|
Code of practice on written consultation
Applies to consultation documents issued after 1
January 2001
Contents
The Code is also available in the following formats:
The Code is also available in Welsh in the
following formats:
This document is presented in
Portable Document Format (PDF). To read it you
may first need to download the Adobe Acrobat
Reader software. For more information regarding
PDF documents and how to load the software,
please click
here
We have worked hard since this Government came to
power in May 1997 to make the administration of
the country more open and responsive: giving
more information about the way departments and
services are operating, taking more account of
people's views of policy, and of what they want
from public services. And we have made a special
effort to work better with business in
developing policy, legislation and services.
But we still have more to do, and this Code is
another major step along the road, and a real
contribution to modernising the way the country
is governed.
We are consulting now more than governments ever have
in the past. That is welcome in itself. But it
means extra work for the people we consult.
Their contributions can improve, sometimes
transform, initiatives we embark on. But we need
to ensure that we keep the burden on them to a
minimum. Many of the people we are consulting,
in business, in the voluntary sector or wherever
else, have large and increasing demands on their
time.
We need to help them however we can to help us. That
means presenting proposals simply and clearly.
It means joining up within government, so that
we ask for views once, not several times.
And, as many people have made very clear to us, it
means giving long enough for a response.
Occasionally, being a responsive government
means acting quickly, because it is clearly in
the public interest to do so. But much more
often, it means organising our time and efforts
so that people outside government have a real
opportunity to contribute.
We also need to give people time to act on our
decisions. The
guidance on implementation periods we are
introducing in parallel with this Code is
another important step forward.
Real changes in behaviour are needed here. We have
seen examples of excellent consultation. But not
always, and I believe we must as a government do
better overall.
We must also take advantage of new technology - while
ensuring no-one is left behind. Our new central
Register of current consultations, will be
an excellent example of information technology
being used to make the democratic process more
effective.
This Code aims to ensure we consult better on written
documents. It has its origins in views expressed
by people regularly consulted, and it was itself
published as a draft for comment. It has itself
improved greatly as a result of consultation.
Written consultation documents are not, of course,
the limit of consultation - they are one tool in
the participation process. As the Code makes
clear, consultation must be built into the
development of an initiative from the start.
I believe the message is spreading throughout the
administration that better consultation means
better results. My ministerial colleagues and I
will continue to work in that spirit.
The criteria in this code apply to all UK national
public consultations on the basis of a document
in electronic or printed form. They will often
be relevant to other sorts of consultation
Though they have no legal force, and cannot
prevail over statutory or other mandatory
external requirements (eg under European
Community law), they should otherwise generally
be regarded as binding on UK departments and
their agencies, unless Ministers conclude that
exceptional circumstances require a departure
The criteria should be reproduced in consultation
documents, with an explanation of any departure,
and confirmation that they have otherwise been
followed
- This code is intended to make written
consultations more effective, opening up
decision-making to as wide a range
of people and organisations as possible.
- All UK government departments and
agencies who conduct any public
consultation should ensure they have the
arrangements in place to operate
it in respect of all consultation
documents issued from 1 January 2001.
This will include designating a
consultation coordinator to oversee the
organisation's consultation activities,
as outlined under criterion
7, and ensuring the department's own
consultation web page, and the central
register of consultations, are
absolutely up to date.
- UK
non-departmental public bodies
should be encouraged to follow the code,
and contribute to the register.
References to 'departments' in this
document should generally be read to
include agencies and complying NDPBs
(and appropriate adaptations should be
made where a Minister does not head the
body concerned).
- Devolved administrations are free to
adopt this code, but it does not apply
to consultation documents issued by them
unless they do.
- The code is not about consultation
within government.
Consultation documents will often
require collective consideration within
government before issue.
Effective consultation
- The emphasis here on written consultation is
not to suggest that this is the only or
best method of consultation. It is the
classic method and has many virtues, but
also limitations. Additional forms of
consultation should always be
considered from an early stage. Some
possibilities are set out under criteria
1 and 4 below.
- The purposes of consultation need to
be borne in mind throughout the
development of a policy (including
legislation) or service.
a) The main
purpose is to improve decision-making,
by ensuring that decisions are soundly
based on evidence, that they take
account of the views and experience of
those affected by them, that innovative
and creative options are considered and
that new arrangements are workable.
b) Effective
consultation ought also to
ensure that so far as possible everyone
concerned feels they have had
their say or at least that
their interests have been taken
into account.
c) The
Committee on Standards in Public
Life has drawn attention to
the importance of consultation
with a wide cross-section of the
public, without which the
openness and accountability of
Government could be impaired,
and the dangers of privileged
access magnified (Sixth
Report, Chapter 7). The House
of Lords Select Committee on
Science and Technology
has emphasised the need for open
dialogue on science (Third
Report, February 2000).
Consultation should always be as
wide as the circumstances
permit. Other things being
equal, public consultations are
preferable to closed ones.
- Really effective
consultation will not be achieved solely
by following this code, however.
a) Departments
need to develop expertise in
the best methods, and learn from
each other. To help this
process, an Internet-based
best practice forum will be
set up by the Cabinet Office
(and the Centre
for Management and Policy
Studies will pursue further
work in this field as part of
its responsibility for
Modernising Policy Making).
b) A web-based
central
register of current public
written consultations
will be introduced in parallel
with this code, to ensure widest
possible awareness of what is
being consulted on, with links
to comprehensive consultation
pages on each department's
website. Detailed guidance on
this is being issued. Later on
the site will offer users the
option of being notified by
e-mail of consultations in
particular areas.
c) There will
also, later, be a register of
forthcoming consultations,
helping organisations to prepare
to respond. It will also
encourage 'joining up' of
consultation documents
between different parts of
government: the Performance
and Innovation Unit report
Wiring It Up has
emphasised the importance of
better consultation, especially
on cross-cutting themes.
Wider application and evaluation of the code
- The code is directed at national
consultations - that is, over the whole
area of a department's responsibility,
which may be England, or may include
other parts of the UK - where views are
sought from the public. But parts of it
may be relevant to more limited
consultations - which in any event
are often put in the public domain -
such as those seeking views from
professional bodies or departmental
trade unions, regional or local
consultations, or consultation with
local government (which is covered by
the Framework for Partnership between
central and local government).
Departments should consider applying the
code to regular consultations of this
kind, so far as circumstances allow.
- Where there are inconsistent statutory or
other requirements, departments should,
as legislation comes to be reviewed,
assess whether those requirements can be
brought into line with it. In the EU and
international context, departments
should seek to ensure that so far as
possible the timetable permits
compliance with the code.
- The code replaces the guide How to conduct a
written consultation exercise. It may be
supplemented by more specific guidance,
for example the Code produced under the Compact
on Relations between Government and the
Voluntary and Community Sector.
Any such guidance must be consistent
with it.
- The effectiveness of the code will be
evaluated starting two years after it is
launched, and the results published.
- Feedback and complaints on individual
consultation documents should be sent to
the person nominated in them, in
accordance with criterion
3. Comments on this guide are
welcome to MPS-ConsultationPolicyTeam@cabinet-office.x.gsi.gov.uk;
tel 020 7276 1730; fax 020 7276 1705; or
by post to Consultation Team,
Modernising Public Services Group,
Cabinet Office, Admiralty Arch, London
SW1A 2WH.
We gratefully acknowledge the work in this field of
the National Consumer Council, whose paper Government
Consultations: not just a paper exercise was
heavily drawn on in preparing How to conduct a
written consultation exercise. The code is,
however, the responsibility of the Government
alone.
To be reproduced in consultation documents
The criteria in this code apply to all UK national
public consultations on the basis of a document
in electronic or printed form. They will often
be relevant to other sorts of consultation
Though they have no legal force, and cannot prevail
over statutory or other mandatory external
requirements (eg under European Community law),
they should otherwise generally be regarded as
binding on UK departments and their agencies,
unless Ministers conclude that exceptional
circumstances require a departure
The criteria should be reproduced in consultation
documents, with an explanation of any departure,
and confirmation that they have otherwise been
followed
- Timing of
consultation should be built into the
planning process for a policy (including
legislation) or service from the start,
so that it has the best prospect of
improving the proposals concerned, and
so that sufficient time is left for it
at each stage
- It should be clear
who is being consulted, about what
questions, in what timescale and for
what purpose
- A consultation
document should be as simple and concise
as possible. It should include a
summary, in two pages at most, of the
main questions it seeks views on. It
should make it as easy as possible for
readers to respond, make contact or
complain
- Documents should be
made widely available, with the fullest
use of electronic means (though not to
the exclusion of others), and
effectively drawn to the attention of
all interested groups and individuals
- Sufficient time
should be allowed for considered
responses from all groups with an
interest. Twelve weeks should be the
standard minimum period for a
consultation
- Responses should be
carefully and open-mindedly analysed,
and the results made widely available,
with an account of the views expressed,
and reasons for decisions finally taken
- Departments should
monitor and evaluate consultations,
designating a consultation coordinator
who will ensure the lessons are
disseminated
Criterion 1
Timing of consultation should be built into the
planning process for a policy (including
legislation) or service from the start, so that
it has the best prospect of improving the
proposals concerned, and so that sufficient time
is left for it at each stage
- Time must be set aside so that a
written consultation can be properly
designed, and reasonable intervals
allowed for responses and their
analysis. The timetable for
implementation should be such that
people affected have a reasonable
opportunity to prepare: in the context
of legislation impacting on business,
see Guidance
on Implementation: Timing of the Issue
of Guidance to Business on Compliance
with New Legislation
- But it will often not be adequate to rely on
a single written consultation alone. Early
consultation is often the key to the
success of an initiative, and to
securing cooperation in it: omitting it
may cause delay and expense later. It is
important that the agenda for early
consultation is not too circumscribed,
so that others can have a part in
developing it. A range of options should
be canvassed where possible.
- It is helpful to let others interested
know the likely timing of different
forms of consultation as early as
possible (and any later changes to it).
Consultation documents should describe
any earlier, parallel and planned later
consultation.
- The House of Lords Select Committee has
commented on some other forms of
consultation that may be helpful [Third
Report, chapter 5]. They
include:
a) Listening
events
b) Meetings or
seminars with, and visits to,
representative groups and other
interested parties
c)
Internet discussions. (The 10
Downing Street website
offers a forum for these; Departments
may want to equip their websites).
d)
Research, including surveys of consumers
and the general public (which may
involve the People's
Panel), and qualitative research
(including depth interviews and focus
groups) [see advice
on government research into public into
public attitudes and opinion and
How
to Consult your users)
- The key is to get the best spread of
views, including the views of those
most likely to be affected, and with
most to contribute.
- Resources need to be set aside.
Effective consultation may involve
significant expenditure of time and
money, including outside expertise, and
planning in the light of earlier
evaluations to ensure value for money (see
criterion 7) is important.
It should be clear who is being consulted, about
what questions, in what timescale and for what
purpose
- A document should explain which people
and groups the consultation is
particularly directed at (and in
what capacity, if there is any room for
ambiguity). It should generally invite
suggestions about others to whose
attention the document should be drawn.
It may be useful to include a list of
those it is being sent to, to help avoid
duplication of effort by respondents.
- A document should so far as possible include
an assessment of the impact of the
proposals on groups likely to be
particularly affected, and every
effort should be made to ensure that
views are received from all such groups.
Departments should always consider
whether there is a particular impact
by gender, age, ethnicity or disability;
in particular regions, or types of area;
or on the socially excluded. The Policy
Appraisal for Equal Treatment guidelines
are relevant here, as is the Cabinet
Office Departmental Policy Maker's Rapid
Checklist.
- Regulatory proposals (including EU
legislation) that may create burdens
for business, charities or voluntary
organisations should include a draft
Regulatory Assessment: see the Good
Policy-Making: a Guide
to Regulatory Impact Assessment.
Where a policy may have significant
environmental impacts, proposals should
include a draft Environmental Appraisal:
see Policy
Appraisal and the Environment.
- A document should make clear which parts
of the United Kingdom it relates to,
and whether it contains proposals which
are the responsibility of more than one
administration.
- The document should also be clear about any aspects
of an issue on which decisions have been
taken, or are inevitable, so as to
avoid wasting the time of respondents.
It may also be useful to indicate where
the department provisionally favours a
particular course. But the agenda should
not be so rigidly defined as to deter
respondents from offering views on
related questions of interest to them.
- The deadline for responses, and so
far as practicable the timetable
envisaged after that, including any
further opportunity for consultation,
should be clearly set out.
- Representative groups should be asked
in responding to give a summary of the
people and organisations they represent.
- It should be made clear that responses
may be made public unless
confidentiality is specifically asked
for. With some subjects - such as
where the responses may concern
individuals' private lives, or matters
of commercial confidentiality, this may
need to be flagged up especially
prominently, so that no-one
inadvertently fails to register a wish
for confidentiality. In some cases,
confidentiality cannot be guaranteed, eg
where a response includes evidence of
serious crime: this may also need to be
brought out.
A consultation document should be as simple and
concise as possible. It should include a
summary, in two pages at most, of the main
questions it seeks views on. It should make it
as easy as possible for readers to respond, make
contact or complain
- Respondents may have a great many documents
to deal with, and lack time from their
everyday work to study a comprehensive
paper. But their views may be of great
value, and everyone should be helped
to identify quickly if they are
affected, and if so to contribute
productively. That is why clarity,
and a summary, are important.
- A summary need not encapsulate every point
in a document. Its purpose is to help
potential respondents focus,
highlighting difficult and contentious
issues. It will rarely be necessary for
Ministers to conclude that the two-page
limit needs to be exceeded.
- Documents should be clearly focused. They
should be set out in plain language,
as free as possible of jargon [link
to plain language guidance; also
to Cymraeg Clir initiative]. Technical
detail may be unavoidable, indeed
central to the issues; but documents
should be as widely understandable as
possible. Worked examples may help in
explaining technical concepts to lay
people. A guinea pig audience may be
useful in developing or testing a draft
document.
- Glossy and elaborate documents are rarely
justified. Time spent preparing them
would be better spent on a longer
consultation period, or on devising
supplementary means of consultation.
- Documents should however set out the main
information and competing arguments
relevant to a decision, or say where
they can be found. Significant sources
of information and opinion outside
government should be quoted if relevant,
whether they support the Government's
views or not. Accounts of EU and
overseas law and practice, and other
background materials such as legal texts
proposed for amendment, might be
included or put on an associated
website, if they help illuminate the
questions.
- It will often be helpful to set out key
questions in a questionnaire -
though questionnaires need careful
design, in which expert help may be
useful, so as not to encourage a biased
response. Responses in other forms, and
on different but relevant questions,
should always be accepted.
- Any questionnaire should feature on a
website, as an electronic form if
possible. In any event an e-mail, as
well as a postal, address should be
given for responses, and preferably
a fax number.
- Paragraphs in a consultation document should
be identified by numbers or letters (in
preference to bullets, which are less
easy to refer to in responses). Pages
should be numbered.
- Details (address, phone, e-mail and
preferably fax) should be given of a contact
who can respond to consultees' questions.
- Similar details should be given of someone
who will pursue complaints or comments
about the consultation process. This
should be a person outside the team
responsible for the document: it might
be the department's consultation
coordinator.
- Consultations should be joined up within
or across departments wherever
reasonably possible: some respondents,
especially small businesses, may not
have time to deal with multiple requests
for comment. Consultation coordinators
should encourage such mergers within
departments. Departments should
contribute as early as possible to the
register of forthcoming consultations
when established, and examine it
regularly for possible partners.
- To avoid imposing extra burdens on people,
and organisations with very limited
resources for replying, like smaller
firms and some voluntary and community
organisations, it may be better to
target consultation through umbrella
bodies, including trade associations and
business organisations. But it is
important to speak to those bodies at an
early stage, to establish that they can
conduct properly representative
consultations, and work out timing; for
example they may be able to make use of
routine consultation processes among
their members.
Documents should be made widely available, with
the fullest use of electronic means (though not
to the exclusion of others), and effectively
drawn to the attention of all interested groups
and individuals
- Every effort should be made to ensure effective
communication with all those who are, or
potentially are, interested. This
may involve contact with representatives
of broad consumer, business, voluntary
or other interests; as well as more
narrowly defined groups. There may be
separate organisations in devolved
regions of the UK.
- The rest of public sector, where it
is likely to be affected, including
local government and front-line staff,
should be included too.
- Generally consultation should be publicised
by a press release or similar
announcement.
- Documents should always be available free
of charge on a website from the moment
of publication, ideally in a range
of formats. Internet versions should be
quickly downloadable - that is, for
example, with the option of avoiding
large graphics. It may not be practical
to include complex attachments (such as
large charts), though early planning
will often permit the information in
them to be presented satisfactorily on
the web.
- But though effective use of the Internet is
increasingly important, people should
not be excluded from consultation
because they are not Internet users. Paper
copies of documents should always be
available, and paper responses
accepted.
- Costs to users should never be such
that they are an obstacle to effective
consultation. Every effort should be
made to avoid charging for paper copies.
- But the methods above will often not effectively
reach all interested groups. Other
methods to be considered include:
a) Targeting relevant newspapers and
magazines (eg trade and other
specialist journals);
b) Targeted mailings and e-mail
notifications;
c) Reproducing the document in different
languages and formats:
consultation coordinators may
want to identify providers of
translation and other services:
i) If a consultation applies to
Wales, it may need to be
published in Welsh.
Departments with a Welsh
Language scheme should follow
it; others should consider any
guidance published by the Welsh
Language Board or
contact Head of Public and
Voluntary Sectors, Welsh
Language Board, Market Chambers,
5-7 St Mary Street, Cardiff CF10
1AT; Tel No: 029 2087 8000; Fax
No: 029 2087 8001; E-mail: rhys.dafis@bwrdd-yr-iaith.org.uk.
ii) Where there is a special
impact on other linguistic
groups, or particular ethnic
minority groups, translation
into relevant languages may be
necessary or desirable;
iii) Requests for documents in a
format suitable for people
with visual disabilities
(large print, Braille, tape etc)
will need to be responded to
quickly, so that the people
concerned are not disadvantaged.
Where a consultation concerns
questions with a particular
impact on these groups, other
formats should be available from
the start, and details should be
included in copies of the
document. Guidance is available
from the Royal
National Institute for the Blind.
Further guidance on formats will
be published by the Central
Office of Information
later in 2000 .
d) Face-to-face visits,
presentation and discussion of the
proposals with interested organisations,
stakeholder groups, user panels etc.
Such measures may especially need to be
considered where there is known to be a
low level of literacy in a group
especially affected.
e) Funding outreach activity by
umbrella groups or independent
facilitators. This may be particularly
appropriate when hard-to-reach groups,
with little central organisation, are
especially targeted.
Sufficient time should be allowed for considered
responses from all groups with an interest.
Twelve weeks should be the standard minimum
period for a consultation
- Inadequate time for responses is the
single greatest cause of complaint over
consultation by government. Proper
planning in accordance with this code
should avoid consultation periods being
limited in order to meet later
deadlines. Consultation should never
have to be shortened below an acceptable
minimum for reasons of departmental
convenience, for example because a
department has fallen behind its own
implementation schedule.
- There will sometimes be circumstances
which unavoidably require a consultation
period less than twelve weeks. Among
these may be timetables set out in
statute; those unavoidably dictated by
EU or other international processes; and
those tied to the Budget or other annual
financial cycles. Where reconsultation
takes place on the basis of amendments
made in the light of earlier
consultation, a shorter period may also
be necessary.
- The nature of the problem dealt with may
also occasionally mean that urgency is
in the public interest, though real
urgency of this sort is rare. Except
where the circumstances listed in
paragraph 2 make shorter consultation
unavoidable, if the period is less than
twelve weeks, the document should state
Ministers' reasons for departing from
the code, and what special measures
- for example advance notice of at least
the broad issues covered - have been
taken to ensure that consultation is
nevertheless as effective as possible.
- Consultees' circumstances should always
be taken into account in fixing a period.
Issues consulted on may themselves be
complex, requiring a period of weeks to
draft responses. Organisations may have
many staff or members that need to be
consulted, sometimes through a structure
of committees with members from all over
the country, which will rarely be able
to meet simply to fall in with a
consultation timetable. An otherwise
adequate period may be less so if a
substantial holiday period falls within
it.
- In order to ensure consistency between
respondents, a provisional view should
be taken before the consultation about
dealing with requests for deadlines
to be extended.
Responses should be carefully and open-mindedly
analysed, and the results made widely available,
with an account of the views expressed, and
reasons for decisions finally taken
- Responses should be acknowledged
where possible.
- They should be carefully analysed, in
particular for:
a) Possible new approaches to the
question consulted on;
b) Further evidence of the impact
of the proposals;
c) Levels of support among
particular groups.
- Analysing responses is never simply a
matter of counting votes. The
House of Lords Science and Technology
Select Committee has drawn
attention to the risks of single-issue
groups monopolising debate. Particular
attention may however need to be given
to the views of representative bodies,
such as business associations, trade
unions, voluntary and consumer groups,
and other organisations representing
groups especially affected. Eventually
it is for ministers to assess the
argument and evidence and reach
decisions in the public interest.
- It is desirable to keep as full an
account as possible of both formal and
informal responses to consultations;
both to ensure that everyone's view is
fairly considered, but also, in line
with the reasoning of the Neill
Committee, to help address any
allegation of privileged access.
- Decisions in the light of consultation
should be made public promptly with
a summary of views expressed
(subject to respondents' requests for
confidentiality), and clear reasons
for rejecting options that were not
adopted. As far as reasonably
practicable, this material should be
accessible to all who responded,
including on a departmental website
(individual notification may be
practicable in the case of those who
have replied by e-mail). Respondents who
ask why individual proposals have
been rejected should receive an
explanation.
- If significant new options emerge
from consultation, it may be right to
consult again on them (though a shorter
consultation period may be justified: see
criterion 5 above).
- Individual responses should also
generally be made available to
anyone else who asks for them. Failure
to make material available may be
incompatible with Open Government or Freedom
of Information provisions. It is
legitimate, in accordance with those
provisions, to make a reasonable charge
for copying and postage. But where
respondents have sought confidentiality,
it should generally be respected. It may
also be necessary to keep confidential
responses that may affect third parties'
interests or privacy unfairly.
Departments should monitor and evaluate
consultations, designating a consultation
coordinator who will ensure the lessons are
disseminated
- A single official for each department and
agency should be designated as consultation
coordinator - perhaps the
department's consumer
champion - and contact details
should be published.
- He or she should ensure that the code is
complied with, that consultations
are joined up where possible, and
that the department contributes to and
learns from the central
register of consultations and the good
practice website (see General
Principles, paragraph 8).
- Departments should monitor consultations
regularly as they proceed, to ensure
that the code, and good practice
generally, are being followed. They
should analyse complaints carefully.
They should seek to develop internal
expertise in effective consultation, and
awareness of where support can be found
outside.
- Departments should evaluate consultations
once complete - perhaps with independent
involvement. Questions to be addressed
include:
a) Whether they fully complied with the
code;
b) Which techniques were particularly
effective in securing a wide range of
useful responses, and which not;
c) Which represented value for money
(taking into account staff time, as well
as direct expenditure);
d) How far policy and service provision
changed as a result. If it did not, the
reasons should be explored with
Ministers.
e) Respondents' feedback. This might
emerge from response rates; an analysis
of complaints and other comments, or
other dealings with regular departmental
contacts. It may also be worth surveying
users after major consultations.
- In the light of this, Departments should
make available annual statistical and
qualitative assessments, including
information on departures from the code
and on cost. The Cabinet Office will
produce guidance on this, and collate
the information.
|
