Skip to content

The great big governance team road trip

Published:

Jon Bright (London, OK): The Governance of Britain website, which we've taken a bit of a keen interest in here, has released a couple of things worth flagging up. There is the opening of a consultation on "Local Petitions and Calls for Action", which we have tracked on our consultations site, and, today, they've released a video of Michael Wills and Jack Straw's trip to Leicester (Patricia Hewitt tags along as well, though isn't referred to by name), the opening shot in what might be a full broadside of regional consultations which build up to the statement of British values and the citizens summit.

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rO4yG5usMjc]

It is a little amusing, to say the least: a heavily edited 5 minutes on what they got up to there, which apparently featured eveything from Wills and co. wandering the streets asking bemused punters what they think of everything ("we're just really interested to know if you feel you've got enough say" chirrups a cheerful Hewitt to someone whose response unfortunately  didn't make it into the final cut) to some sort of panel debate with audience members reading questions off bits of paper. The twin, contradictory aims of the Governance of Britain agenda come through strongly: on the one hand there is the stated desire to "talk about the governance of Britain" and find out about things "politicians need to be doing differently" and on the other there is a search for ways to drive through the lurking British statement of values, which feels like it has already been written.

It's even handed, in its own way, featuring people who think the whole thing is cobblers and people who think everything is going quite well, but, set to its uplifting, dancey soundtrack, it plays like an advert for the latest piece of Microsoft technology or Orange mobile - the people are ready, the future's bright, everything is going to be fine, no need to worry about a thing. The government went down to the streets, people were asked what they thought, there was a lot of smart editing, it all looks nice and is over very quickly. What actually happened - what the process was, what the results are - remains unclear. And where are they off to next?

Tags:

More from openDemocracy Supporters

See all