Comments on: Joe Quango http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/ Everyone has a right to my opinions Sat, 06 Sep 2008 01:22:14 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Robert Sharp » Blog Archive » Your Voice? http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-133229 Robert Sharp » Blog Archive » Your Voice? Fri, 16 May 2008 07:22:18 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-133229 [...] this undermines representative democracy (see my earlier worries about citizen juries). Rather than provide new ways for the Government (which even the most [...] [...] this undermines representative democracy (see my earlier worries about citizen juries). Rather than provide new ways for the Government (which even the most [...]

]]> By: Robert Sharp » Blog Archive » Citizen juries http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-97018 Robert Sharp » Blog Archive » Citizen juries Thu, 06 Sep 2007 17:52:34 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-97018 [...] I have ranted about these new citizen juries before. Last December, I argued that MPs already have a ready-made focus group - their constituents - and there was no need for an intermediate cross-section to represent the views of everyone else. [...] [...] I have ranted about these new citizen juries before. Last December, I argued that MPs already have a ready-made focus group - their constituents - and there was no need for an intermediate cross-section to represent the views of everyone else. [...]

]]> By: Robert http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-34692 Robert Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:36:54 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-34692 I think that, no matter what criteria people use to elect their politicians, in almost no case is that criteria "I'll vote for him because he'll consult me on most decisions." With the rise of the internet and digital communications, a more direct and participatory democracy can and should arise. We're not there yet though, and of all the improvements to be made, a 100 person focus group is not a good first step. In fact, it looks like a step backwards. But this is all academic because, yes, the policy is most certainly a cosmetic excerise in the first place. I think that, no matter what criteria people use to elect their politicians, in almost no case is that criteria “I’ll vote for him because he’ll consult me on most decisions.”

With the rise of the internet and digital communications, a more direct and participatory democracy can and should arise. We’re not there yet though, and of all the improvements to be made, a 100 person focus group is not a good first step. In fact, it looks like a step backwards.

But this is all academic because, yes, the policy is most certainly a cosmetic excerise in the first place.

]]> By: Matt Munro http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-34675 Matt Munro Wed, 03 Jan 2007 11:39:12 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-34675 The problem is I don't believe that joe public indulges in that sort of in depth analysis of their politicians - hardly any voters even read manifestos - they tend to vote out of habit, perceived self interest, because they perceive a need for change or because they believe someone to be a good leader. It is also becoming harder to asess a politicians character as managed image has become more important than personality, intellect or integrity. Despite being an avid consumer of news media, and after 10 years in the public eye, I would still struggle so summarise Blairs "character" in any meaningfull way. I'm not sure I fully appreciate the difference between direct and representative democracy, unless the former equates to a referendum type arrangement on every decision and the latter to electing a body of representatives to make decisons on the voters behalf ? In all but the simplest and smallest societie,s the former would be unworkable in a pragmatic sense, although perhaps less so with internet technology etc. The latter has always been my understanding of democracy. Irrespective of ideology, the use of focus groups would worry me because a perennial problem with any self selecting group is that it can only ever be representative of "people who agree to take part of focus groups". Having said that I expect this will be a cosmetic exercise and the opinions of "the people" will only inform policy where they are consistent with the opinions of the policy makers. The problem is I don’t believe that joe public indulges in that sort of in depth analysis of their politicians - hardly any voters even read manifestos - they tend to vote out of habit, perceived self interest, because they perceive a need for change or because they believe someone to be a good leader. It is also becoming harder to asess a politicians character as managed image has become more important than personality, intellect or integrity. Despite being an avid consumer of news media, and after 10 years in the public eye, I would still struggle so summarise Blairs “character” in any meaningfull way.
I’m not sure I fully appreciate the difference between direct and representative democracy, unless the former equates to a referendum type arrangement on every decision and the latter to electing a body of representatives to make decisons on the voters behalf ? In all but the simplest and smallest societie,s the former would be unworkable in a pragmatic sense, although perhaps less so with internet technology etc. The latter has always been my understanding of democracy.
Irrespective of ideology, the use of focus groups would worry me because a perennial problem with any self selecting group is that it can only ever be representative of “people who agree to take part of focus groups”. Having said that I expect this will be a cosmetic exercise and the opinions of “the people” will only inform policy where they are consistent with the opinions of the policy makers.

