Last Saturday the final session of the Citizen’s Assembly of Scotland concluded. The assembly, the largest deliberative event in Scotland’s history brought together ordinary people to deliberate over the issues that will shape Scotland.

As we all wait to see the final outcomes of the process, setting out a shared vision for Scotland’s future, we cannot allow ourselves to fall back into the old ways of doing politics.

Now more than ever, Scotland’s success depends upon the power of people working together to tackle the real challenges – whether that’s on the economy, Brexit, climate change or healthcare.

The Citizens Assembly for Scotland was commissioned because we all benefit when people here work together to identify problems – and create a vision for how to improve our nation’s quality of life.

We’ve seen the power of ordinary people coming together, given the time and space to deliberate, negotiate and discuss the big issues that affect us all.

But right now, decisions about us are not made with us. Too often the we feel locked out outside of election time. Democracy isn’t just putting a cross in the ballot box every five years – it’s feeling like all of us have a permanent stake in how decisions are made.

That’s why, ERS Scotland and other grassroots democracy groups in Scotland are proposing a permanent deliberative assembly that could ‘level up’ Scottish democracy – a ‘House of Citizens’ to complement Holyrood’s existing chamber.

The second chamber – drawn from a ‘democratic lottery’ – could represent Scotland’s full range of experience and talent and is an idea overwhelmingly backed by representatives of the Citizens’ Assembly of Scotland, by 83%.

This week exclusive polling by YouGov revealed that support for the House of Citizens proposal among Scots outnumbers opposition by around 3 to 1,  with 45% backing the plans, to just 14% opposed – support spread across all major parties – including an overall majority of Labour and SNP supporters.

Another poll earlier this year revealed that support for institutionalising Citizen’s Assemblies is higher in Scotland than the rest of GB, with a majority of Scots supporting establishing Citizens’ Assemblies to inform the decisions of local councils and even replacing the House of Lords with a rotating Citizens’ Assembly.

Working with Common Weal, Royal Society of Arts and the Sortition Foundation we’ve helped map out how a House of Citizens could work in practice and asking you to sign our petition to back the change.

A House of Citizens would represent a shining example of trust in our communities when compared to Westminster’s fully appointed House of Lords, It would exist to inform and challenge the decisions of parliament, selected by ‘democratic lottery’ – and it would reflect the make-up of Scotland in terms of things like age, ethnicity, gender and income.

A House of Citizens would bring together Scottish people from all walks of life, to lay down new tracks or update our destination along the way. That will get us where we need to be – a better future for everybody.

Photo: Rab Lawrence, Flickr

Sign our petition for a Scottish House of Citizens

The Electoral Reform Society has called on Labour to back proportional representation, in a submission to the party’s National Policy Forum.

A consultation on the party’s views on democracy and the constitution ends on Monday, and members have been writing in urging the party to get behind ‘real democracy’ through a fairer voting system.

The ERS works across all parties to call for positive political reform – and in our submission, we noted that  Westminster’s political system is dysfunctional and distrusted by voters across the spectrum. Only 4% feel they have a lot of opportunities to inform and influence decisions made by MPs at Westminster, according to BMG polling last year for the ERS.

Here’s some key points from our submission, which you can read in full here.

“In recent months, the centralised nature of decision-making at Westminster has become evident. So too has the lack of a robust, transparent structure for dealing with relations and differences between the nations and regions of the UK. Decisions have often felt imposed from the top, with little meaningful dialogue with local government and a culture of mutual distrust fostered by top-down decision-making and archaic ideas about governance.

“There is a huge opportunity for a political party that seeks to give power to the many by overhauling Westminster’s broken, centralised structures: moving power away from the centre, not through simply moving departments around but by implementing the kind of democratic transformation Britain needs.

“The need for a wholesale renewal of our democracy is now more urgent than ever. Westminster’s broken voting system and centralising tendencies give almost unrestrained power to the leader of the government, however few citizens voted for them, while the House of Lords continues to perpetuate class-based hierarchy and to represent the interests of the few.

“With millions of voices excluded from the conversation, the interests and concerns of the UK’s nations and areas outside of London have been pushed to the margins. Such an atmosphere of alienation is a recipe for distrust.”

While the ERS does not have a policy position on federalism, we set out some lessons from other countries on how federalism can be done effectively in our 2019 report ‘Westminster Beyond Brexit’.

