DCLG Forum

Title/URL

http://forum.communities.gov.uk

Screenshot

Department

Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG), formerly Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM)

Objective/Context

The online discussion forum was set up for everyone with an interest in local government to discuss and post comments on a number of issues likely to be included in the Local Government white paper, as well as wider issues relating to local government.

In July 2004, the ODPM (now the DCLG) started a debate with local government and partners on the future of local government under the banner of ‘local:vision’. local:vision sought to develop a shared agreement of what the roles and functions of local government should be in the future in order to deliver improvement in public services.

The forum began with a debate on local strategic partnerships. Topics on local government reform and neighbourhoods were subsequently added. Lastly, a discussion topic on cities and towns was incorporated.

Policy teams were particularly interested in developing an ongoing dialogue with their stakeholders by a means that was efficient and logistically advantageous. To this end, representatives of policy teams were nominated to login to the forum regularly and facilitate the discussion.

Policy Overview

local:vision – the Future of Local Government

In summer 2004, the ODPM launched a broad debate with local government and partners, called ‘local:vision’, on the role and functions of local government.

It was initiated with the publication of their document, The Future of Local Government: Developing a 10-year vision, which identified a number of issues and challenges that it felt should be considered as part of a debate on the future of local government.

Policy themes included in the local:vision debate are:

• Local leadership;
• Neighbourhoods;
• Developing a new Performance Framework.

Application used

Online deliberative forum (third-party build and hosted on external servers).

The forum was readable by anyone, but registration was required to contribute.

Purpose

Deliberative consultation – to obtain experiential feedback on policy analysis and decisions.

Other consultation methods used

Stakeholder meetings; submission by email, post or telephone.

Moderation

Participant posts were pre-moderated against the terms and conditions (published on the website). Comment moderation was carried out by the Hansard Society on behalf of the department.

Representatives of the policy teams involved in the local:vision debate logged in to the forum and posted follow-up questions to those used to open the debate and to pick up on issues raised by participants.

Catchment

The policy directly impacts on England and Wales. However, access and participation was not restricted to England and Wales.

Timeline

The forum was launched with a debate on Local Strategic Partnerships, which ran between 27 February – 3 March 2006.
The forum was broadened out to incorporate the local:vision debate on 24 March. The forum was temporarily suspended during local government elections (13 Apr – 5 May) – a statutory requirement, known as ‘purdah’.
The evaluation of the forum was carried out over 14 weeks with completion on 2nd June 2006.

Registrant profiles 707 registrations

Male 66%
Female 34%

England 96%
Northern Ireland nil
Scotland 2%
Wales 2%

Under-24 3%
Under-46 51%
Over-46 46%

First online forum?
Yes 37%
No 63%

Participated in Government/Parliament consultation before?
Yes 18%
No 82%

Publicity

The DCLG wished to consolidate and deepen the network of stakeholders it was in contact with.

The department prepared and distributed press releases to relevant broadcast and press outlets prior to the launch of the forum.

The department sent out emails to parties who had expressed interest in receiving departmental updates. The department also made use of email bulletins administered by the department, its partners and by third-parties.

The majority of participants recall finding out about the forum via email, a link online or via a search engine.

There was no budget for ‘paid for’ marketing.

Participation rate

101 participants posted a total of 152 messages (average of 1.5 per participant)

Distinct Features

Strengths

• Large number of registrants and repeat visitors;
• Clear delineation of responsibilities between communications, policy and web teams. Greater interaction between these teams through close collaboration on forum tasks;
• Active referencing and visible linking between the department’s various web-based (blogs, corporate sites, forum, webchats) and offline channels making good use of audiences and participant bases;
• Good range of discussion themes representative of the policy responsibilities of the department;
• Speed of brand and content update following ministerial reshuffle and departmental transition from ODPM to DCLG.

Potential for improvement

• Propensity of registrants to spectate rather than participate (though it is acknowledged that spectating is a credible form of engagement);
• Temporarily closure around local government elections (purdah) with little notice provided to participants;
• Occasional instances of participants referencing and pursuing localised disputes in the forum;
• ‘Summing up’ posts from policy teams were not published quickly enough after closure of topics.

The use of online deliberative forums seems to have suited this department well. Given its varied policy responsibilities, the forum allowed the department to support a number of policy discussions simultaneously whilst administering them centrally. Technology was important in this respect, but it was also vital that the various departmental teams (policy, web and communications) coordinated closely.

The department’s stakeholder base was initially sceptical but gradually the forum was used more regularly and the substance of contributions became more focused on the consultation areas. The participation rate was low but steady; nevertheless the numbers spectating were high suggesting a great deal of interest in the subject matter, forum and the deliberation taking place.

Participant feedback

In feedback, the majority of participants stated they registered to share their views, to be able to access and debate the views of others (both government and otherwise) with an interest in these issues, and to learn more about local government policy. However, a large segment voiced suspicion that their views would not reach ministers and not be addressed.

The forum was seen as a valuable opportunity to have open debate away from intermediation and ‘spin‘. Participants welcomed the forum as a means of holding the department to account.

In post-consultation surveys, a small majority of respondents felt the policy teams had participated sufficiently in the forum. However, they said that the deliberation between participants was more visible than that between participants and the department. Respondents felt that they had learned more from other participants than from the policy team representatives.

Most respondents believed that the forum had achieved its goals. Though many were concerned about how representative the participant base was and the extent of the department’s commitment to public engagement, almost all respondents said that online forums were a credible platform for dialogue between the public and the department and that they would participate in future.

Departmental feedback

The departmental teams involved in the forum looked forward to the prospect of engaging with the public in an asynchronous and deliberative format. The forum, they said, provided useful insights into the public’s understanding of local government policy and its implementation. It was also a useful means of gauging the success of departmental communications and the breadth and depth of the department’s active stakeholder network.

Support from ministers and senior officials for enhanced public engagement is strong. Before the ‘Digital Dialogues’ initiative, the department had been considering how online applications might support its public engagement activities. As a result of participation in the initiative, the DCLG has expressed an interest in exploring forum-based methods of consultation in the long-term future and has begun scoping a specification for procuring the necessary technology.

Outcomes

The local:vision debate will be drawn together in a white paper which is intended to provide the beginning of a new settlement between citizens, communities, local and central government that enables the best possible outcomes to be secured for all communities. Participant’s posts in the forum will be recorded as contributions to the debate and will be considered as proposals are developed.

After a period of stasis over the summer, the department reopened the forum in September 2006 – allowing follow-up on the themes previously covered and adding new ones, and acting on learning from their involvement in Phase One of Digital Dialogues.