This website is for the people of Sefton, Merseyside to discuss:
Practical Democracy
A Method of Candidate Selection
There is no shortage of commentary on the need for greater public participation in the political process, particularly at local level. One area of concern, is the selection of candidates for public office. Perhaps the best description of the underlying problems can be found in 'The Report of the commission on candidate selection' (Electoral Reform Society - August 2003). The report resulted from an investigation of the problem by the five largest political parties in the U.K.
Here are a few of the things found in the report:
- Party memberships consisting of just over one elector in a hundred are unlikely to be representative of the population as a whole.
- If we wish candidates to be truly representative of the communities they are elected to serve, we must recognize that there will (and should) be all sorts of candidates with a wide variety of backgrounds.
- After citing statistics showing the under-representation of various minorities, the report says, "These figures add up to a picture of a narrow group of representatives selected by a tiny proportion of the population belonging to parties, for which ever fewer members of the public vote and for whom even fewer people have any feelings of attachment."
- Regarding candidates in safe seats, the report said, "It is undesirable that someone can bypass a proper examination of their credentials simply by virtue of being there, and expect to coast through on the efforts of the local and national party."
- - - - - - -
We propose Practical Democracy as one solution to the problems of candidate selection.
We are preparing to ask Sefton Council, via an Area Committee Meeting, the following question.
Question
Will the council consider initiating, in a ward in Sefton and in addition to the existing system, a trial of Practical Democracy, a draft of which is attached, as a method of allowing all the people of Sefton to participate in the selection of candidates for election to Sefton Council?
In considering this matter, we request that the council consult with all relevant agencies including The Electoral Commission, The Electoral Reform Society, The Local Government Association, the political parties, the residents of Sefton, and ourselves, so all views are carefully weighed.
FOUNDATION
The people of Sefton wish to seek out and select those of us who are the most characteristic of our attitudes and aspirations and nominate them to serve as candidates for Sefton Council. The method we propose is democratic (i.e., allows the entire electorate to participate), egalitarian (i.e., gives everyone an equal chance to participate), and is in harmony with natural human impulses.
We present the concept in the simplest, most direct way possible. We will, necessarily, suggest a few of the mechanics, but they are secondary to our goal of selecting those of our peers who are best suited to stand as candidates for seats on our Borough Council. We shall provide additional detail at the Council's pleasure.
METHOD
- Divide the electorate into random groupings of three people called triads. The random grouping mechanism must insure that no two people are assigned to a triad if they served together in a triad in any of the five most recent elections.
- Assign a date and time by which each triad must select one of its members to represent the other two. If a triad fails to notify the Returning Officer(RO)of its selection by the assigned date and time, the triad shall be deemed disinclined to participate in the process.
- Randomly divide the participants so selected into new triads.
- Repeat from step 2 until a target number of candidates are selected.
DISCUSSION
A Sefton Electoral Commission conducts the process. It randomly selects the participants of each triad and supplies the triads with the text of pending ordinances and a synopsis of the budget appropriate to the group. In addition, on request, it makes the full budget available and supplies the text of any existing ordinances. This insures a careful examination of public matters and encourages a thorough discussion of partisan views on matters of public concern.
For convenience, we refer to each iteration as a 'Level', such that Level 1 is the initial grouping of the entire electorate, Level 2 is the grouping of the selections made at Level 1, and so forth. The entire electorate participates at level 1 giving everyone an equal opportunity to advance to succeeding levels. Triad assignments at Levels 1 through 3 shall be based on geographic proximity to the maximum extent practical, provided the assignments satisfy the requirement for randomness.
As the process advances through the levels, the amount of time the participants spend together increases. At level 1, groups may meet for a few minutes, over a back-yard fence, so-to-speak, but that would not be adequate at higher levels. As the levels advance, the participants need more time to evaluate those they are grouped with. They also need transportation and facilities for meeting and voting. These are mechanical details.
The initial phase of the process is dominated by participants with little interest in advancing to higher levels. They do not seek public office; they simply wish to pursue their private lives in peace. Thus, the most powerful human dynamic during the first phase (i.e., Level 1 and for some levels thereafter) is a desire by the majority of the participants to select someone who will represent them. The person so selected is more apt to be someone who is willing to take on the responsibility of going to the next level than someone who actively seeks elevation to the next level, but those who do actively seek elevation are not inhibited from doing so.