That includes transforming the unelected House of Lords into a proportionally-elected chamber representing the nations and regions of the UK.

It must also include making sure all votes count equally – by scrapping ‘winner-takes-all’ election results. Westminster’s warped electoral system is indeed one of Labour’s challenges. The fact that not all votes are treated equally means that 71% of the votes at the December general election had no impact on the local result. See our 2019 General Election report: Voters Left Voiceless.

Labour banks up a massive number of votes in areas it doesn’t ‘need’ and its supporters are denied any representation in vast swathes of the country. This set-up is damaging not just for trust, but our economy too – with cash splashed on swing seats while millions of people elsewhere go ignored.

And despite an increasing trend of voters shopping around at elections, most seats don’t change hands (some since the time of Queen Victoria). Most voters get locked down in safe seats, sometimes going decades without having someone they voted for representing them. It is a recipe for unchecked inequality and political isolation.

As we note in our submission: “The time for zero-sum politics has passed. It is striking to note that countries with more cooperative political systems – including New Zealand and Germany – were among those best able to handle the pandemic.

“During the leadership election, Keir Starmer identified the problem of under-representation in politics, and promised to consult Labour members on proportional representation. This is a chance to reconnect democracy with citizens.

“With trust in politics at rock bottom, it is time to be bold. Backing real democracy and proportional representation might also help Starmer attract new voters. Across the spectrum, too many have felt powerless for too long. It’s time for a new constitutional settlement fit for the future.”

Members can submit their ideas until Monday here.

Sign our petition for a fair voting system in the UK

A new report by the recently established Centre for the Future of Democracy at the University of Cambridge has found that dissatisfaction with democracy has reached an all-time global high. Westminster-style democracies (the UK, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the US) typically fare particularly badly in terms of democratic faith, with the proportion of citizens dissatisfied with the performance of their democracy doubling since the 1990s. In the UK, this proportion increased by around a fifth (18 percentage points) since then.

The global financial and economic crisis and growing within-country regional inequality are of course important factors behind decreasing satisfaction with democracy. But the Centre’s report also suggests that ‘satisfaction with democracy is lower in majoritarian “winner-takes-all” systems than in consensus-based, proportionally representative democracies’. The antagonistic and adversarial mentality inherent in the outdated First Past the Post voting system found in majoritarian, Westminster-style democracies contributes to polarisation and tribalism, making citizens less willing to compromise and to accept the mandate of rival political parties or viewpoints. By contrast, New Zealand is the only Westminster-style democracy to have avoided the trend of ever-increasing public discontent, likely as a result of having introduced a fairer voting system in the 1990s.

New Zealand is the only Westminster-style democracy to have avoided the trend of ever-increasing public discontent, likely as a result of having introduced a fairer voting system in the 1990s. Click To Tweet

These findings highlight the perilous state of our democracy, with ever-deepening citizen dissatisfaction and disengagement, but sadly they do not come as a surprise. Edelman’s annual trust barometer found that trust in institutions is the lowest it’s ever been in the UK – we’re penultimate in their league table of trust, just one spot ahead of Russia. Similarly, a BMG poll for the ERS in December 2019 found that 85 percent of people thought democracy could be improved ‘quite a lot’ or ‘a great deal’, with 80 percent of people feeling they have ‘not very much’ or ‘no influence’ over decision-making. Just 16 percent of the public believe politics is working well in the UK – and only two percent feel they have a significant influence over decision-making.

Indeed, why shouldn’t they? The 2019 general election saw the views of almost 14.5 million voters (45.3% of all electors) go unrepresented, while unelected legislators continue to be appointed to the House of Lords, without a mandate from, and no accountability to, citizens.

To quote Edelman’s own findings: ‘How did the birthplace of parliamentary democracy, the “mother of parliaments,” and a respected voice of sense on the world stage find itself in such an unaccustomed place?’ Our broken Westminster system – with its power-hoarding tendencies, over-centralisation and short-term policy-making – combined with decades of institutional failure and lack of reform, are at the root of most of this dissatisfaction and lack of trust.

Our broken Westminster system – with its power-hoarding tendencies, over-centralisation and short-term policy-making – combined with decades of institutional failure and lack of reform, are at the root of most of this… Click To Tweet

We need to renew our democracy wholesale before it’s too late – shifting away from the centralised ‘Westminster model’ of governance, towards a consensus model which would include a move towards proportional elections for both chambers; decentralising power and sharing it across our nations and regions; and ensuring that citizens are engaged and empowered with a genuine voice over their democracy.

