Our Deliberations
CLAIMING OUR FUTURE DECEMBER 2016
The Concept Claiming Our Future was based on a concern to build stronger and more strategic cross sectoral civil society action for change. It was rooted in an imperative to create public spaces where alternatives to current models of development could be explored and the change collectively sought by civil society could be deďŹ ned. It was informed by a valuing of participation which motivated action to mobilise people into these public spaces and to ensure participative deliberation within these public spaces. This led Claiming Our Future to an approach that reflected the importance of dialogue and of the use of public spaces as places of deliberation to define and agree on the better society we seek. The deliberation sought was one that involved a struggle between ideas that was respectful but challenging, that moved beyond current boundaries that stifle public debate, and that allowed the contribution of participants’ full unbounded potential. Claiming Our Future convened eight deliberations on a range of topics. These involved interested individuals and members of a variety of civil society organisations. The deliberations ranged in size from over 1,000 participants at the inaugural event, to an average of 300 participants at the policy focused deliberations, to 130 participants at our final event.
The first group of deliberations included an inaugural event in Dublin in 2010 and three policy focused events in Cork, Galway and Dublin in 2011 and 2012, that took their agendas from the policy priorities identified at the inaugural event. These deliberations were organised by working groups that then acted on the outcomes of the events. Two local deliberations were held in 2012 on issues of resilience and renewable energy. The outcomes of the event on resilience were taken up by the local group involved and the deliberation on renewable energy resulted in the local group supporting the emergence of a People’s Energy Charter network. In 2013 a national deliberation was hosted on UN global development goals. This specifically brought together civil society sectors concerned with national and international development under the banner of what became the UN Sustainable Development Goals. There was then a break in these events to focus on other strands of work until the final deliberation in 2016 that debated civil society issues.
The Mechanics Facilitation Deliberation requires skilled facilitation. Participants need to feel comfortable if they are to participate. Exchange involves contributing viewpoints and actively listening to other viewpoints. Focus is required to build towards and identify what are the shared perspectives. Skilled facilitators from within civil society organisations contributed greatly to the success of the Claiming Our Future deliberations. The most effective deliberations allowed for space for the facilitators to meet before the event. These meetings enabled their contribution to designing the event and allowed debate on the objectives and themes for the event.
Consensus Decision Making Deliberations sought to move away from majoritarian approaches in coming to conclusions and to use more inclusive and consensus decision-making. The modified Borda count (http://www. deborda.org/modified-borda-count/) was used. This is a preference voting procedure. The option which gains the highest average preference score is identified. The procedure involves three stages: the debate, the vote and the analysis of that vote.
Prior to the debate, all concerned may propose relevant options. During the debate, participants may propose amendments or new options. The list of options for consideration is up-dated and displayed and forms a ballot paper. Participants are asked to express their first five preference options. The higher preferences get higher points. The final tally can then identify the most preferred options using the completed ballot papers.
Monitoring and Reporting A small group of ‘consensors’ were appointed for each event, drawn from the different civil society sectors and perspectives participating. The role of the ‘consensors’ was to: Oversee the preference voting process arising from the deliberation. Review the results of the voting process from each session and report this back to the participants, through an agreed presenter. Review the new ideas arising from the open field element of each session and report back patterns or trends in these which would be helpful to the debate. Prepare a final report on the outcomes of the day’s deliberations.
Creativity Deliberation events sought to engage activists and artists in a collaboration that could shape and enable constructive
and successful dialogue among participants. All the events were organised with creative moments. These creative moments sought to capture and enhance the mood of the deliberation and stimulate the energy people could bring to it. They included poetry, song, dance, relaxation, and theatre.
Inaugural Event, Dublin, 2010 – Consensors’ Report Extracts Values. There was a strong consensus
that priority be given to five values: equality, environmental sustainability, accountability, participation and solidarity. Most tables used the opportunity to suggest other values that were not on the original list or to indicate a particular perspective on one of those on the list. In particular, a number of tables reflected on ‘enterprise’, putting it in a collective or sustainable context. Fifteen tables proposed the value of ‘honesty’ or ‘integrity’.
