Civic Election Issues: Community Consultation

At least among The People Who Tweet, the perceived failure or fraud of the city’s consultation processes by Vision Vancouver is one of the issues that resonates.
Peter Ladner takes that on in his column in Business of Vancouver – and he’s blunt about it:

Every politician has to draw the line between endless listening and leading. In Vancouver, this election will be about where to draw that line – and how to make every voter think it’s being drawn where he or she wants it.
One big problem with listening is that a lot of what you hear is a crock. Or, to be more charitable, it’s fear of change, fanned by the worst imaginings of uninformed uncertainty, often spiced with political or personal agendas. Not all consultation is equal.

Then the examples: Canada Line predictions, bike lanes of course (Rob Macdonald’s op-ed is the gift that keeps on giving), development proposals and the Grandview-Woodland planning process.
So in the upcoming election, “Everybody is promising to listen more.”  The NPA is making it a defining theme, given Vision’s vulnerability, who must be frustrated given that they made the same commitment last election.
There’s an insidious assumption, however, behind many advocates’ promotion of more consultation to solve what  ails us: a belief that if the process is conducted properly, there should be little or no controversy as a result.  If there are obstreperous objections, it’s concluded the process was flawed.  If it was conducted properly, assume the objectors, the conclusion would have been the one we agreed with.  Therefore, there’s something wrong with the process, not our position.
The danger is that decision-making becomes an exercise in opinion management and crowd control.  Avoid controversy at all costs, becomes the mantra.  And the easiest way to do that is not to promote any policies that actually make a difference or decisions that require a choice of unpalatable options.
Don’t make tough choices.  Just consult more.