Westminster needs an ambitious, democratic overhaul to bring it into the 21^st century. Only by switching to a fair, proportional voting system for Westminster and replacing the House of Lords with a PR-elected second chamber representing all parts of the UK, we can bring power closer to voters, while putting into practice the fundamental values of cooperation and equality – all of which are fundamental to ensuring that citizens once again are satisfied with democracy and trust their institutions.

To revitalise our democracy, the ERS is calling for:

• Proportional representation: The UK remains the only country in Europe to use First Past the Post. To end the disaster of winner-takes-all voting, the ERS advocates the use of the Single Transferable Vote (STV), which maintains both proportionality and a constituency link.
• House of Lords reform: The ERS proposes a second chamber elected on a territorial basis to serve as a forum in which the four nations (including English regions, depending on how they choose to be represented at the national level) can work together in the 21^st century, and scrutinise and revise the work of the government and the House of Commons.
• A national Constitutional Convention led by citizens: A Convention should consider constitutional issues (including devolution), building upon the work of local citizens’ assemblies and other deliberative democratic processes to give people a say on how they are represented.
• Local Citizens’ Assemblies: We need to bring politics closer to people and foster bottom-up citizen involvement at the local level to ensure trust in our democracy. Citizens’ assemblies should be used at the local level in a systematic and embedded manner to deal with complex and contested issues.

Sign our petition for a fair voting system

On Saturday 26^th and Sunday 27^th October, The Citizens’ Assembly of Scotland kicked off at the Grosvenor Hotel in Edinburgh, with one hundred people from across the country meeting for the first time.

The Assembly has been selected by an independent third-party to create a ‘mini-public’ reflecting Scotland’s population based on age, long term life limiting condition, ethnicity, political belief, voting intention for the Scottish Parliament, attitudes to UK membership of the European Union, attitudes to Scottish independence, education and geography. The breakdown of Scotland’s demographic and recruitment methodology can be found on the official website.

Until they were recruited, many of the participants had never heard of a Citizens’ Assembly, yet Professor David Farrell, lead researcher of the Irish Citizens Assembly, remarked on the “incredible (and so familiar) buzz in the room during the first period of small table deliberation”.

Focusing on outcomes can overlook the importance of the process of a citizens’ assembly. During the introduction, co-conveners David Martin and Kate Wimpress spoke of the importance of the Assembly for Scotland’s democratic future and the value of each person’s experience in order for it to become a rich and potentially transformative journey for everyone involved.

The Assembly was introduced to the independent research team, which will be analysing how their views and attitudes develop over the next six months in response to high quality, balanced information and deliberation. The outcome of the research will be presented as a report alongside open access to the data, putting Scotland’s experience on the international stage and support the development of best practice.

Over the weekend the Assembly was given the remit that it is setting out to address:

• What kind of country are we seeking to build?
• How best can we overcome the challenges Scotland and the world face in the 21^st century, including those arising from Brexit?
• What further information will Scottish citizens need in order to make informed decisions.

This was followed by a presentation from Professor Nicola McEwan, an independent researcher of Scottish and UK constitutions at The University of Edinburgh, covering three themes:

1. The way decisions are made and the processes that lead to this.
2. The powers of the Scottish Parliament, its relationship to Westminster and how it has evolved.
3. Different constitutional options for the future

The Assembly is designed around constant input from the participants. An example being that the assembly has asked for more information on how UK tax structure operates. While the Assembly retains sovereignty, the guidelines state that members will avoid discussing general merits of constitution outcomes, nor be a substitute for elections or referendums.

In the next meeting on the 30^th Nov and 1^st December the Assembly will be asked to draw upon their own experiences and hear from their fellow members what a ‘good life’ means. This will be supplemented by official research on happiness and well-being. This will be the starting point from where it will decide what social policy issues it wishes to explore and their relationship to the constitution.

Scotland’s Citizen’s Assembly represents the opportunity to advance Scotland’s participatory journey and move towards institutionalising these processes.

According to David Martin, the participative and deliberative process sets out “new standards for the quality of the information provided with and new standards on how the discussion on contentious issues are concluded”. In an effort to bridge the potential polarisation of constitutional issues such as Independence and Brexit, the Assembly’s conveners believe the recommendations will be critical to ensure the country can take informed decisions to move forward by agreement.

