Risk and reward

This is the second of a three-part comment on the Citizens’ Assembly that concludes this weekend.

The Prince Edward County Citizens’ Assembly is expected to render its recommendation this weekend. The group will submit its consensus view on the size of council and how we elect our local government.
But does it make sense for an unelected group to decide how to structure an elected body? Is it undemocratic that 24 people, chosen at random, represent us in this way? Some have suggested that these folks didn’t run for office, weren’t elected and therefore can’t represent our views reasonably or accurately.

I think they can. Average folks tend to be engaged in this community. More so, I suspect, than in many others. Even those who may not be current with the issues that churn through Shire Hall on a weekly basis tend to care deeply about their community— its history, traditions, and future.

It has been noted that participants in citizens’ assemblies are reported to feel as though they have won a lottery. They plunge into the task with energy and enthusiasm. They are hungry to have input into community decision making. It seems no one had asked them before. If it is true elsewhere—it is doubly so here.

It must also be noted that unelected folks represent us everyday on very important matters. They make decisions that directly affect lives and shape our communities. Like citizens’ assemblies, juries are selected at random from our peers. They render decisions based on evidence within the confines of the law. Juries weigh the facts, hear arguments for many sides of the issue and they make a decision.

Few would argue that our jury system is undemocratic or fails to reflect the views of the broader community— save for those perhaps convicted of crimes. Is it perfect? No. But it has worked well for a hundreds of years and remains a cornerstone of justice in our civil society.

Would the citizens’ assembly recommendation be improved if it were delivered by elected group? Such a panel would surely be composed of folks with strong and clear views on the subject. They would fight hardest, and with the most determination to gather a base of support to ensure they won a seat at the table.

It seems mostly likely, in this case, that 24 views would enter the process and 24 views would exit intact. It is hard to imagine that such an arrangement would have any more success at breaking the stalemate than council has had.

The advantage of random selection is that it finds citizens without baggage—without deeply entrenched views or fixed ideas. They come to the table without a constituency to answer to. They come free to speak their mind, to listen and to be persuaded of a better argument. They are better able to render a recommendation established upon a foundation of shared values and principles.

This is a particularly relevant approach on an issue such as this; narrow in scope but bearing great significance as to how we continue to govern ourselves. It has, I think, a greater likelihood of achieving a reasoned and uncluttered recommendation.

It is not without some risk, however. The advisors to such a citizens’ assembly hold tremendous power to influence participants and, ultimately, the outcome. They shape and guide the discussion. They can pull the gathering away from some avenues or lead them down others.

Jonathan Rose is the advisor and facilitator of the Prince Edward County Citizens’ Assembly. As an associate professor of political studies at Queen’s University, he surely has highly developed and refined views about how local government ought to work. Are those views seeping into the minds of the participants? Even inadvertently? Is it really a County solution if the recommendations were shaped by a Kingston academic?

Rose understands these risks profoundly. He and his team have worked hard to ensure their views remain buried while actively prodding and nurturing discussion, to ensure that each of the 24 County residents’ ideas and worries percolate to the surface.

Rose is heavily invested in the success of the process. He has little interest in how the County is governed—but an overwhelming stake in seeing the Citizens’ Assembly work. And be seen to work well. He does not want to be seen to be putting his thumb on the scale.

Of course our best safeguard against outside influence is the 24 County folks currently deliberating the size and shape of our local government. I am comfortable in relying on their independence, passion and wisdom to make an informed recommendation.

 rick@wellingtontimes.ca