Q2 Who should be represented in this process?

PE Phil England Public Seen by 329


We have been examining this question through a series of public events and a survey. We are doing this to help build a shared vision among democracy campaigners so that we can:
a) engage with the Trickett/King's initiative and campaign to make it have a better public interest outcome and
b) design and initiate our own process if the King's/Trickett proposal turns out to be insufficient.

We are moving this discussion to Loomio for a limited time in order to bring this discussion to a conclusion and see if there are any unifying statements we can agree on. These will then be put forward to the next convention planning group meeting on 11 September for possible adoption.

You are invited to propose unifying statements (using the green button at the top right-hand of the page) drawing on our work to date (see below) to see what support they receive from other participants. You can also comment on, discuss and vote on proposals that others have made. Those statements receiving the most support will be considered for adoption at the meeting of the next convention planning group on 11 September.

Work so far on this question:

i) Popular responses from the survey we conducted after the public meeting at the House of Commons on 10 May:

“The people” are represented in this process either through
• A random selection of citizens or
• Independently organised assemblies

Those not well served by the current system should perhaps be disproportionately represented so as to re-balance the current system and counter the inertia of the status quo.

ii) Results of the temperature check of statements suggested at the end of our day of deliberation on 16 July 2106 (in response to Q2 & Q3):

  • Decisions to be made openly and transparently (96%)
  • Countryside and cities as part of its physical, geographical diversity (90%)
  • A series of meetings that physically goes to all regions of the UK (e.g over a year) Local MPs of regions could take part (80%)
  • It should consist of 2 parts: Online and Physical Meetings (78%)
  • Open invitation (starts with this) + representative sample (73%)
  • Multi phase process creates transparency with existing local groups (69%)
  • Elected representatives who represent all various communities and are accountable to communities. Forming local assemblies (68%)
  • A preparatory process that will grow alongside existing system (68%)
  • Getting in touch with groups – faith, disabled, civil society groups – make a list and contact them so they are invited in and so they come from a wide distribution of population. Network to do as many as possible (64%)
  • 24 people from each region (12 women/12 men) randomly selected by weighted sampling – 288 deliberating on national issues. 1000 people from each region then convene to do a “sanity check” on its proposals (58%)
  • Additional point we need to get clear on voting rights and eligibility: Citizenship, Nationality and residence are not interchangeable terms – look at definitions (56%)

Poll Created Mon 29 Aug 2016 9:01AM

The People should be represented using random selection, via a process that pays attention to including disadvantaged sections of society. Closed Fri 9 Sep 2016 8:02AM

Random selection from a spectrum of socio-economic groups that seeks to include gender, race, religion, sexual orientation, disability etc in its diversity.
A core principle must be the representation of diversity.


Results Option % of points Voters
Agree 0.0% 0  
Abstain 33.3% 1 RG
Disagree 66.7% 2 SF CB
Block 0.0% 0  

3 of 20 people have participated (15%)


Steve Freeman
Tue 30 Aug 2016 5:25PM

Don't understand what is proposed. What does the principle mean and how would it work? This might be ok in a communist society after classes were abolished but wouldn't work in class based societies.


Chris Brody
Tue 6 Sep 2016 10:18PM

My view is that ALL citizens (which could be defined as those with a right to vote under the current system, or by some other criteria to be agreed) should be invited to take part in the process, which should include online and real-world elements.


Robbie Griffiths
Thu 8 Sep 2016 5:51PM

I agree with the spirit of this, but am inclined to side with Chris in that all people should be encouraged to participate, in particular if we are to create and develop our own constitutional process rather than that created by the powers that be.


Andy Paice Mon 29 Aug 2016 9:02AM

I've started a proposal. Please vote, comment and/or create your own statement proposal.


Mary Fee Mon 29 Aug 2016 11:27AM

Problem is would require infrastructure therefore funding. Is this en route or at arrival point?



Andy Paice Mon 29 Aug 2016 11:55AM

As I see at it's the arrival point of actual convention which yes will require funding from somewhere e.g a movement, an alliance of political parties, civil society groups


Phil England Wed 31 Aug 2016 8:13PM

A citizens jury or citizens assembly that is selected by random selection (similar to jury service) is at the centre of what was originally proposed by John Trickett and is likely to be the model that King's College London are using. It has been used in other convention processes (eg Canada, Ireland and, as an initial part of the process in Iceland). For an assessment see here for example: http://www.consoc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/J1847_Constitution_Society_Report_Cover_WEB.pdf


Phil England Wed 31 Aug 2016 8:23PM

Mary's point is significant. King's College were supposed to be applying for substantial sums of money. The process would be costly. That is why I think that if we end up having to do it ourselves, then the process would likely need to be much more ad hoc and no-to-low budget with, for example, assemblies encouraged to happen all over the country, perhaps feeding into some national process. So I think Andy's proposal is fine for Trickett/King's initiative purposes the but I think we need another approach / proposal for the grassroots / DIY option.


Phil England Wed 31 Aug 2016 8:24PM

Does the diversity statement need strengthening along the lines of "Those not well served by the current system should perhaps be disproportionately represented so as to re-balance the current system and counter the inertia of the status quo"? which was an approach that seemed to be emerging from the survey?

Load More