Secrets and Lies

Very good holiday season reading in Ian Leslie's new book. It reminds us that deception of others and, even more, self-deception are at the heart of almost all that we do; and that in a world where institutions and individuals are unable to live without deceit the best way of coping wth this is a healthy dose of understanding one's own motivations, knowing oneself, and a sceptical attitude to what others say and claim. I would add especially in the case of organisations. It's also interesting in the light of what I said in my recent post Trust Them?

Following on from this I'm having some difficulties with the Eastern Moors Partnership just now. It may be recalled that in response to a question from me last year EMP said they were completely committed to transparency. Recent correspondence shows this as having been 'economical with the truth'. Consultation meetings with local groups and individuals have been taking place which have been less than transparent. These have involved selected participants whose names are being withheld on the basis of some spurious concerns about confidentiality. Not all who wanted to take part have been invited but there is no way of judging why the managers chose person 'x' rather than person 'y', or group 'a' rather than group 'b'.
Not only are remarks not attributed to individuals but in addition the public are being prevented from knowing who attended the meetings! One of the fascinating stated justifications for this is that people can thereby "speak honestly....without fear of being named and shamed". These then are the 'consultation hoodies' who are privileged to have their views counted but decline to be accountable for what they say.

Blacka Blogger and the 'Consultation Hoodies'

When I challenged this the startling response I received (underlined) was that I myself make comments anonymously on this blog!! Putting to one side the fact that anyone who wants to know my identity or even meet me, simply has to ask via the contact email at the side (and some have) there is a world of difference between an alias as a gimmick on an independent blog with no official influence or input and a public consultation about a major public asset. I would suggest, with rather less humility than I would prefer, that as most people around here already know who I am then I have shown no reluctance to stand up and be counted for what I believe, both here and in public meetings at which I wear no mask or hoodie but attend as myself properly identified.



But there are other issues here that may not be immediately obvious. Consultations are supposed to be bottom up, so the theory goes. But power remains in the hands of the managers if they go about things in this way. They gather together comments of all kinds from all sorts of people, some sensible others way-out or misguided. If they are unattributed it makes it a lot easier to manage and also stifles any dialogue between those being consulted. Last year we had the post-it note approach. Comments made do not become topics for discussion. So the 'balancing' act of those coordinating is an exercise in picking and choosing - the result being 'everyone's had their say but we're doing pretty well what we wanted to in the first place'. There must be a text book you can buy guiding managers through this. Probably one of those you see on shelves of WH Smith's in the station concourse.