One certain output of the Assembly will be report given to the Scottish Government and the Scottish Parliament in May 2020 and then debated in parliament. The Scottish Government has committed to taking forward the Assembly’s recommendations and acting on conclusions.

Meanwhile, an ongoing conversation continues around how communities and voices outside the room engage with the Assembly’s process and the issues raised about the future of Scotland. How it relates to wider society will enrichen the vision and support actualising it; by both compelling political commitments, and incentivising practical actions inside and outside traditional institutions.

Whatever happens over the next 6 months, hopefully, this is just the start of Scotland’s journey towards a more active democracy.

The next meeting of the Assembly will take place in Glasgow on Saturday 30^th and Sunday 1^st December. The Electoral Reform Society and The University of Aberdeen will be hosting a public discussion with co-convener David Martin and Dr Clodagh Harris from Ireland’s Citizens’ Assembly on 5^TH December in Aberdeen.

Attend our Aberdeen event

Whichever side of the Brexit debate people are on, one feeling is clear: voters feel disenfranchised and frustrated at Westminster’s chaotic handling of the Brexit process.

One result of the suspension of Parliament in September was the growing recognition that our constitution is not working – and is unable to survive these constant blows.

And the reason is simple: the gentlemen’s agreements that have propped up how Parliament works have totally broken down.

As the ERS pointed out in our recent report, our political set up gives the government of the day too much power. When tensions are running high, this only increases the polarisation between voters and their representatives.

What would a positive response to the current ‘constitutional chaos’ look like?

This week, calls are growing for an overhaul of the constitution in order to bring democracy back to the people.

Recent years have seen the increasing confusion in Westminster albeit within the ‘strong and stable’ voting system of First Past the Post.

According to the Electoral Calculus, there is a strong likelihood that the next General Election will result in a hung parliament. Yet parties remain locked in a ‘majoritarian’ mindset, pretending they can always govern alone.

That is arguably why it took Theresa May two ways to reach across the political divide after failing to win a clear majority in 2017.

MPs from a range of parties have come together to the Electoral Reform Society’s call for a UK wide ‘Constitutional Convention’, that brings together citizens and politicians with the power to make recommendations how we can renew our politics and improve the way the UK is governed.

A Constitutional Convention means directly involving members of the pubic in shaping the democratic future of the country.

Conventions and assemblies on constitutional issues have been held in British Columbia, Iceland and the UK where the Scottish Parliament was formed under the Scottish Constitutional Convention. The design and composition of these conventions reflect the unique geographical, historical and political make-up of each of these areas and the moment in time in which the conventions took place.

Brexit has marked a seminal moment in British history which many argue should trigger a reconfiguration of the British constitution as to what the limits of executive power should be. These constitutional issues need to be made with the input and support of citizens across the UK. Put simply: the public voted for Brexit; therefore it is the public who should have greater involvement in deciding its outcome.

Whatever happens next, it is vital to take power from Westminster and put democracy back at the heart of British politics.

Sign our petition for a Constitutional Convention

It’s easy right now to get caught up in the daily drama of politics – to focus on individuals, and the game playing, and to forget that the current political chaos is all part of a much bigger picture.

Because for all the daily drama, the last year of political turmoil is the outcome of a system that is failing and has been failing for a long time.

The party system is fragmenting and has been for a while. The last two General Elections were the most volatile – that’s the movement of people between parties – since 1931.

And new political cleavages have come to prominence – not only Brexit but on climate, internationalism and more. These shifts are causing the system to malfunction.

All democratic systems have trade-offs. The Westminster system trade-off is, supposedly, government stability and the ability for the government of the day to enact its programme with as little friction as possible.

In return, we have to accept an Executive which has – compared to other democracies – extraordinary power, and an upper chamber packed with unelected individuals – an undemocratic and therefore weak chamber in order to maintain executive strength.

And we’re lumbered with a disproportional electoral system that wastes the majority of votes, sacrificing fair outcomes in order to create a majority. Sixty-eight percent of votes in 2017 made no impact on the local result, our analysis shows.

But that trade-off to get ‘strong’ one party government only works in a two-party system.

In a world that’s a bit more complex than that, this arrangement is over. For good.

