Citizens' Assemblies - more than an influential focus group?

There is no drect analogy between jury trials and Citizens’ Assemblies because jury trials are a means to come to a verdict on a specific event, based on a set of circumstance carefully and expertly presented (within a procedural court system) as evidence.

Citizens’ Assemblies debate broad-based issues and seek to make recommendations amongst selected options.

· CAs may have a part to play in today’s democracy but their constitution and impact needs careful consideration.

· The notion that CAs are a superior form of representative democracy is doubtful.

· Our present form of representative democracy could be reformed to better effect than inventing a new paradigm, e.g., Devolution, PR and Lords reform.

Pros

1. There should be a formal route in between elections for government for the public view of certain issues to be appraised.

2. Public participation in decision-making needs to be increased.

3. Democracy has been devalued and needs to be revived in the minds of the public

Cons

1. Representative democracy already provides vehicles for influence and legislative action – i.e., local government, elected Mayors, etc..

2. CA are not constituted to complement these institutions nor (e.g.) Parliamentary committees.

3. Recommendations from CA have no formal means to be acted upon.

Detail concerns

A cross section of the public

· The vast majority of those canvassed to attend will decline (30,000 v 2,000 in the case of the UK Climate CA). This questions the representative nature of those who are left to take part.

· Making everyone’s opinions equal denies the fact that some people have more knowledge and experience than others. The CA deliberations could be devalued where topics need technical knowledge or comparative reasoning.

· If people are selected who have no interest in the topic, it implies that some people who oppose the proposition or feel that the issue is not worthy of debate will be included.

· Keeping participants for the duration is problematic – on third dropped out of Ireland’s Citizen assemble over the period of its sittings, suggesting that persistence was more important than representation.

The terms of discussion

· How many CA on what topics is a reasonable number?

· The choice of topic and the perceived ‘problem’ will reflect a partial focus – i.e., who’s to say what is more important? The danger is that only popular or immediate topics will get an airing.

· The framing of motions to discuss will skew the discussion.

Providing advice

· The way experts are appointed and by whom is just as important as the selection of attendees.

· From where should experts be sourced – academia, business leaders, consultancies, etc.?

· Who should select the topics and the experts?

Acting on the results

· What obligation does government have to listen to, respect or otherwise take note of the CA recommendations?

· CA recommendations could conflict with the governing Party’s election manifesto, which formed the basis for their election.

· If the CA is seen to have no direct effect on government policy, then their function could be seen to be questionable.

Paying for the process

· How are experts, advisors and facilitators to be paid?

· Without financially compensating attendees for their time, many will be unable to divert themselves from essential duties.

· Who pays for CA and how is the funded to be fairly distributed? The UK Climate CA cost c. £500,000.

Case studies

What’s the evidence (taken from https://www.politico.eu/article/the-myth-of-the-citizens-assembly-democracy/)?

The Irish Constitutional Convention in 2012 recommended legalizing gay marriage, which was introduced by public referendum in 2015 in a world first. In 2017, the Citizens' Assembly recommended ending a constitutional ban on abortion and allowing terminations without restriction until up to 12 weeks of pregnancy. This too is now law. This illustrates the value of a CA under an ideological impasse; these measures alone made it worthwhile.

The full story is more mixed. Legalizing gay marriage was just one of nine reports the Constitutional Convention delivered to the government. The Citizens’ Assembly examined a portfolio of issues, including voting reform and climate change. Many of its recommendations on these have gone nowhere.

The time commitment excluded people who work weekends or have care responsibilities, and tends to filter out all but those with an unusually high sense of civic duty or who are already politically engaged.

Electoral reform proposed by the pioneering 2004 Citizens’ Assembly in Canada was not passed by the public.

The electoral reform recommendations of a 2006 Dutch citizens' assembly were first ignored, and then rejected by the government.

2006 Dutch Citizens' Assembly were first ignored, and then rejected by the government.

A citizens' assembly to solve Brexit run by academics in 2017 backed "a bespoke UK/EU trade deal and a customs union that would allow the UK to conduct its own international trade policy while maintaining a frictionless UK/EU border" — a conclusion that does not solve any of the ways in which Brexit was politically deadlocked.

The Citizens’ Assembly of Northern Ireland recommended that there be more funding for the care of the elderly and that care workers be better trained and better paid. But as Northern Ireland's ruling assembly and executive have been collapsed for two and a half years; there was no minister of health to receive the report. Neither could it solve the fundamental issue of lack of funding.

Conclusion

Democracy in developed western nations is not serving its purpose.

“It's worth remembering that democracies survive by experimenting”, David Farrell, University College Dublin politics professor.