Making the Economy work for the People. The two policy themes
which attracted the highest support under the theme economy and
environment were: Change the current development model and define and measure progress in a balanced way that stresses economic security and social and environmental sustainability; Regulate banking to change the culture from one of speculative banking to one where currently state-owned banks and new local banking models focus on guaranteeing credit to local enterprise and communities. The two policy themes which attracted the highest support under the theme income, wealth and work were: Achieve greater income equality and reduce poverty through wage, tax and income policies that support maximum and minimum income thresholds; Prioritise high levels of decent employment with a stimulus package to maximise job creation in a green/social economy. Reforming the State to work for the People. The two policy themes which attracted the highest support under the theme of governance were: Reform representative political institutions to enhance accountability, equality, capacity, and efficiency of national and local decision makers; Develop participatory/deliberative forms of citizen’s engagement in public governance and enhance democratic participation by fostering the advocacy role of civil society organisations, civics/ ethnics education in all school levels, and a diverse media. The two policy themes which attracted highest support under the theme of
access to services and public sector renewal were: Provide universal access to quality healthcare, childcare, and services for older people; Invest in equality in access to and participation in all levels of education (preschool to university).
Deliberation on Income Equality, Galway, 2011 – Consensors’ Report Extracts
Card Vote: Each participant was invited to display green, amber or red cards depending upon their perception of how the day was proceeding. The overwhelming vote was green, with a smaller number of amber cards and around 15 red votes.
There was a consensus that high incomes were linked to disproportionate power, influence and status. Similarly, there was a strong emphasis on the need for some form of cultural shift in attitudes to high incomes and wealth, and in particular, the need for alternative symbols and rewards to mark success. Some tables attempted to set a range on low and high incomes. Some approached it as a ratio or proportion between the highest and the lowest with proposals from 1:4 to 1:14. Other tables attempted to put an absolute figure on maximum incomes and proposals here ranged from €75,000 to €190,000, after tax.
What Next? A total of 474 separate ‘proposals’ were submitted by the 99 tables active during this session. These varied enormously from very specific policy themes which we should organize around to general strategic approaches. The general ideas that emerged most strongly were: Keep going/proposals on structures/governance of COF (71); Develop a local organisation/hold local events (66); Develop a web presence/ social media/net based activities (55); Ideas for publicising COF and its programme (49); Develop a clear COF policy platform (46); Link with other organisations/interests (45); Organise some form of mobilisation/ demonstration (34); and Recruit new members (29).
What are the issues around high incomes?
The full range of mechanisms for achieving greater income equality were discussed at the tables, with a consensus emerging that progressive taxation was generally the most appropriate mechanism, where gross incomes were not curtailed. In this context, a large number of tables referred to the need for transparency and efficiency in public expenditure to sustain public support for taxation.
What are the issues around low income? In this discussion most tables
returned to consideration of how to set the lowest permissible income. There was a common unwillingness to name a minimum level, with several tables saying that an independent process needs to be put in place to agree this level. Some tables commented on the limitations of the language of minimum and adequate. There was a consensus that income itself is not a sufficient measure; there was discussion of issues like inter-generational poverty, housing insecurity, poor education , quality of general public services , and feelings of stigma , alienation and powerlessness associated with poverty.
What actions should we take? Institutional and legal proposals: Establish an independent body to set the level for a minimum income in our society; Establish a high pay commission; Promote the inclusion of a reference to income equality in the proposed new Irish Constitution.
Actions to increase transparency/ awareness of income equality:
Campaign to get every company/public body etc. to include a statement of wage differentials in its annual report/accounts; Look for individuals to commit to a maximum wage in their own lives; and ‘Walk in my Shoes activities’, day of action, celebrity participation etc.
Ideas related to the media: develop
our own media, social media, local media and national media; Actively challenge income myths; and Demand fair access to
public media/claim our space.