Yet we are left with an overbearing executive and warped election outcomes. Parties and candidates can slip in on fractions of the vote, while the prospect of ‘wrong winner’ elections looms large: a government in power despite winning fewer votes than the next placed party.

When marginal seats are won with just handfuls of votes in it, our system is easily exploited.  And the prize is huge.

Our political system is not designed to share power. It is a system that preserves hierarchy and hoards power at the centre. As system so stuck in the past that there are still seats reserved in our second chamber for male aristocrats.

Our political system is not designed to share power. It is a system that preserves hierarchy and hoards power at the centre. Click To Tweet

As well as flaws in the system, there are growing inequalities at the input end. Turnout has increased at each of the last four general elections. But the gaps in who turns out are growing. You are far less likely to vote if you are young, working class or from an ethnic minority. That was not the case decades ago.

Proposals for voter ID can only make this worse – potentially disenfranchising millions at a time when people already feel marginalised: just 4% feel able to ‘fully’ influence decisions by MPs at Westminster (BMG polling for ERS this year).

As well as a system that hordes power at the centre, and ignores votes, there are huge gaps in our electoral rules themselves. Vast sums of money flow into our democracy with little oversight.

You can still for instance, set up a company in the UK and fund political activity through it even if that company does no business here – one of many loopholes that put fair elections under threat.

So we need to stop seeing democratic reform as a nice add on. Democratic reform is not separate to economic and social change – it is fundamental.

The ballot box is the great equaliser of any democracy. But that only works if votes are equal – both in terms of who participates and whether their votes count. And it only works when our Parliament is fully elected, not a place for preserving privilege.

We cannot underestimate the scale of the challenge but nor can we assume that these systemic flaws can be used for good. It’s now time to create a democracy that works for everyone.

The following is based on a speech by Dr Jess Garland, from the ERS and Fabian Society event at Labour conference on 23^rd September.

Read Westminster Beyond Brexit…

The events of 2019 have put the problems of Westminster’s system into sharp focus. 

From discussions about the Prime Minister proroguing parliament, to MPs leaving main parties to form their own (only to splinter within weeks), the last few months have seen parties trying to patch up cracks that have been developing in our political system. 

These cracks aren’t new: politics has been fragmenting for decades as Britain changes. But Westminster’s political system has totally failed to keep up. 

Today marks 200 years since one of the first battles for the vote – the Peterloo Massacre. It’s a good day to discuss how our political structures need to change today. 

A broken system

The failure of the electoral system to properly represent voters’ choices is having a stark effect on how government works (or doesn’t). It’s no wonder we’re in deadlock when Parliament is skewed by a discredited, winner-takes-all mentality. The 2017 election saw 68% of votes fail to count towards the local result – and one in five felt forced to vote ‘tactically’ – holding their noses at the ballot box.

First Past the Post is meant to buffer big parties, but poll after poll shows the two main parties (Labour and the Conservatives) on around 60% support – 10 points below their lowest ever joint general election result. With votes ‘split’ across hundreds of constituencies, those kind of numbers could see some wildly random results ensuing – with unfairness and disillusionment taken to whole new levels. 

With votes ‘split’ across hundreds of constituencies, we could see some wildly random results ensuing – with unfairness and disillusionment taken to whole new levels. Click To Tweet

We’ve already seen evidence of parties trying to get round this. The Brecon and Radnorshire by-election in early August saw both the Greens and Plaid Cymru stand aside to boost the prospects of the eventual winners, the Liberal Democrats. The problem with this is that shouldn’t need to happen. The disproportionate nature of the voting system is forcing this kind of politics where parties will potentially divvy up where they stand and where they stand aside. This reduces voter choice: put simply current system cannot reflect what voters actually want. 

 Westminster's first past the post system is forcing the kind of politics where parties will potentially divvy up where they stand and where they stand aside. Click To Tweet

Parliament’s private members’ club

200 years since Peterloo, the majority of Parliamentarians are unelected: there are around 800 Lords compared to 650 elected MPs. 

200 years since Peterloo, the majority of Parliamentarians are unelected: there are around 800 Lords compared to 650 elected MPs. Click To Tweet

And for far too many of its members, the second chamber of our parliament is a cosy club for the privileged few: with £305 a day in tax-free expenses and the best terrace in London. Yet this is not just another private members’ club – it is one which has real powers over the law of the land.

