Set a 9-month deadline as a default for feedback on the outcome of any engagement with clear reasons where this deadline would not be met (if applicable). The live status of the decision making process should be clear and transparent throughout. Parliament could create a minimum standard of response. For example - initial acknowledgement of engagement; - follow up to explain how many responses and what happens next; - a follow up with information on the outcome of the inquiry. - signposting with more information - traffic light system for inquiries flagging up what has been addressed and what hasn't - calls logged and and rules as to how long someone would have to wait for a response. This would show people that their participation is worthwhile and make people feel that their voice is being heard. Legislation and inquires can take a long time, so set expectations from the start and consider how you will keep people involved in the longer term. If you don’t do this it will fuel apathy and mistrust.
This is really tricky. People who take time to engage should get feedback on the process, otherwise there is a risk they will decide it's not worth the trouble. But change in a political/policy development context usually takes years, not months.
Engaging with people is only valuable if there are outcomes. These are often time sensitive and must be communicated effectively, again through councils, community councils and participants.
Scottish Parliament coming back and updating us is really good. Make sure feedback is accessible and in EASYREAD. It is important to listen to what people say and explain loud and clear why MSPs have made their decisions - whether they have agreed with public input or not. If people know why decisions have been made - people will understand the decisions and trust the process more.
Back to group
Back to group
This content is created by the open source Your Priorities citizen engagement platform designed by the non profit Citizens Foundation