Tackle underlying causes: Find ways
other than money to recognise/mark success; Research the rich locally and nationally; and Highlight gender and other underlying causes of income inequality.
Strategic considerations: Make a
noise/people power/mobilise/boycott; Have a clear idea of when the future is; and Focus energy on a few strategic campaigns.
Deliberation on an Economy for Society, Cork, 2012 – Consensors’ Report Extracts What do we mean by Prosperity?
There was a very strong message from the discussions that we should seek to understand the idea of ‘prosperity’ as having enough rather than having an excess. There was also a strong sense that we need to think of prosperity in more than financial, consumerist or monetary terms. Many of the discussions emphasised that the idea of sustainability is central to the idea of prosperity that we wish to promote. If it is not sustainable it is not prosperity. There were different views about the relationship between prosperity and equality. However, behind these apparent disagreements it was clear that those tables that discussed prosperity in the sense of ‘surplus’ saw a conflict between the two concepts, while those tables which discussed prosperity in the sense of ‘enough’ felt that the two concepts
reinforced each other.
Is Growth Necessary? A number of the tables concluded that growth was necessary, but in all cases this was expressed within constraints and conditions. The most commonly expressed condition related to what we consider and measure as ‘growth.’ Growth should be seen as a tool not a target in itself: growth is necessary if we consider growth of the right things. Participants identified an extensive list of the areas where growth was positive; these could be summed up as a social, environmental and wellbeing. It was recognised that this was not simply a matter of new indices, but rather the need for an alternative model of economic and social development which would generate positive movement on those indices. Some tables responded that economic growth was not necessary, generally referring to current concepts of growth such as GDP. Some groups felt that short term GDP growth was necessary to bring us out of the current crisis, others felt that such growth would, in reality, make matters worse.
Voting on innovative ideas. This
session involved participants reading a range of innovative ideas which could form an element of a new economic and social model. Each participant was given 10 stickers and was invited to place all or some of these on the posters they favoured, depending upon their preferences. The resulting ranking of popular support was, in reverse order: Collapse Scenario (158); Job Guarantee (175); Technology & Innovation (182); Basic Income (247); Bail Out The Public (271); Radical Regulation(279); Steady State Economy (299);
Empowering Local Communities (452); Establish New Value Base (540).
What should happen next? The
two strongest sets of proposals related to enhancing the local presence of Claiming our Future and improving our communications capacity. A number of specific ideas which Claiming our Future should be working to progress also emerged. Among those that were mentioned by more than one table were: a wealth tax campaign, campaign for political reform, campaign for environmental protection legislation, and a campaign for basic income.
Deliberation on Building a Resilient Community and Economy, in Tralee, 2012 – Consensors’ Report Extracts The debate at the tables focused on what resilience meant to participants, the external shocks impacting on us and what a resilient community would look like.
Three common strands emerged from the debates: 1. Resilience means survival, bounce-backability and self-sufficiency. It is about local inter-dependence and localisation. It is the point at which shocks become opportunities and new ideas emerge to meet the challenges positively. 2. Resilience requires leadership, cooperation and organisation. Organisation is about
building networks and making challenges. It gives a voice to people in the community. 3. Resilience is based on three components: Vision. It involves holding a vision for the community that is inclusive, participative and values diversity; The individual. It needs individuals that take responsibility and are proactive. It involves developing the values and knowledge held by individuals through awareness raising, education and building consciousness; and Community. It needs a community ready to take risks and capable of mobilising local resources. It involves nurturing flexibility and empowerment of its members. Each table explored what needed to happen to build resilience in Kerry in relation to the field it was focusing on.
Food security: Increase support for food producers, including home growers, by providing knowledge, advice, access to land, and funding; Revive co-ops, create community gardens and increase access to growing areas; Open more routes to markets including OOBY’S, farmers’ markets and co-ops; Promote permaculture principles including reducing waste by using it as inputs for other enterprises; Increase the number of local abattoirs; Address health issues around food, teach food values especially to young people, and make food fun with cooking or harvest festivals*. Energy: Improve communication between groups and individuals to inform and share ideas; Influence local and national government to be more supportive of new ideas; Recognise the scattered nature of the
community.