We’re basically alone in Europe for having a fully-unelected revising chamber. And no other country in the democratic world has a second chamber bigger than ours. Globally, only China has a bigger body, and they merely meet to rubberstamp government policies. 

No other country in the democratic world has a second chamber bigger than ours. Globally, only China has a bigger body, and they merely meet to rubberstamp government policies. Click To Tweet

It’s time to abolish the bloated House of Lords and create a new chamber to revise our legislation – one where the public picks the members, and can hold them accountable. 

It would also be a chance to think properly about devolution, with a second chamber representing the nations and regions. 

Diversity deserts

Westminster remains one of the worst offenders when it comes to a lack of diversity. Just 32% of MPs are women. 2017 was described as “the most diverse parliament”, yet figures show just 8% of MPs were from an ethnic minority. The House of Lords performs even worse, in case you’re wondering. 

No institution is perfect, but Westminster is substantially behind other areas of political life. The Welsh Assembly, for instance, made headlines in 2003 when it became the first parliament in the world to hit 50:50 gender equality. While not currently at those levels it is still leaps and bounds ahead of Westminster at just under 47%. 

Diversity is good for politics for a number of reasons but ultimately ensures that voters feel represented by people they identify with who they feel can represent their interests. Unless Westminster becomes more representative of the nation as a whole it will continue to be seen as serving the minority and it is not surprising that a recent Full Fact report put trust in politicians to tell the truth at just 19%. 

Unless Westminster becomes more representative of the nation as a whole it will continue to be seen as serving the minority Click To Tweet

Politicians need to take radical action to rectify this, including by collecting and publishing data on diversity in parties, and overhauling the voting system to end the ‘seat blocking’ culture encouraged by First Past the Post. 

A new democratic settlement for the UK

The centralised model of power represented by Westminster is completely at odds with the shape of the UK and how devolution has evolved in its nations. 

The Brexit process has shone a light on the tension between Westminster and the devolved administrations. Our report Westminster Beyond Brexit highlighted the ad hoc nature of arrangements for the respective governments of nations to meet and iron out disputes. 

We need a constitutional convention to look closely at what model could work best for the UK. 

We need a constitutional convention to look closely at what model could work best for the UK. Click To Tweet

The need for change across our democracy is urgent. Just 19% of people in the UK saying they trust politicians to the truth – that will only change when people feel connected to their representatives and able to influence decisions in Parliament.

200 years on from the Peterloo Massacre, a group of Trade Unionists united under the banner of Politics for the Many are holding a major conference in Manchester. This conference will address the challenges and opportunities that face the left and trade union movement in campaigning for real democracy today. Tickets are selling fast, so get yours now.

Buy Tickets for This Is What Democracy Looks Like

Next Monday, the firing gun will be started on the Scottish Government’s plans for a ‘Citizens’ Assembly of Scotland’. Hundreds will gather to discuss what this might look like, what it might involve, and how it could improve how democracy works in Scotland.
Over 200 people signed up in a matter of days to attend the (now sold-out) debate, meaning it had to be moved to a larger venue at the University of Edinburgh.

ERS Scotland – who have run ‘deliberative’ community events (Act As if You Own the Place) involving thousands of people over the past few years – have welcomed the government’s plans but say that getting the process right is essential.

It comes amid growing support for new models of democratic engagement, particularly in a time of polarisation. Six select committees in Westminster have just announced plans to hold a Citizens’ Assembly on combatting climate change and achieving the pathway to net zero carbon emissions.

Ahead of Monday’s debate, it’s worth looking at some opportunities and pitfalls for Citizens’ Assemblies.

Ireland’s 2016 citizens’ assembly is the most relevant assembly to look at here – it was nation-wide and government-backed (and led to real constitutional change, through the referendum on abortion and more). Yet Emmanuel Macron played with citizens’ assemblies in France, but couldn’t let go of the process – meaning it was too politicised.

Scotland is at the forefront on this – and it’s good to see government looking closely at the Irish example. But it’s up to the whole establishment – politicians, media and civil society – to understand that this a whole different approach, beyond party politics. How they react will have a big effect on whether the assembly can do the job it’s required to do: being a trusted proxy for the citizens.

All the binary ways of thinking and focus on personalities – who’s up, who’s down – that has to be put aside. Everyone will be on a learning curve, and they can’t bring the old ways of working to it. Citizens’ Assemblies don’t fit into the narrow box or viewpoints of the past.
Our media will play a big role in this – as in Ireland, a concerted efforts must be made to report this fairly and focus on the issues, not the Kremlinology of it all or simply the Great and the Good.

