Tuesday, 17 September 2013

Negligent or intentional?

We all have our areas of expertise, but few people are unaware that information needs to be prepared in a suitable manner for its intended audience.

A good guideline for something like public consultation on a development might be 10 pages containing the main salient points and a marked up overall image. 

Failing this information people simply do not have the time and are put off from getting involved.

A step further towards informing people and not wasting time covering the same points would be to provide an open online forum to discuss further and for the council to activly engage on there.

A good way of putting people off is providing them with 1000's of pages of documentation filed in such a way that the intended users are unable to work out what is relevant to them and what is relevant to a lawyer, and maintaining one on one verbal dialogues that can later be ignored. A good example of this is our insane 0.5 car journeys 8am-9am per dwelling statistic that for some reason is a new conversation every time.

My question to you is. Are the examples below negligent . . or intentional?

Whether you consider the above neglectful of duty, or intentional to push through what they want over the NIMBYs they must retain the votes of, please try to clip the wings of the dishonest and 

The www.nocheappromises.org to this would like to see are...

1.To call for and vote in favor of a motion that no consultation period can start until a single document that contains the most important points and can be understood by the target audience in under 10 minutes is made available as the primary point of reference. Further detailed information will be available as links from that document.

2.To call for and vote in favor of a motion that no consultation period can start until  a transparent online discussion forum is made. This could take the form of a Facebook group but must be open. A link must be in a prominent place on the consultation web page.

3.To call for and vote in favor than no consultation period can start unless it is is suitably publicized. This should include the provision of public information boards at the entrance to supermarkets, front page coverage in the local paper, a banner in the locality and in all instances include a layout image.

4.To call for and vote in favor of a motion that a separate 100 random constituents consultation is conducted to gauge if vested interests may be influencing the responses.

1 comment:

  1. Keep up the good work Kazek, Anyone with eyes to see, and an average intelligence, can recognise that there is a faction within WBC that is corrupt, dishonest and rotten. Let's trust the time is near when they pay for their actions many times over, and better people take their place,