Community: Develop a shared
understanding of community; Build trust and solidarity within the community; Identify community assets and build participation in the community where people can give and receive; Support the local economy through local produce and markets, local energy production, local finance (LETS), home working and eco/ niche tourism; Build local power through self-organising, changing attitudes and mindsets, collective responsibility for waste as a resource, and co-operatives; Education through schools, sports groups and community groups and providing transition training in crafts, husbandry, survival and food.
Health: Promote a holistic preventative model of health provision at local level; Lead by example at a personal level and promote cooperation at community level; Seek policy change that transfers power to the local level; Promote clean food, water and environment. Education: Nurture a moral code,
boundaries, respect, empathy, confidence, empowerment and critical thinking; Enhance connecting and inter-linking generations, families and communities; Education is life-long, people need to be open to learning within their communities and parents need to pass on resilience to their children.
Personal Transition/Spirit of Transition: Give yourself time for
personal awareness and self-reflection; Engage with groups and network with community and interest organisations; Make your personal transition, have fun with this and share it; Take action, practice what you preach and celebrate life.
Democratic Institutions: Build
a democratic, open, inclusive and transparent representative structure for good governance at local level; Reclaim power that has been given away with local decision making and devolution to community governance; Identify resources and assets at community level and educate in personal responsibility.
Economy: Develop local renewable energy to create strong renewable industry and service the local economy; Produce more local goods, buy more local products and stop money leaking out of Kerry; Empower local people to start local businesses through better education for innovation. Transport: Reduce the need for travel
through greater self-sufficiency. Cut down on the transport of goods by using local produce; Develop public and community transport plans, local cooperation, integrated services and improved information on transport options to change dependency on the car; Build a national car sharing website customised to local areas with passenger feedback systems; Awareness raising to change mindsets and use previous means of doing things; Influence the political outlook towards
integrated thinking on transport at national, regional and local level.
Deliberation on Reinventing Democracy, Dublin, 2012 – Consensors’ Report Extracts Political reform: The tables were asked
to identify their priorities for political reform. The reports from the tables can be gathered under four main themes:
Political culture: Three key ideas
concerning political culture emerged from the tables: participation, values and education for citizenship.
Erosion of structures of solidarity: A number of tables highlighted the extent to which communities have been ‘set against each other’ and traditional patterns of solidarity have been broken down – both in the boom and in the recession. Several tables noted how the voices of dissent (and advocacy) have been silenced. Economics and politics: Several tables made reference to the ‘failed model’ of development and distribution which currently prevails. The power of multinationals and global capital was also commented on, as well as its impact in driving local business out of existence. Media: The influence of the media in ‘dumbing down’ debate and setting a polarising agenda was seen as a significant underlying factor by several tables. The media was also seen to exclude alternative and minority voices.
Priorities: Each participant was asked to
read and discuss a series of specific projects for political reform and to vote for each of these, using a voting system designed to draw out ideas which enjoy broadest support. The proposals were prepared by the Steering Group after widespread consultation and were set out in some detail. The following preference top rankings emerged: Involve civil society in local government decision making processes and use participatory methods (417); Devolve greater power to local government and create local funding for sources for it (357); Recognise the contribution of civil society organisations in democracy and protect their right to do advocacy work (388); Change the electoral system to deliver greater diversity and more effective institutions. (265); Change the party whip system, allowing the Dail to set its own agenda and have more powerful Oireachtas committees (214); and Enable participation of people in institutional settings (prisons, etc) in decision making (190).
Action: Each table was asked to arrive at a
consensus on what should be the priorities for action for ‘Claiming our Future’ over the coming period. Five fields of action were identified across the tables:
Engage with existing structures. A
number of tables emphasized the need to link with existing processes and structures. Develop ‘tool-kits’ or other forms of support. Other tables focused on the need to develop different types of resources to support action
in this area.
