It is all about the outcomes

 I have just started a new book called: Rekindling Democracy by Cormac Russell: 

Finally, a book that offers a practical yet well researched guide for practitioners seeking to hone the way they show up in citizen space. Rekindling Democracy, A Professional’s Guide To Working In Citizen Space, convincingly argues that industrialized countries are suffering through a democratic inversion; where the doctor is assumed to be the primary producer of health; the teacher of education; the police officer of safety, and the politician of democracy.

Through just the right blend of storytelling, research and original ideas Russell asserts instead that in a functioning democracy, the role of the professionals ought to be defined as that which happens after the important work of citizens is done. The primary role of the 21st century practitioner therefore is not a deliverer of top-down services, but a precipitator of more active citizenship and community building. And then he goes about showing us how to do so effectively.

I particularly like this remark: The primary role of the 21st century practitioner therefore is not a deliverer of top-down services, but a precipitator of more active citizenship and community building. 

In other words, the job of local politicians & the professional officers of local councils is to nurture community action and good citizenship rather than be the all knowing deliverer of services. What matters ultimately are the outcomes for people and our communities, not a list of activities (or spurious unmeasurable promises) ...

Take this for example (and it is just one example - I could have done much the same to any other political leaflet from one of the local political parties) from the local Conservative Party campaign. 

Looking at the 'record of progress' first:

• good and outstanding schools: this is positive but this says very little about the achievements of the students. Are more pupils getting good qualifications? Have numbers of excluded pupils gone down? Is the gap between the less able and more able narrowing or widening? What do the students and their parents say about how the schools are? What about the mental and physical health of young people - is there nothing to say about this? 
• community boards: some committees have been set up. Wow. What have they achieved? Do communities know about these boards? Do more communities feel empowerd to take action on matters that need investment?
• mitigation funding: again, it sounds good, but what will (has?) this £60 million be spent on? Who gets to decide? What does it include? How much of this is compensation for the homes being destroyed by the HS2 construction? How will communities benefit, exactly?
• spending on social care: is this a success? If more is needing to be spent, does this mean that needs have risen? Why and what could have been done to prevent those needs rising? How much of the spend has gone up because central government subsidies have gone down? Again, how are people, families and communities being assisted to prevent such needs rising?
• vfm: sounds good but it is pretty short on detail. And again, where is the community benefit? Where are the beneficial outcomes that people can experience?
• eliminating rough sleeping: this is a positive and obviously supported by extra funds made available from central government during the pandemic crisis. Of the six, this is a palpable and positive outcome and I hope it continues long past the end of the pandemic. 

Now let's turn to the plans for the future:

• protecting the environment: planting trees is always good of course! How will this be done and how will communities get involved? The other points sound good but I am wondering whether Buckinghamshire Council has the power to increase environmental standards alone, or is this a central government initiative? Doubling EV charging points is good. But again, where are the measures of outcomes? What percentage of the Bucks population currently own an electric vehicle? How will this be increased? 
• further reducing crime: much of what is mentioned is outside the scope of what BC can do (for example it is the PCC and Chief Constable who are recruiting police officers). Where are the outcome measures? Has crime been reducing in the county over the last few years? I think it is rather the reverse: violent crime has been going up by 20% and overall crime (according to the Office for National Statistics) has increased by 1% in the last year. And what about the fear of crime (especially amongst women on streets at night) which can be as disabling as actual crime. No mention of fear and also no mention of how to help the public and communities take action to reduce crime. These are the outcomes that matter...
• safeguarding: all good things but note the terminology of 'supporting' not 'enabling' or 'empowering' vulnerable people shape and achieve dreams and ambitions.  
• supporting job creation: again note the 'supporting' way of thinking. And the desired objective is... (small fanfare...) a plan! And it is remarkably short on detail and what outcomes need to be achieved. For example if the leaflet said something like '60% of our villages do not have fast broadband and our target is to enable those communities to reduce that figure to 30% over the next four years' would be much, much more impressive.
• investing in roads and pavements: investment is good but it isn't an outcome! How will this money be spent, where will it be spent? How will overall 'road health' increase? How many fewer tyres and wheels will the Buckinghamshire public have to replace over the next four years? Measurement of ourcomes is key here and this is spectacularly absent. 
• mitigating HS2: leading an unsuccessful campaign to stop HS2 is not something I would have mentioned! But putting that aside, aiming to reduce the disruption connected to HS2 and East West Rail is something worthwhile and feels closer to an outcome for the people and communities directly affected. How will this be measured? And saying something more positive like 'we will ensure that lives of the people most affected by these large construction projects are improved through better logistical planning of groundwork and community engagement' or some such would have been so much better. 

As I say, I could have done a similar analysis of another party's leaflet. The Labour and Liberal Democrat candidates seem to locked in a battle over who has been and will be the best opposition. I have chosen this leaflet to analyse as Buckingham East is a Conservative held ward. In all honesty if I am going to win a place on Buckinghamshire Council, I am going to have to earn more votes than at least one of the Conservative candidates. 

My plan is to bring positive and fresh ideas to a council that I think has become complacent and out of touch with our local communities. I want to persude the council to invest more in community building and becoming an enabling and empowering authority - with a real focus on outcomes. 

That is my pitch! I hope I can earn one of your three votes to help make this happen. Thank you.