Public want to see proof their voice has been heard

THERE is a familiar cry of the politically disenchanted that rings out – THEY are not listening to the people.

It strikes at the very heart of what it is to be a politician, or what it is not.

Are they there to simply reflect the majority view of the electorate, or, as some might like to say, make difficult and unpopular decisions for the 'good of the island'?

And if it is the former, how do they go about judging what that view is?

Do they listen to those who are shouting loudest and are the angriest, gathering to wave banners? Or to those who claim to represent the 'silent majority', who some just might argue should start speaking up if they want things to happen?

Clearly there is a high level of discontent with this States – even senior politicians are being quick to self-diagnose it as the proverbial worst ever – a label which tends to affix itself to every administration at some point.

It is getting to that time in the electoral cycle, too, where big decisions are piling up on top of each other – a trend that has been repeated ever since the system of government reforms.

The proverbial buses arriving all at once.

That leads to rushed and, at times, uninformed decision-making, but it also leads to problems with public engagement.

Who can blame people for turning off when faced with streams of big reports and public consultations when they arrive all at once, and then turning rapidly back on when they realise just exactly what it is their representatives have been up to.

Those who rail that they have not been listened to cannot argue that they have not been asked – it is just how.

Go on the States website today and you will find consultations on strategies for old people, for young people, for the future of the ambulance service, whether there should be same-sex marriage, beneficial ownership rules and a community survey to have a say on how public services are delivered.

There are also representations being taken on the Island Development Plan.

This comes at the same time as people are being encouraged to have their say on the new traffic layout in Town and the associated cruise industry.

On top of that, different reports are going to the States about funding the transport strategy and with proposals that will affect some residential statuses.

Oh, and reforms to the structure of government.

While the public has not been consulted per se on the States reports, there is certainly an expectation that people will engage and tell their political representatives what they think.

In the past, administrations have been rightly criticised for being a closed shop, not consulting on key issues.

The pendulum has well and truly swung, but with it too comes a heightened expectation in the individual's mind that not only should they have a say, they should be agreed with – or at least see their views have had an influence.

Consultation is about much more than the act itself. It is the results that the public wants to see and proof that their voice has been heard.

What this States has failed to do at times is explain their decision-making well enough to win the public argument – and that is reflected in the hostile reception it is getting.

Some of the politicking around the decisions has not helped.

Take the hurdles that have been put in the way of La Mare.

This is an Assembly that so far has over-promised and under-delivered – and things are not getting any easier. Because very soon, just as more major reports are flying off the printing press, a fever will take over that is more about political careers than it is about good decision-making.

All of a sudden, the more aloof members of the Assembly will be back smiling and shaking hands with those who put them into office. Those standing for re-election will answer face to face for their actions so far.

Many members become more and more distant from the public the longer a term goes on. They become inward-looking, probably not deliberately, but eventually a bravado takes over as they feel increasingly like an exclusive decision-making club not having to answer for all of their actions and guffawing at anyone who disagrees.

They consult, yes, but more because they are advised that is the right thing to do than because they want their minds changed.

Members move from always having time for others to paying it lip service, feeling that with experience comes expertise that does not need any outside 'interference'.

They will not admit this, because to do so is a failure on the promises they all make at election time.

Or if they see it, they will see it in other politicians and not themselves.

The final verdict on this administration will be delivered in and around April.

Those standing again will have a very real first-hand flavour of what the public thinks.

The number of those who do not, particularly one-termers, will be another reflection on the success of this Assembly.