What if citizens were called to policymaking duty the way they are called to jury duty?
All over the world, ordinary people are finding out what that’s like when they’re selected by civic lottery to participate in a citizens’ assembly, a democracy innovation that may just be the antidote to the polarization of the world we need.
20 years ago in B.C.
In 1996, British Columbians experienced the familiar problem of a first-past-the-post electoral system returning the “wrong” result: the Liberals won the popular vote, but the NDP formed government after capturing the majority of the seats.
Liberal Leader Gordon Campbell promised to create a “citizens’ assembly” on electoral reform if he was elected, which he was four years later.
The names of 160 B.C. residents were selected out of a hat. They were given the task of coming up with a new system for elections and promised that their recommended alternative would be put to a referendum. The citizens’ assembly deliberated for a year, and made a recommendation in 2004.
Here was the logic behind the assembly: Campbell could see that if his party directly proposed changes to the electoral system, the public would treat those changes with suspicion. An independent citizens’ assembly would be more credible precisely because its recommendations could be harmful to the governing party.
Ultimately, the B.C. Electoral Reform Citizens’ Assembly’s recommendation fell just short of achieving the 60 per cent assent it needed to become law through a referendum. But the project is celebrated 20 years later and credited for sparking what the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has called a “deliberative wave” in governance.
Assemblies today
While more than 50 deliberative processes have been held in Canada over the years, the citizens’ assembly model began to flourish around the world.
Earlier this year, the European Union used it to produce a set of recommendations on hatred in society. In Ireland, it’s been used to tackle the most controversial issues, including abortion and same-sex marriage.
Read more: What Canada can learn from Ireland on citizen engagement to bolster democracy
According to the OECD database, environment and other long-term policy issues are the most popular topics addressed by citizens’ assemblies, and local governments are the most frequent users of these methods.
In Canada, there’s also been a resurgence of citizens’ assemblies at a time of low trust in government and widespread polarization.
Canadian assemblies
For example, between 2020 and 2022, 90 Canadians contributed more than 6,000 volunteer hours on the citizens’ assembly on democratic expression and last year, a youth assembly on digital rights and safety put out 21 recommendations.
In B.C., multiple local citizens’ assemblies have been set up, some of which our action-research team at Simon Fraser University is facilitating:
In Victoria-Saanich, 48 members will be discussing the case for municipal amalgamations this fall;
In Burnaby, 40 community members presented their recommendations on the city’s official community plan in July after seven days of deliberation;
The town of Gibsons heard from its 25-member assembly that deliberated for five days on its official community plan in May;
The city of New Westminster is piloting a standing 36-person citizen’s jury to replace several council advisory committees and provide advice on a variety of topics.
Participating in a citizens’ assembly
Imagine walking into a room with dozens of neighbours you haven’t yet met.
In citizens’ assemblies, there are teenagers and octogenarians, business people and activists, people of all genders, races and abilities, individuals who have been regulars at city council and those who have never engaged in local democracy before. Inevitably there is a wide range of political leanings, lots of passion and some trepidation.
As a facilitator, these are some of the most diverse rooms I enter, and some of the most difficult groups to guide through a process.
The challenges range from giving everyone a base of technical knowledge to effectively participate in discussions — a component often missing in public consultations — to ensuring complex accessibility needs are met, something required to address the gap in effective involvement of people with disabilities in decision-making.
I’m aware of the weight of language and how it lands in the room. Words that work within our social silos trigger others in a room so diverse. I do a lot of reframing, amplifying, gently correcting or clarifying, sometimes walking back words in order for participants to be able to grasp the truth of what others are saying.
My colleagues and I use and contribute to guides and resources on how to design and facilitate citizens’ assemblies. It never ceases to amaze me how far we get by spending time on agreements about how to be together — this year’s agreements included provisions for repairing relationships after one assembly got off to a rocky start — and the use of playfulness and humour.
Results and next steps
Citizens’ assemblies are certainly not the magic bullet that will solve all of democracy’s problems.
There are real questions about the ability for these groups to truly speak on behalf of society, the role of expertise versus lived experiences, whether the investment in citizens’ assemblies comes at the expense of investment in more broadly based public forms of participation, and whether power shifts away from elected bodies are desirable.
What we learn repeatedly is that a well-organized citizens’ assembly can be a very positive experience for participants. In Burnaby, for example, 90 per cent of assembly members were satisfied (28 per cent) or highly satisfied (62 per cent) with their experience.
Read more: What do workers want? 5 key takeaways from the first citizens’ assembly on workplace democracy
The OECD estimates that roughly half of the recommendations of deliberative processes are implemented. We’ve also found that the side benefits of citizens’ assemblies, such as increased community cohesion and a sense of hope, are substantial.
In Gibsons, for example, increases in community cohesion and social belonging were the most commonly reported positive impact by participants. More than 90 per cent came away from the experience agreeing or strongly agreeing with the statement “people with different political beliefs can have civil, respectful conversations.”
Building trust with government may be another important outcome. Research shows trust in government is significantly higher among Canadians who feel they have a say in what the government does (79 per cent compared to 21 per cent who do not).
Yet only 40 per cent of Canadians feel they have a say in what government does. Citizens’ assemblies bring members of the public into the fold regarding the difficult trade-offs involved in every decision of public importance. As one participant in our research observed, to be part of the citizen’s assembly is to realize that it’s not easy running a town.
Aftab Erfan is the Executive Director of the Morris J Wosk Centre for Dialogue. Part of her team provides consultancy and advisory services to organizations running a Residents Assembly such as those described in this article.
This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
