Consultations and Good Governance

A previous BANGO article touched on the process of consultations with the Fair Trading Commission and the questions were asked, "Were the outputs of the consultation considered and what was the outcome of those considerations?"

As we move towards a national NGO forum, these are matters which will have to be carefully thought through. It is imperative that we do not find ourselves as part of a rubber stamp simply as an exercise to say that civil society was consulted.

For example what happens when a critical suggestion is not part of a final decision? What if that final decision does not state reasons for excluding the critical suggestion? If a requirement in the decision making process is that there must be consultations with Civil Society, then how should a decision reflect this.

First it should have gone through a process to collect inputs either orally or written. Second, after going through this there should be a report stating the pros and cons that were discussed in the meeting and the decisions coming out of the meeting representing the consensus of those attending and participating in the meeting.

You will find that the outcome of a meeting has to do with what was said in the meeting. Therefore the inputs coming from participants in meetings are very important. While this may seem very straightforward and logical to the reader, at the time of participating many people seem forget this and fall prey to cold feet and the threat of embarrassment.

Way too often participants emerge from meetings with strong points which never got put forward at the meeting for one reason or other. If we are to make an impact we have to approach it differently. Remember that usually whoever is calling a meeting or consulting come with their agenda and this is not a criticism it is a fact. Some come with preconceived ideas and notions while some come with a working understanding of the issues.

By thrashing out the two sides of the coin or the fives sides of the pentagon we can arrive at win-win solutions and decisions or as we say consensus. If there are five sides and four sides participate then a lasting decision would be impossible. Let me cite this example that has stuck in my mind since the Summit .

While going through the framing of the protocol for establishing the Barbados NGO Forum, part of a paragraph on the role of NGOs spoke of improving the life of the people. A lady got up and said that her organisation does not deal with people but with the welfare of animals and if we stated betterment for the people that does not cover her organisation.

As a result of this intervention the paragraph now includes "the protection of human and animal rights". Yes there was some laughter when she blurted it out because everybody was thinking poverty, environment, the upliftment of people, etc. but she had a point. This is an example of what one may consider to be simple information being very critical.

Even before the Forum rolls into existence, the matter of process should be resolved. How are decisions made during a consultation? What is the process? What is a consultation? Is it advisory? Is it designed to make a decision on a particular matter? What matters require or merit consultation?

These details will become very important as we start to move on. Consultations with Civil Society must be done using the principles of democracy and good governance otherwise we will run into problems, if decisions are made that run counter to consensus or does not include consideration for minority but valid issues.

Roosevelt O. King
Secretary General
admin@bango.org.bb