]]> By: Robert http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-34377 Robert Tue, 02 Jan 2007 17:32:16 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-34377 I think, Matt, that the issue here is one of direct democracy versus representative democracy. If we're going for an Athenian system of direct democracy, then your definition of "right" does indeed hold... and there would be nothing wrong with doing exactly as the majority pleased. I would also have less problem with market research companies approximating what the majority thought on any given issue. But this flies in the face of the principles of our <strong>representative</strong> democracy. Part of the mental equation we perform when deciding who to vote for, is choosing someone to make as yet unknown decisions on our behalf. This is why a person's character, leadership qualities, powers of analysis, diplomatic qualities, political affiliations and beliefs (ideological, or religious), are as important (perhaps even more important) as manifesto committments. This form of political system also assumes that there is a "right" that is distinct from what the majority prefers. Personally (and we may be homing in on our personal ideological differences here) I also lean towards this 'representative' analysis. But since most British politicians buy into this 'represenative' analysis too, I think its odd for any of them to endorse a policy which so obviously undermines it. I think, Matt, that the issue here is one of direct democracy versus representative democracy. If we’re going for an Athenian system of direct democracy, then your definition of “right” does indeed hold… and there would be nothing wrong with doing exactly as the majority pleased. I would also have less problem with market research companies approximating what the majority thought on any given issue.

But this flies in the face of the principles of our representative democracy. Part of the mental equation we perform when deciding who to vote for, is choosing someone to make as yet unknown decisions on our behalf. This is why a person’s character, leadership qualities, powers of analysis, diplomatic qualities, political affiliations and beliefs (ideological, or religious), are as important (perhaps even more important) as manifesto committments. This form of political system also assumes that there is a “right” that is distinct from what the majority prefers.

Personally (and we may be homing in on our personal ideological differences here) I also lean towards this ‘representative’ analysis. But since most British politicians buy into this ‘represenative’ analysis too, I think its odd for any of them to endorse a policy which so obviously undermines it.

]]> By: Matt Munro http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-34218 Matt Munro Tue, 02 Jan 2007 11:19:43 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-34218 "Finally, the policy overlooks the crucial possibility that what is popular is not always what is right". Surely that's the cornerstone of democracy though, government by the majority, for the majority ? If the majority want it, it is by definition "right". I do worry that this simple but important principle is being quietly buried by political correctness. Agree about focus groups though, and as someone who works with a lot of management consultants, I won't bore you with my opinions of them or the real reasons they are employed. “Finally, the policy overlooks the crucial possibility that what is popular is not always what is right”.

Surely that’s the cornerstone of democracy though, government by the majority, for the majority ? If the majority want it, it is by definition “right”. I do worry that this simple but important principle is being quietly buried by political correctness.
Agree about focus groups though, and as someone who works with a lot of management consultants, I won’t bore you with my opinions of them or the real reasons they are employed.

]]> By: Clarice http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-33001 Clarice Thu, 28 Dec 2006 23:50:55 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-33001 Yes, but wasn't it a beautifully written post, KN? Yes, but wasn’t it a beautifully written post, KN?

]]> By: Katy Newton http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-32978 Katy Newton Thu, 28 Dec 2006 20:56:06 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-32978 It's part of the consultancy fever that appears to have gripped this government. I don't really get it, myself, but a couple of my friends are management consultants so I try not to be rude about it. It’s part of the consultancy fever that appears to have gripped this government. I don’t really get it, myself, but a couple of my friends are management consultants so I try not to be rude about it.

]]> By: Clarice http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-32697 Clarice Wed, 27 Dec 2006 21:54:33 +0000 http://www.robertsharp.co.uk/2006/12/27/joe-quango/#comment-32697 Hear hear! Hear hear!

]]>