Putting people at the centre of law reform: a case-study of the Police Act Review

Mike Webb

New Zealand Police

Quick context

• Small team based at Police National HQ reviewing/rewriting the Police Act 1958

• Representing the interests of Minister of Police and Commissioner of Police

• Aim: “start a conversation about different communities’ expectations of policing”

• Outcome: “this will allow New Zealanders to articulate what kind of police service they want, and to give them a direct voice in shaping the kind of legislative arrangements that can help deliver that style of policing”

The wider challenge

Some might say that a project to review

and rewrite policing legislation is:

• Dry

• Boring

• Complex

• Distant from the lives of ordinary Kiwis

just how wrong can some people be?

Specific challenges

• To generate interest in the review

• Raise awareness in ‘hard to reach’

and ‘hard to hear’ populations (e.g.,

youth, Māori and Pacific peoples)

with

• A modest budget for communications

• An expectation orthodox comms and

consultation paths would be followed,

because it is a government project

Our strategy

?

• Develop principles of consultation (and then, just as

importantly, stick to them)

• No surprises approach, where possible

• “Become a bit like Switzerland”

• Pursue traditional and non-traditional consultation channels

• Exploit free/low cost media channels

• Front foot every media opportunity

• Generate momentum through the steady release of

interesting papers

Establishing principles of consultation

• A two-way process Those leading the consultation must engage and listen

• Respect Achieving successful stakeholder involvement is based on respect for those communicated with

• Opportunity Reasonable time and sufficient opportunity must be given to express views

• Openness Demonstrating an open mind and a willingness to change where appropriate is essential to building trust

Standalone website

• Copies of all significant documents relating to the review were uploaded to a dedicated Internet website

• Arms-length from NZ Police website

• Extra functionality allowed for online responses to consultation documents

• A single portal for key project-related information helped with reducing misunderstandings about the review, and reduced need for OIA requests

Test & Consult Reflect & Propose Consult & Propose

Issues Papers to ground the discussion

• Eight papers

– Posed 120+ consultation questions

• Publicly released over six months

• Also channel marketed to identified key stakeholders:– Justice sector agencies and other partner

organisations– Local government– Police staff– Communities of interest– NGOs

Connecting with ‘the frontline’

• To further keep the review grounded,

a group of 16 frontline officers was

gathered from around New Zealand

• Largely operated as a virtual group,

but also brought together in Wellington

• The frontliners regularly tested ideas,

assumptions and language … which

was particularly important re: making

sure key messages were understood

Expert forums to elicit deep thought

• Review team partnered with Victoria University’s Schools of Government, Law and Institute of Criminology; plus AUT’s School of Social Sciences

• Aim: a neutral third party to host explorative discussions on complex topics

• Really useful for ‘testing the waters’

• Three topic meetings were held, with anonymised notes posted on the dedicated Police Act Review website

• Success of university-based events

prompted a larger, open format, event

to bring the wider discussion together

• Police and VUW co-hosted

international symposium on policing for

the future

• Helped hook in new comms champions

Symposium on policing futures

Public research

• Started mid 2006 by UMR Research Ltd

• Capturing views of Kiwis on what sort of police service they want and expect

• Primarily qualitative research (e.g., focus groups), but with quantitative aspects (e.g., household surveys)

• Sample included mix of gender, ethnicity, age, urban/rural, victim/non-victim, etc.

• Very useful for calibrating messages and refining some of the public policy choices

Policing Directions

• Major public consultation document released in May 2007

• More than 80 public meetings held nationwide to raise awareness; some ‘piggybacking’ off partner meetings

• 1200 people attended the meetings

• In the end, 234 submissions received

• Results of consultation exercise were written up in Public views on policing document (August 2007)

Awareness raising

• Radio advertisements run on 180

different stations around the country

• Print advertisements in 16 daily papers

• Quarter page ad in Sunday Star Times

during middle of consultation period

• Non-traditional channels also exploited:

e.g., 30” item screened on Health TV in

85 GPs’ waiting rooms (reaching 100K+)

• Aided by mainstream media pick-up

(e.g., op ed commentary by review team

members was printed in 90 daily papers)

Spreading the net

• Summary booklet translated into Māori

• Pamphlet highlighting key proposals also translated into 10 other languages

• Youth efforts

– Debating competitions for secondary

school and university students

– National student essay competition

– MYD involvement (e.g., making use of

the Aotearoa Youth Voices website)

• Wiki Policing Bill

Why a wiki?

• In March 2006, we held a thought

storming session to generate ideas

• Challenge: how do we connect with

4 million New Zealanders for $5?

• Examples of ideas we came up with:

green graffiti, free bus advertising,

milk-cartons, ATM machine receipts,

a mascot … and the use of Web 2.0

Which 2.0 Channel?

• YouTube and MySpace accounts

failed to generate real engagement

• Turned to the idea of a wiki as a

low cost, easy-to-set-up, medium

• Complementary to other, more

traditional, consultation efforts

• Ability to reach difficult to engage

members of the community

• Cutting edge of e-democracy…?

So: did it work?

• Attracted a lot of interest to the review

• Brought in some fresh ideas and

further helped to refine existing ideas

but

• Required extensive moderation effort

and it brought in some pretty silly ideas

• Drew in irrelevant international and

expat thinking into the review process

• Seen by cynics as just a gimmick

Other successes and lessons learned

• What worked well? What didn’t? And what may we do differently next time?

Some of our ‘best buys’ were:

• The one-stop-shop standalone website (www.policeact.govt.nz)

• Calibrating messages regularly with key audiences, and doing everything possible to avoid any nasty surprises

• Not letting a comms vacuum develop

No surprises policy 1: Multi-party briefings• At key stages throughout the review

the Minister offered one-on-one

briefings to other political parties

• Emphasised need for Police to serve

the government of the day, whatever

its political complexion

• All Police Act Review papers were

distributed to all parliamentary

political parties, and research units

No surprises policy 2: Talking to the unions

• Early engagement was key to

building a high-trust relationship

• A full-time Police Association

representative embedded with the

review team, with full access to all

meetings and project materials

• Regular briefings provided to other

service organisations, as required

No surprises policy 3: Public sector briefings

• Five briefings held at points during the project for wider public sector

• Open invitation to all public sector CEOs to send a representative

• Usually attended by 35-50 people

• Allowed agencies with an interest in discrete issues (e.g., IRD) to keep in contact with the review, and ask questions in a secure environment

Recapping our strategy

• Develop principles of consultation (and

then, just as importantly, stick to them)

• No surprises approach, where possible

• “Become a bit like Switzerland”

• Pursue traditional and non-traditional

consultation channels

• Exploit free/low cost media channels

• Front foot every media opportunity

• Generate momentum through the

steady release of interesting papers

?

Have the results lined up with the strategy?

From our point of view – yes

• Profile raised, ideas generated,

consultation increased, at low cost

• Consultation ethics maintained

• A firmer and fuller base of ideas

generated, plus greater consensus

built for new policing legislation

• And, fingers crossed, the Policing

Bill is set for enactment very soon

Political recognition

Final thoughts …

• Putting people at the centre of law

reform projects is a good thing to do

• It’s also more fun and stimulating for

those working on the project, rather

than living in a risk-averse bubble

• Treating people with respect and

being open will get you a long way

• Relentless enthusiasm is the best

antidote to seeming indifference