Jon Bright (London, OK): Received an email over the weekend outlining the current status of Cameron's "Stand Up, Speak Up" website, an attempt to get voters engaged in the construction of the Conservative manifesto. Engagement is something both parties are talking about at the moment, and there seems to be general agreement that it is produced by giving people power (even the EU is dipping a collective toe in the water).
Cameron isn't giving away the keys to the kingdom here: people can only vote on a preapproved list of proposals drawn up by his wide ranging policy reviews, and the promise is merely to debate the top 10 proposals, leaving plenty of wriggle room. But at least the process is open, which is something that could contrast interestingly with Brown's citizens juries. The NHS ones ran last Tuesday to very sparse media coverage and, despite the fact that almost 1,000 people attended, details of what actually happened remain few and far between. Reporting of the results was left to ministers, who unsurprisingly declared it a success. All a bit reminiscent of the 'Big Conversation'.
Perhaps that is the best way to have a discussion about the NHS - maybe anonymity allowed some of the many professionals who attended to say what they really felt. But it's certainly not the way to produce a feeling of engagement in the process. Can Cameron do better? It depends, I suppose, on how many of the proposals he actually adopts, and what focus they are given in what looks to be a very imminent election. It's unclear how many people have actually voted - probably not enough to produce a genuine feeling of public ownership of any of the ideas. But, as I've written before, redistribution of power is one radical area where the Tories could claim to be genuinely different from Labour.
Update: Dizzy and Iain Dale highlight this tale of what happened at one of the citizens' juries - a must read.
