Voices - A New Era Or Missed Opportunity?

Dr. Hugh Govan

Although some leaders may have been more supportive of the idea than others, it is a welcome development in the region. The leaders' rationale appears to be strong in that the people will only "buy" the Plan if they feel they were involved in making it.

And thus, the Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat was given the unenviable task of coordinating possibly the region's first large scale public policy consultation. We will leave for others to discuss whether the islands got what they wanted in terms of, say, labor mobility or the powers that be what they wanted in terms of tighter security-but how has the "new" idea of public participation fared?

Western countries have had interesting experiences as non government organizations (NGOs), and some public bodies have struggled against bureaucratic inertia, and some times outright hostility, to achieve more inclusive governance systems. Some of the lessons learned have included the need to avoid:

>> Confusing public relations exercises with consultation process

>> Presenting elaborate documents as a starting point rather than seeking people's basic concerns

>> Presenting the issues in a complex and daunting format (bulky drafts, frameworks etc.)

>> Relying on the public to make written submissions on complex documents, or using other inappropriate feed back mechanisms that exclude large parts of the population

>> Claiming to have consulted civil society by holding a single "public" meeting by invitation only and far from the majority of the population (e.g. rural based)

>> Providing little or no explanation of why some views and not others are incorporated in the final document

These and other mistakes have been made in the Pacific Plan civil society consultation process to date and have risked losing the sense of ownership and commitment that was intended from the outset.

But it is by no means too late, and to be fair to the Forum Secretariat, it is an immensely challenging task in a region which is so extended and diverse. To their credit, the Secretariat has had some discussion with Suva based regional NGOs, has encouraged governments to invite NGOs to national consultations and has reacted promptly to NGO criticism, although so far not effectively.

It's not too late because the Forum insists that the plan is a living document and the consultation process will continue for years to come. So how should Pacific Island civil society be consulted? Well surely an obvious starting point would be to ask the people themselves?

The rich diversity of cultures in the region should present a first source of inspiration; processes of consultation and consensus and the concept of "ownership" are present in many traditional and contemporary Island societies. Some of these processes must offer options for national consultations. For example the "Maneaba" decision making mechanism in Kiribati has proven its merit throughout the ages or the "Marae" for the Maoris public debate.

The critical level of consultation is at the country level. In the case of the Plan these national consultations have presented the greatest challenge. The largest obstacle to date has been an inability of the Forum Secretariat to influence how national consultations are carried out.

A potential solution lies in dedicating resources specifically to the civil society national consultative processes, to be carried out by the civil society networks in collaboration with the national governments. These are just some emerging ideas but much can be gained through discussions with civil society on the means of consultation before pressing ahead with the consultations themselves.

The region has the right to expect a better consultation process - the Forum Secretariat was tasked to carry out a "participatory, consultative and broad-based approach to national level consideration of regional integration…" But, the issue at stake is much broader than the Pacific Plan. This is an opportunity for significant progress in good governance for the region, in which communities are empowered to be fully engaged in an effective dialogue with their respective governments and intergovernmental institutions. Isn't this a goal of so called "democracy and good governance"?

Dr. Hugh Govan is the Manager, Communities and Coasts Programme at the Foundation for the Peoples of the South Pacific International, based in Suva, Fiji.