A concerted efforts must be made to report this fairly and focus on the issues, not the Kremlinology of it all or simply the Great and the Good. Click To Tweet

And if parties really want to be on board with giving citizens a say on taking democracy to the next level they have to be open to learning. Parties need to pledge to accept the results of the assembly even if it doesn’t fit their agenda: the government must commit to listening and taking this forward.

Politicians’ involvement needs to be in the background, but they must still feel part of it. So their involvement needs to be well designed. In Ireland, there was animosity between citizens and politicians at the beginning but they worked through that – by the end politicians were viewed as citizens with particular expertise.
For this assembly to work it needs status. There needs to be national awareness of this – it needs to be fully in the public eye and at the heart of public debate.

Our event needs to be built upon, with mechanisms for everyone to feel part of a national conversation.

Looking at Ireland, there was extensive communication of the assembly of all kinds, and fair media coverage of the issues, not the personalities.

The meeting on 8th could be first of many educational exercises on this.

First published in The Scotsman

Find out more about our event

This piece was originally published by The Scotsman.

Talk of citizens’ assemblies is in the air. Former Conservative leadership contender, Rory Stewart has suggested holding one to break through the Brexit impasse. And on Monday, the Scottish Government released their plans for a citizens’ assembly to discuss Scotland’s democratic future.

But what are they? A citizens’ assembly is made up of a representative group of around 50 to 200 citizens, put together from the general public, like a jury. The selection of members is stratified to ensure that participants are as representative as possible of the general population according to certain criteria – usually gender, age, ethnicity, geographical location, and social background. Being put together like a jury means that the wider public can be confident that members are fellow citizens, just like them, and are not representing special interests.

Citizens then hear from experts and campaigners from across the spectrum and society to learn, consult, and then discuss between them on ways forward on complicated issues – away from the sometimes shrill, antagonistic process of (for example) an immediate, full-scale referendum.

The most well-known citizens’ assembly is that which took place in Ireland between 2016 and 2018. The Assembly was composed of a chairperson, appointed by the government, and 99 ordinary citizens ‘randomly selected so as to be broadly representative of Irish society’ in terms of age, gender, social class, and regional spread.

Members debated on a number of topics, including removing the country’s constitutional ban on abortion – and it had a huge impact. Several recommendations – including ending the ban on abortion – were successfully put to a referendum in May 2018.

When just 4% of people feel properly represented by Westminster (BMG polling for the ERS, May), they are looking for new ways to be speak out.

The ERS recently published a report on moving beyond the ‘Westminster model’ of politics, backing a more ‘deliberative’ model of democracy. We’ve been working on public engagement and innovations in democracy in Scotland for years, through public events collectively involving thousands of citizens, helping to shape their communities.

The ERS have also published new proposals for a fresh model for local democracy in Scotland, featuring permanent citizens’ assemblies to feed into local decision-making. And on a UK-wide level, we helped run a national citizens’ assembly on Brexit – which could form a template for an government-backed one in future.

So we’re delighted that the Scottish Government has decided to use citizens’ assemblies to upgrade Scottish democracy.

Old fashioned party politics and a binary vision have failed to provide solutions that Scots can unite around.

The initial structure and the open questions are a good start. Our campaign for more people power at a local level through our ‘Act As If You Own the Place’ initiative has taught us a great deal about what the gold standard in public involvement might look like. We know from our own experience and research that the assembly design and the way assemblies are run are crucial for their success. The devil will be in the detail.

The hard work starts now: there is a lot of work to do on this and in making sure the Scottish people see the assembly as the trusted, independent institution that it should be.

It’s positive that the government are keen to hear from experiences here in Scotland and from around the world.

So our verdict is so far so good – and we look forward to working with all partners on ensuring this is the best deliberative democratic process possible.

On the evening of Monday July 8th the ERS will be hosting a public debate in Edinburgh – featuring experts and politicians – to discuss the citizens’ assembly plans. 

Contact mediaoffice@electoral-reform.org.uk to find out more. Joanna Cherry MP QC, Dr Jess Garland, and Dr Oliver Escobar are confirmed already. 

Sign up for ERS Scotland’s Citizens’ Assembly event