an agency to attend the event. The media were present and had obviously been invited to publicise the event.

The delegates were split up into groups and each allocated an electronic voting device. A “minder” was allocated to each group.Then the stars of the show arrived: Gordon Brown, Alan Johnson and Ara Darzi.There followed a rapid succession of questions from the podium on which the delegates were asked to vote. The minder was available to suggest the best answer if there was any doubt.Strangely, almost all the votes were 2:1 in favour of Nulabour’s policy. Even the question: “Would you prefer gynaecological surgery to be carried out in your GP practice even if it meant the closure of your DGH facility?” was answered with 2:1 in favour.Following the “consultation” the medical delegates were told to leave but the other 2/3 of the audience were kept back and each given an envelope.

My colleague was intrigued by this and managed to catch one of the “chosen ones” and ask about the contents. Each envelope contained £75 in cash! So now the consultation is over and the results indicate there is overwhelming public and doctor support for closing down the DGHs. I can only say that the way the voting was done makes the “Blue Peter” voting fraud seem like, well, “Blue Peter”. According to the Downing Street website there are nine more of these “consultations” due around the county. Thats an awful lot of people to bribe with taxpayers money, but once they’re done the business of closing the DGHs can start in earnest.

I’d like to think that this will be followed up by Her Magesty’s Press.

I’d like to think so too, but unless Greg Palast gets given the editorship of a broadsheet paper it’s doubtful.

Alhough the potential bribery aspect is a new wrinkle to me, anyone who’s participated in a community consultation exercise at any level during the past ten years will know for themselves that community consultation, while it may be fantastic in theory, is in political practice little more than a tick box exercise where there’s only one box to tick.

I’ve taken part in several consultation exercises, as a service user, an activist and in a professional capacity, and every single one has been a joke where we’ve been deliberately guided toward a predermined goal – though the tea and biscuits werre nice (foil-wrapped chocolate if we were lucky).

Apparently these days you get a bit more than nice china and unlimited gingernuts as an incentive.

It’s crystal-clear to those who’ve had dealings with New Labour that consultation exercises, or whatever the latest euphemism is, are totally empty gestures. The result has already been decided, the facts remain to be fixed around the policy.

Brown’s New Labour get their political way by dishonesty and spin whilst being at the same time political zealots comvinced of their own rectitude, even though evidence says otherwise. To deal with the cognitive dissonance that creates they must have us publicly agree with their policies, even if we don’t.

That’s what consultations are really for, maintaining an image of approving popular democracy, while doing what you want anyway.

Mind you, a consultation contract is a marvellous method of bestowing largesse to political or personal loyalists. Oddly enough they then often miraculously find that the populace is broadly in tune with policy goals. Voila, instant validation, except when it’s not – but then it’s all “the methodology must have been wrong, we need another consultation” . And another fat cheque from the Treasury.