Establish demonstration projects. Some table proposed that Claiming our Future should establish independent processes and projects to highlight the potential of alternative approaches to advancing political reform.
Develop Claiming our Future. A range of tables set out actions to further evolve Claiming Our Future itself. Campaigns A number of tables proposed
specific campaigns on particular issues to: localise decision making in HSE, VECs; promote the centrality of ‘equality’ as a defining value in decision making; promote LETS and other alternative, localised economic/exchanges systems.
Deliberation on Renewable Energy – Production, Distribution, and Conservation, Portlaoise, 2012 – Consensors’ Report Extracts Energy Generation The energy co-operative group discussed the need for community cooperatives. There is the possibility to create local micro-grids to supply and balance energy requirements. The group debating combined heat and power identified the benefits of efficient fuel use as well as the flexibility of Sterling
Engine CHP’s that can run on many types of fuels. Solar and wind energy were also discussed to those who wished to learn more. Questions around wind energy’s efficiency and how the industry is regulated were raised. However, there was interest in community owned wind farms and with the right expertise, funding and structures. The group discussing subsidies and a carbon tax identified energy subsidies supporting fossil fuels as inhibitors to the deployment of renewable energy technologies. These subsidies must be removed if we are to move away from dirty fuels. The consensus was that there is a need for a fair carbon tax at all levels.
Energy Conservation The role of the media in energy conservation and renewable energy deployment was assessed by one group. This group identified the need to use social media and online forums to communicate and open dialogue between environmental groups. Communities should examine the potential for district heating systems. One group discussed the possibilities of such a system and how certain areas have the criteria needed for installing such a system. Another group discussed energy monitoring and management as a way to conserve consumption. During this discussion the expert present outlined how through active monitoring of energy use, individuals can become more aware of wasted energy. As well as this, there is the opportunity to provide jobs at a local level.
The airtightness and heat recovery group discussed methods of making a dwelling more airtight and thus reducing the amount of heat loss. The key is to make people more aware of how they can make small improvements to their building envelope and save on energy consumption for space heating. The group discussing the Aarhus Convention outlined the need for environmental rights in the Constitution and how there should be an environmental Court to prosecute those that damage the Irish environment for financial gain.
Energy Distribution The group discussing energy democracy examined the various problems existing within the Irish system and how these issues could be resolved. Various problems were identified: Opaque democracy; Governance not government; No Leadership; Pro-profit ideology; Pro-market bias among senior public servants; Semi-state “competition” is a gravy train; and appointed local government. Solutions were offered; Use existing smart grid; Re-politicise the population; Aarhus convention – use it; Upstream participation; Re-define national interests when it comes to energy; New players in local democracy must be accountable; Challenge semi-state selfish interest; Semi state mandate to become social and not commercial; and Democratise semi-states. Barriers related to the establishment of energy co-operatives were identified. Two of the most prominent barriers are related to people’s trust in such projects. People need
instant success and reward otherwise there isn’t much interest. People tend to retrofit their existing home, without thinking of the benefits of energy co- operatives. Another group was concerned with the large Eirgrid pylons being constructed in the Laois area. Such investment into Ireland’s grid is dependent on continued economic growth and resource consumption.
Deliberation on Setting Goals for a Better Ireland in a Just World, Dublin, 2013 – Consensors’ Report Extracts Where does Ireland fit in? The tables
There is a need for case studies to show the authorities smart micro grids are possible. An energy survey is a good way to start and such works will drive the local economy by supplying badly needed employment.
were asked to discuss the relevance of the ‘Millennium Development Goals’ in the Irish context, the goals that might be relevant for Ireland post 2015, and what makes such goals effective. The reports from the tables can be gathered under five main themes: The need for goals to address structural issues and be meaningful; The centrality of equality; The importance of ‘connectedness’; The value of engagement; and Some specific goals such as the right to work (or to meaningful work), the right to education, and securing the role of public services.
Change
Universal Goals for a Better World.
