Tag: brussels

  • The #GoodMove chaos in Brussels is something that should worry those of us who advocate…

    The #GoodMove chaos in Brussels is something that should worry those of us who advocate for citizen participation, and those of us who care about citizen action on the environment. lesoir.be/473320/article…

    For those not close to it, a series of traffic calming and car-excluding measures are being taken in Brussels to reduce car traffic and air pollution. They had a good, not perfect, but good citizen engagement process lasting over a year before anything was done.

    The headlines are about yesterday’s meeting in the commune of Schaerbeek, where protests got physical with a group of men tearing down the new signs for the traffic scheme – the bigger issue is the political fear that is now freezing the tens of schemes in the pipeline.

    Right now it looks like only Bruxelles-Ville and one of the projects in Schaerbeek are going to see the light of day any time soon, after this has been discussed for *years*. Let’s be clear, this is not banning cars. This is reducing their prominence in dense urban areas.

    And yet violent protest from a tiny number and loud angry voices from a small minority is derailing schemes across the whole city-region. After, I say again, a good citizen participation project (realistic in scale and open in approach for the question it was trying to answer).

    It’s particularly notable that some of the angry voices are mentioning the participation (300 citizens in Schaerbeek for instance) as being laughable and irrelevant. Because they disagree with the outcome, they disagree with the process.

    So, are we wrong about citizen participation reducing the barriers to implementation of these sorts of schemes – or at least, is the level of engagement required to get general public confidence disproportionately large?

    And can we involve citizens in these difficult climate decisions in the time we have left? I believe that the answer to both questions is yes, that’s why we’re working on @NetZeroCitiesEU, but I can’t deny a frisson of concern about what is happening in my city.

    It’s worth noting that @elkevdbrandt and @PhilippeClose among others have been trying to give political leadership – but they have been rare bright lights in a general picture of uncertainty and backtracking.

    I know that some people will see this and think ‘just have more citizen assemblies’ but 300 people in Schaerbeek did not make a difference to the angry voices, and it is the angry voices who are causing the problem.

    I don’t have any easy answers myself. It’s something I’ll be thinking hard about as we move ahead with our work in 112 cities (including Brussels!) on reaching net zero.

  • Just watched the opening speeches at the @DemNext_ launch event from last night (on…

    Just watched the opening speeches at the @DemNext_ launch event from last night (on YouTube via their Twitter account and well worth a watch), and @ClaudiaChwalisz‘s vision of what the sortition-governed future could like got me thinking about numbers.

    The question I wanted to answer is how often would an average citizen be likely to be called to serve, and how many “veterans” or currently-serving people would they be likely to know.

    I decided to plug my home country into a spreadsheet. Belgium has 11 million people and a famously multi-layered governance structure, so lots of opportunities. I also assumed that 20% of the population were not of voting age.

    The top level is the Federal Government. Let’s assume a Federal executive assembly would be 300 people (twice the size of the current Federal Parliament). With annual selections you would be selected every 30 891 years.

    We then have five regions (Flanders, Wallonia, Brussels, German-speaking region and the Wallon-Brussels Federation – I told you it was complicated). If there are 200 people on a regional executive assembly, you get selected every 9 267 years.

    Then, there are ten provinces (Brussels is in historic Brabant but is a region not a province, so I discounted it). If each provincial executive assembly has 100 members, your chance of selection is once every 8 067 (and never in Brussels).

    Finally, 581 communes from Antwerp (500k people) to Herstappe (79). Some are divided into districts so I’ve upped the number to 700. If each local executive has 75 members, your average chance of selection is once every 177 years – though it’s every year if you live in Herstappe!

    There are of course also lots of topic-specific panels on things like judge appointments (to use Claudia’s example), so we have to make some assumptions there too.

    I’ve assumed that each panel is half the size of the relevant Executive Assembly, and that there are 40 at federal level, 30 in each region, 20 in each province and 10 in each locality each year.

    In total, that means that the chance of serving on any one of those bodies in any given year is 3,2% – so in other words you might be selected every 31 years, or twice in your adult life (at all, not to a specific Assembly).

    On assumptions about sizes of family and friends group, you could expect someone in your extended family to serve every 2-3 years, and if you have 100 friends, 3 of them would be serving at any one time, so by middle age half of your friendship group would be veterans.

    Because there are two levels of selection, if we assume a 10:1 ratio in first invitation responders to second invitation then you could expect an invitation letter for something every three years or so, but nine times out of ten you would not be selected.

    How does that compare numerically to the Belgian system? Not every part of the Belgian system is directly elected (some of the regional bodies and the provincial councils aren’t directly elected), and there are local, regional and national elections on a regular timetable.

    If you live from 18 to 80, on these assumptions about sortition you will be invited 20 times and serve twice. On the current system you will vote about 34 times (12 times each for region and federal, 10 times for the 6-year commune councils).

    Now, voting is a very different sort of democratic transaction from being invited to take on actual political power in an executive assembly, but one of the challenges for the sortition-only model for me is whether people are going to be prepared to give up

    a less-effective vote every five or six years for a much more powerful role in a process (that they can’t select) at two random points in their life, and maybe not at all.

    It goes without saying that there are huge caveats here. If there are 400 or 4000 national panels rather than 40 that changes the numbers – it depends on what level of decision would need a panel and which would be left the to bureaucracy.

  • Links from the week of 5 September 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Links from the week of 29 August 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Links from the week of 22 August 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Negative piece in @ladh on politics of Brussels Parliament’s joint citizen/MP panels -…

    Negative piece in @ladh on politics of Brussels Parliament’s joint citizen/MP panels – headline calls it “Noddy Politics”. Notable for me is how the parties quoted are more critical the further to the political right they are. Eg the right-liberal MR: dhnet.be/regions/bruxel…

    The other notable points (for me) are:
    1. Citizens profited from the experience
    2. Follow up is essential (and seen to be lacking, though that’s hardly the fault of the process)
    3. The link made between citizen assemblies and the intention of abolishing representative democracy

    The last one is a risk for those of us who want to continue experimenting with these approaches without seeing them as an alternative to representation.

  • Links from the week of 1 August 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Regulatory independence (inc on immigration) is the one unqualified benefit of Brexit…

    Regulatory independence (inc on immigration) is the one unqualified benefit of Brexit, bought at a cost in trade, rights and investment. So this might be a good thing. twitter.com/TheScotsman/st…

    The problems are
    (1) does the British state have capacity to make all these judgements consistently better than the better-resourced EU (maybe)
    (2) does the public like the idea of lower regulation on chemicals (doubt it)
    (3) do companies want to have two processes, one for

    the UK market with one range of chemicals and one for the EU market with a different range (almost certainly not, so an EU ban is an effective UK ban, but without a say for the UK.
    I suspect a lot of Brexiteers have in their heads that the UK is just in some hand-wavy way

    better at this than the Europeans, or ready to take a risk that will pay off. There’s certainly not much more democracy in obscure regulatory decisions shifting from Brussels to London.

    So even where Brexit is working as promised, the question is #WasItWorthIt.

  • Links from the week of 27 June 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.

  • Links from the week of 20 June 2022

    Articles, reports and other links I shared on Twitter this week.