The only thing worse than
an uninformed public in a democracy is no democracy at all. So when public
safety is involved, what is “safe enough” and who decides?Can the authorities involve the public in developing regulations that
will affect public safety without losing control or getting bogging down in
petty politics?Yes, the public can
and should be involved.
Most people will consent to a decision, even one they might not agree with, if
they believe it was reached fairly and intelligently. Thus, any public
consultation process must first provide for substantive and procedural fairness.
Second, to understand and resolve any problem, the facts and interests of all
stakeholders must be freely aired and debated.
But
who should participate?Theory suggests a large group but practicality dictates a
smaller one.In any event, all major interests groups must be represented,
including the public.These reps
must respect the legitimate interests of others and the public interest, which
Walter Lippman once defined as what people would choose “if they saw
clearly, thought rationally, acted disinterestedly and benevolently.”
The
Internet is a powerful way of consulting the public, supplementing traditional
methods, each having pros and cons.One
thing to avoid is superficiality. Citizen juries need at least several days to
discuss and deliberate complex issues.
Consensus,
the ultimate goal of any such process, is often thwarted by the inability to get
beyond one’s own selfish interests and stock opinions.The process must enable participants to separate opinion from fact.This is where a skilful facilitator can really help.It is also better to admit ignorance than to be found in error, since the
latter condition means that one is ignorant of one’s own ignorance! Gently
leading the group from ignorance to knowledge is the facilitator’s most
important task.
A confident, informed public
can contribute
significantly not only to the issue at hand but more importantly, to the
efficiency, effectiveness and future health of communities and our democratic form
of government. Trust and communication are the bricks and mortar of community
and democracy. Without both, we have neither.
Although
it seems risky, a genuine and consistent engagement of the public in a fair and
open process is probably the best risk mitigation of all.The more you open up and show some vulnerability, the more people will
trust you.This is one of the keys
to managing public risk.
Recommended Reading for Risk
Managers
Risk
in Modern Society, edited by Ragnar Lofstedt and Lynn Frewer.This fine collection of papers from international scholars addresses
comparative risk, risk perception & communication, social amplification of
risk, trust and how to involve the public in risk decisions.The last chapter provides a worthy account of public consultation in
Europe.
Mike
Murphy has been a risk management consultant for the last four years. Prior
to that, he spent 17 years (78-96) with Transport Canada, his last five as Regional
Director General, Aviation
in Winnipeg. Originally trained as a professional pilot, he is the
author of an internationally acclaimed 500-page report entitled "An
Evaluation of Emergency Response Services at Airports in Canada,"
currently in its second revised edition (August 1999) and is undergoing
a thirdmajor
revision. He is also the
Chairman of the Air Passenger Safety Group (APSG) www.transport2000.ca/APSG
, a Director of Transport
2000 Canada www.transport2000.ca,
a Director of the Ottawa Chapter of Christian Businessmen's
Committee (CBMC) www.cbmc.net and the Secretary General of the Peugeot Club of North
America (PCNA). www.peugeotclub.org
His
first major involvement in public consultation was at Transport Canada where
he was at the time responsible for the national aviation enforcement
program. Concerned that the unchecked powers exercised by government
officials had the potential to be oppressive, he provided the aviation
industry with a public forum where they were free to 'throw darts' at TC's
enforcement policy without any fear of recrimination. After several
year of lively and productive dialogue, which lead to important revisions,
even the industry critics admitted their once sharp arrows had been
downgraded to those of a 'rubber-tipped' variety. He has used the same
"no recrimination" open communication style to pull great ideas
and honest feedback from staff, clients and the aviation industry for over
15 years.
Most
recently, as chair of the Air Passenger Safety Group, he organized the
first-ever Air Passenger Safety Symposium in Ottawa which provided a
representative group of passengers with an opportunity to hear all sides of
the debate on a particular issue. The all-day event in August 1999
included speakers from all the major stakeholders, a question and answer
period and a panel discussion. Passengers then answered a five point
questionnaire, the results of which were published and sent to the
Honourable David Collenette, Minister of Transport. Murphy believes that
eventually the airlines and/or Transport Canada
will see the value in hosting this sort of open and balanced
interaction with airline passengers.
Managing Your