Anaerobic digestion (AD) was discussed in another group. Issues such as investment costs, deployment potential, interest and legislation were discussed.
Two groups examined how change might happen. They identified: Taxes and sanctions; A carbon budget; Social justice impact assessment; Direct action even in the absence of popular support; Presentation of a convincing sustainable alternative; Next generation needs to be born with a conscience; More use of electronic democracy across EU; and Use of petitions.
The tables were asked to discuss the basis on which they would judge and prioritise the goals set out on the ballot paper and to share any goals that were particularly important to participants. All participants were then invited to cast their ballot papers.
The five priority goals for Post-2015. Equality: Achieve equality between women and men and for the diversity of groups in society including older and younger people, people with disabilities, Black and minority ethnic people, lesbian/gay/bisexual/trans/ intersex people, and people of disadvantaged socio-economic status.
Governance: Enable governance that is
participative, accountable, developmental and responsive to the needs of all in society, in particular those living in poverty.
Sustainable development: Achieve an
ecological footprint equal to or smaller than one planet.
Rights: Government policy and civil society initiative to be directed towards a human rights based approach to development.
Non-exploitative economy:
Government policy and civil society initiative to be directed towards devising and implementing an economy that does not exploit the planet or people, and that delivers equality and sustainability.
What Next? Each table was asked to
discuss the priorities for action following on from the event. Each participant was then asked to post two commitments on the walls: one which they would carry out and one which they would bring back to their organisation. At a personal level four areas for action emerged: Promote the goals agreed with colleagues, friends and contacts and try to build debate about them; Find out more about the goals and live life in a manner that reflects the goals agreed; Engage with the organisations involved in this event and hold them to account for progressing the goals agreed; Lobby Government, TDs, and local Councillors about the goals agreed. At an organisational level five areas for action emerged: Feedback the outcomes from the event within the organisation,
make it a point for discussion and realign activities with the post-2015 agenda; Connect with other organisations on these issues, develop alliances and collaboration across sectors on the post-2015 agenda; Engage organisations with Claiming Our Future, Dochas and The Wheel; Continue advocacy on, raising awareness of potential in, and lobbying politicians on the post-2015 agenda; Make the new development goals an issue in the European Parliament elections.
Deliberation on Broken Politics – Civil Society’s Role in Creating Real Change, Dublin, 2016 – Consensors’ Report Extracts Celebration: We opened the deliberation with a presentation and celebration of new ideas and new developments across civil society with testaments from activists. Reflection: We started the debates with reflections on civil society action to develop shared agendas for transformative change, to devise strategies with a capacity to achieve such change, and to make the connections and build the cooperation to realise this change. Proposition: We debated on how to work
together to enhance the role and impact of civil society in seeking change. Seven strands of action were proposed. We could build concrete solidarity by contributing to each other’s campaigns. This could be pursued on an immediate individual or peer to peer basis. A task force
of ‘alliance builders’ could identify those narrow and broad campaigns we could connect around and join together on to secure a greater impact. Connections within civil society could be nurtured and extended. We need a space around which we could remain connected. We need a means of connecting whether through developing our own media or establishing a digital networking. Local activism could be stimulated and supported. Connections need to be established at local and at national levels and between local and national levels. Links with politics and with academia could be reviewed and further developed where there are shared values. New forms of connection with the general public could be developed to build understanding of and support for civil society agendas. New structures, in particular at local level, could serve as a means of connecting and cooperating. The Public Participation Networks draw in the different parts of civil society. These could be a platform around which to build and give effect to solidarity. Public space could be reclaimed to create possibilities for connecting and collaborating. This include physical spaces in urban and rural areas. The media is another such public space that needs to be challenged. We could further develop our own media. There is a need to make visible what works in campaigning and working for change and in demonstrating alternatives in action.
A shared long-term vision could be developed as a source of connecting and collaborating. This could build on the Claiming Our Future Declaration.
This pamphlet was drafted by Niall Crowley. The publication of this pamphlet was made possible by support from St Stephen’s Green Trust Fund and Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust.