Smarter petitions (Nov 2009)
-
Upload
fraser-henderson -
Category
Technology
-
view
66 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Smarter petitions (Nov 2009)
Smarter Petitions…everywhere!
Fraser Hendersonwww.particitech.com
11th November 2009
The petition imbalanceThere is a long tradition of petition writing in the UK.
Signing a petition is a simple way for members of the public to call for action
It is the most popular civic activity in the Citizenship Survey.
A 2007 Local Government
Association survey found that less than a
third of local authorities guarantee
a response to petitions
CLG research shows that even fewer councils make
information available about how to petition
Research by Leicester DeMontfort University shows that petitions empower people when there is a clear relationship between the petition and decision making
Motivation•· To express anger•· To exert power and control•· To make a difference•· To increase the status, elevation and positioning of an issue•· For publicity reasons•· For transparency•· To force a response•· To establish a collective voice or for aggregation of opinion•· To cause mischief•· Because there is an expectation (‘feel good factor’)
A new petitions duty (by April 2010!)The duty requires local authorities to draw up and publicise a petitions
scheme which will give citizens :-
•the right to a public response if they sign a local petition – both paper and electronic
•the ability to trigger a full council debate on their concerns
•the ability to trigger a senior office to give evidence at a meeting of the overview and scrutiny committee
•the ability to appeal to the council’s overview and scrutiny committee if they feel the response from their council is not adequate.
What is a valid petition?
is signed by the requisite number of people who live, work and study in the local area
The appropriate number of signatures required for triggering a debate (limited to max. of 5% of the local
population)
Relate to a function of the authority OR (upper tier only...) relates to an improvement in the economic, social
or environmental well-being of the authority’s area to which any of its partner authorities could contribute
ExclusionsOn the face of the Bill
vexatious, abusive or otherwise inappropriate petitions are excluded on the face of the Bill (Cl.14(1)(b))petitions under other enactments (Cl.12(1)(c)
By secondary legislation
•any matter relating to a planning decision;•any matter relating to a licensing decision;•any matter relating to an individual or entity in respect of which that individual or entity has a right of recourse to a review or right of appeal conferred by or under any enactment;
Tip of the iceberg challenges
Language and translation
Thresholds and the certainty of validation
Data protection
Guaranteeing a response from partner agencies
Council versus the world
Politicking
…but also
Local authorities will need to provide an ePetitions facility (2011?)
To support the bill•A “petition expert group” consisting of 6 Local Authorities
•An I&DeA community of practice (providing peer support)
•Case Studies
For ePetitions
•A recommended data standard for interoperability
•Guidance on ePetitioning
ePetitioning history (UK)Scottish Parliament: 1999 – Napier University (ITC), Edinburgh
Bristol & Kingston : 2004 – Local eDem National Project (via ITC & NLC)
Bundestag : 2005 (ITC)
No.10 downing street : 2006 - MySociety
Bristol revamp & National Assembly for Wales : 2008
Europetition (EC funded) : 2009 - MAC & Public-i
2010 : New system for UK Parliament
ePetition AppraisalFor Against
Transparency and feedback
Escalation in the democratic process
Data collection
Speed of raising and collecting
Pre-petitioning phase
Improves validation
Catching media interest
Duplicates
Astroturfing
“Graffiti” – time consuming
Moderation?
Raises expectation of a response
However•In the case of four parliamentary systems it was generally be concluded that the introduction of the ePetition systems failed to significantly mobilise non-participating or underrepresented social groups.
•The typical user of the German, the Scottish and the Queensland•systems tends to be a middle-aged male with an above-average level of formal education
•Local politicians tend to deal with petitions, irrespective of the submission channel
•Available data gives no indication that the introduction of ePetitions in Queensland and Germany has significantly contributed to an overall increase of petitions submitted
Council Citizen Committee
Statutory Requirements
Getting feedback Format
Vetting, Rules and Regulation
Progress Validity and representation
Set expectations Avoiding Duplicates Actions
Supporting the petitioner
Integrating with offline Responsibility
Back-end process Marketing
Validating Connecting with supporters
Evaluation Signing
Effective ePetitions
ePetition design matrix S3.3
VolumesIn Bristol, 101 ePetitions since 2004 Over 40,000 signatures (Population c.400,000)
In Birmingham : 9 petitions, 960 signatures (since May 2009)
Since 2006, the No.10 site (to 2008) : Over 29,000 petitions have been submitted, of which over 8,500 are currently live and available for signing, over 6,000 have finished and 14,601 have been rejected outright. There have been over 5.8 million signatures, originating from over 3.9 million different email addresses.
NB the set-up costs of the Downing Street site were £17,500 and the annual running costs are £109,000,
ePetitioning in Bristol
ePetitioning in Bristol
ePetitioning in BristolBiggest responses
• Against call for Banksy removal (3,187): Councillor• Recycling plastics petition (4,867): Councillor• In house Home Care Services (7,923): Citizen• Save cycle path from becoming bus route (10,000+): Citizen
Profile of Bristol ePetitioners (2007):-
13% under 25, 64% aged 25-50, 19% over 5086% White, 3% BME
4% stated they had a disability45% male, 51% female
43% home user, 49% work58% first time e-petitioners
Europetition : European Parliament
European Citizens Initiative (>1m signatures)
Bristol 400,000 Kingston-upon-Thames 150,000 Birmingham City 1,000,000 North Lincolnshire 150,000
Norfolk 824.000
2007 = 1,506 Europetitions
Environmental issues, water, etc 288Fundamental rights 226
Urbanisation 131Education & cultural issues 103
Social Affairs & Discrimination 207Internal Market & Consumers 192
Health 105Justice 99
Transport issues & Infrastructure 88Property & Restitution 72
Expanding possibilities
Multimedia evidence of citizen and committee work (photos / videos)
Videoconferencing with petitioners, SMS signatures
What Next?
Health Authorities? Police Authorities? Other agencies?
Internally – staff petition managers?
National aggregator / router?
Petition maps?
National ‘mood’ barometer?
www.particitech.com