As the levels increase, the proportion of disinterested parties diminishes and we enter the second phase. Here, the participants that advance are marked, more and more, by an inclination to seek further advancement. Those who actively seek selection must persuade their triad that they are the best qualified to represent the other two. While that is easy at the lower levels, it becomes more difficult as the process moves forward and participants are matched with peers who also wish to be chosen.
Each participant must make a choice between the other two people in the triad knowing they must rely on that person's integrity to guide their future actions and decisions. Since they are unable to control the person selected, they must choose the person they believe most likely to conduct public business in the public interest.
However, they do not make their choices blindly. Elections are a periodic process. The majority of those seeking candidacy will do so each time the process recurs. Some will achieve public office and their performance will be a matter of public record. When they participate in subsequent occurrences of the process, their peers will evaluate that record to help them decide the candidate's suitability.
Furthermore, the names of advancing candidates are announced as each level completes. Members of the public with knowledge of unseemly acts by an advancing candidate can present details for consideration at the next level. Since, after the initial levels, the peers also seek advancement, they won't overlook inappropriate behaviour.
Hence, a powerful new human dynamic, the pursuit of self-interest, is integrated into the system: Those who seek public office find it in their own best interest to maintain their integrity.
Other features of face-to-face meetings in three-person triads are that they allow participants to observe the non-verbal clues humans emit during discourse, they tend to favor moderate attitudes over extremism, and the dissimulation and obfuscation that are so effective in media-based politics will not work in a group of three people, each of whom has a vital interest in reaching the same goal as the miscreant. Instead, advancement depends on candidates' ability and persuasiveness, perceived trustworthiness, and the probity with which they fulfilled any public obligations.
This is a distillation process, biased in favor of the most upright and capable of our citizens. It cannot guarantee that unprincipled individuals will never be selected ... such a goal would be unrealistic ... but it does insure that they are the exception rather than the rule.
The cost of conducting an election by this method is free to the participants, except for the value of their time, and minimal to the government. Thus, it removes the greatest single cause of corruption in politics ... the need for campaign funds.
ILLUSTRATION
This table describes the method by which the members of Church Ward will select candidates for the Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council:
| Level | Candidates | Full Triads | Overflow | Select Randomly from Previous Levels | Total Triads | Selected(1) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 9001 | 3000 | 1 | 0 | 3000 | 3000 |
| 2 | 3001(2) | 1000 | 1 | 2 | 1001 | 1001 |
| 3 | 1001 | 333 | 2 | 1 | 334 | 334 |
| 4 | 334 | 111 | 1 | 2 | 112 | 112 |
| 5 | 112 | 37 | 1 | 2 | 38 | 38 |
| 6 | 38 | 12 | 2 | 1 | 13 | 13 |
| 7 | 13 | 4 | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5 |
| 8 | 5 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 |
(1) The example assumes each of the triads selects a candidate.
(2) Level 2 is a special case. If the number of candidates does not divide equally into triads, any candidates remaining are overflow. When there is overflow from Level 1, the extra person(s) automatically become candidates at Level 2.
Thereafter, when there is overflow at any level, the number of people needed to create a full triad are selected at random from the people who were not selected at the previous level.
(3) The two (or whatever number the Council decrees) people so selected are the candidates the people of the Church Ward nominate to speak for them on the Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council.
The candidates selected by Practical Democracy will stand for election as normal. Their nominators are the people in the 'chain' who selected them.
The Council will decide the proper life for the triads. The dates shown here illustrate the concept. It is not suggested that these dates indicate an actual trial.
| Level | Start | Report | Days |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 03/12/08 | 08/12/08 | 5 |
| 2 | 10/12/08 | 15/12/08 | 5 |
| 3 | 17/12/08 | 05/01/09 | 12 |
| 4 | 07/01/09 | 19/01/09 | 12 |
| 5 | 21/01/09 | 09/02/09 | 19 |
| 6 | 11/02/09 | 02/03/09 | 19 |
| 7 | 04/03/09 | 30/03/09 | 26 |
| 8 | 01/04/09 | 27/04/09 | 26 |
Election Day: May 7th, 2009
(4) The life of Level 3 is extended from a nominal 12 days to 19 to accommodate the Christmas and New Year holidays.
CONCLUSION
We believe the Practical Democracy method of selecting candidates for the Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council will enhance democracy in Sefton.