Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Stopping the Blame Game - Rebuilding Public Trust
20 Plays12 days ago
Alex Iszatt interviews Leah Brown on her White Paper on 'Restoring Public Trust and Accountability'. Leah is a Lawyer who has drawn up a new policy on how to improve the way that UK institutions can improve the way they engage with the public.
Listening to the public, MPs, media and ensuring that institutions are responsive to what people need is a focus of Leah's paper.
Recommended
Transcript
Rebuilding Trust in Democracy
00:00:08
Speaker
Welcome to the Observations podcast. Now today we're asking a big question. How do we rebuild trust in our democracy?
Leah Brown on Institutional Accountability
00:00:16
Speaker
My guest is Leah Brown, a restorative justice expert and the author of a new white paper on institutional accountability.
00:00:23
Speaker
We'll talk about political trust, public harm, and how systems can begin to repair themselves if we're serious about change. So thank you so much for joining me today. Thank you so much for having me. I'm so excited.
00:00:36
Speaker
ah I've read in your white paper and they have a lot of big questions that, you know needs some legitimate
Erosion of Public Trust
00:00:43
Speaker
answers. Really, you talk about the crisis of institutional legitimacy in the UK.
00:00:47
Speaker
But what does that really mean in practice? And how do we see it threatening democracy itself? Well, I think this crisis of institutional legitimacy refers to the erosion of public trust in key institutions. So if it was isolated, then we could um get more comfortable with it. But the reality is it stretches across the police and health care and education, the civil service,
00:01:09
Speaker
the Church of England. um um And the decline here in these institutions isn't merely about dissatisfaction. It's about a profound disconnect where citizens ah no longer feel like these institutions serve their interests or uphold their values.
00:01:25
Speaker
And so in practice, what do we get? we This manifests itself as cynicism or disengagement, or in fact, a growing belief that these institutions are self-serving rather than public serving.
00:01:38
Speaker
And obviously that yeah it does get to the heart of what what people want. They want the government, they want these policymakers, even the Church of England to actually like work for them. So what do you think needs to change at a fundamental level? Because these are big places. These are these are institutions that have been working in the same way for hundreds of years.
Restorative Approaches to Trust
00:01:58
Speaker
Well, I mean, the biggest issue, as you say, is that this erosion of trust threatens democracy, right? It makes people more susceptible to um populism and misinformation and division because the the trust in the institution is what enables that kind of collective action and social cohesion. So here's what the white paper and certainly what I think would help.
00:02:18
Speaker
I think if the institutions move from a stance of authority to one of true accountability and true collaboration, this would mean that they'd have to be more transparent. It'd mean that they'd have to engage in in genuine dialogue, particularly when things have gone awry. um and And we think that by adopting restorative approaches and disciplines that prioritize healing and trust building,
00:02:40
Speaker
over punitive measures hold the answer because I think we're very quick to um eject people from organizations when they've done something wrong but we don't do any kind of remediation and so the cultural challenge persists and ultimately it's cultural challenges that are resulting in this erosion so we should probably start by addressing those.
00:02:57
Speaker
Well, no absolutely. and of course, we you know, when it comes to institutions and the causing harm, it's not just one. As you right to say, you know, this is institutional. And why do you think it's such like this damaging dynamic?
00:03:10
Speaker
Because ultimately, it isn't just you one company. It isn't just one business. It is a societal issue. So, you know, what could potentially be a more democratic or accountable alternative look like?
00:03:23
Speaker
um Well, I think that that would look like creating spaces where affected individuals and communities can voice their experiences and participate actively in the healing process. The underlying issue is that this dynamic perpetuates a cycle and that cycle um allows institutions to not acknowledge their role in causing harm or creating space for those who have been affected to have their say in what should happen next.
00:03:44
Speaker
And so when institutions control the harm and the response, they maintain that power imbalance and prevent that genuine accountability. So if we route a restorative approach and shift that focus from blame for what happened to understanding and shift from punishment to repair, again, it's uncomfortable for the institutions and their leaders, but they'd have to relinquish some control and embrace the vulnerability of not knowing what somebody who's survived an experience of harm from them is actually wanting by way of amends.
00:04:14
Speaker
They'd have to foster a greater culture of empathy, and they'd also have to take shared responsibility in the narrative of what's happened. And when it comes to shared responsibility, sometimes they they don't want to open that door because they are worried about you know what they might let through.
Expanding Restorative Justice
00:04:30
Speaker
And know restorative justice, as you've but you've mentioned there, it does come up quite a lot in the paper, um but it does seem like quite a misunderstood a discussion and an argument, shall we say, ah Of course, when we think about any type of justice, and people are ah are looking to always blame. Sadly, I think that's truly the case.
00:04:49
Speaker
So how do you see this restorative justice ah working at national and institutional level, especially in political culture? Because I think even when we take it away from democracy, i think, as I said, there's always some kind of let's blame someone. Someone needs to take this away. So how do you think that we can maybe understand it a bit clearer and how we can make it on a national level?
00:05:11
Speaker
One of the things this paper advocates for is that these restorative justice principles don't just belong in the criminal justice system, that actually we could expand them and their utilisation across the civil service. um It's a process.
00:05:23
Speaker
It's a lot like mediation. the The lawyer and the mediator in me finds great freedom in a process that provides an opportunity for dialogue. um And that dialogue is uncomfortable because it's between the institution that has caused the harm and the individual who has experienced the harm.
00:05:37
Speaker
And so it doesn't have to be about minimizing the wrongdoing, but rather about acknowledging it, understanding its impact, and then collaboratively determining determining how they want to make amends.
00:05:48
Speaker
And in politics specifically, where blame is the center of the equation, um it is a paradigm shift to do this, right? Because you have to move away from adversarial approaches.
00:05:59
Speaker
and You have to embrace a mindset that values healing, that values reconciliation, that that allows institutions to listen without being defensive, and to be transparent about their shortcomings.
00:06:09
Speaker
And the the challenge here is that this is operating in a framework where there is legal liability, right?
Dialogue and Transparency in Politics
00:06:14
Speaker
That there is a reality where something disclosed to the media that that shouldn't be or something um is in part of a judicial review or an inquiry that is subject to a very clear legal framework.
00:06:25
Speaker
And one of the things that I love about this process is that it isn't inhibited by that. It can go on in parallel. And the things that happen in that process remained um sacred to that process.
00:06:36
Speaker
And that's one of the ways in which it's quite flexible in rebuilding trust and fostering a more inclusive and just society. If we take for an example for the House of Commons, and you know talking about the blame game, and they all love to like bat that back and forth.
00:06:51
Speaker
If we're using ah restorative justice ah in this kind of example, um where, say, an MP stands up and claims that their constituents want a certain change, ah but look okay let's go for like an actual like reform. Okay, so reform wants um only English flags on the town hall. This is a yeah generalization of an example.
00:07:13
Speaker
um and they're And they're blaming ah the Tories they're blaming Labour for allowing the the other flag flags to come on board. Even in a small example of that, how can restorative justice and maybe like an example of the explanation of how we should all look to what the benefit could be, not just for your town, not just for your constituents, but actually let's have a ah proper discussion rather than just throwing about who's to blame.
00:07:42
Speaker
But there are two things at play here, right? There's the reputation of those individual MPs, and then there's also um how they are appearing to their constituents who they've asked to advocate for them in the House of Commons.
00:07:54
Speaker
um One of the things about this process is that it separates the problem from the person. um One of the challenges, I think, of politics is that there is so much posturing and there is so much performativism that actually a process like this that that helps somebody else understand what is really important to you. Not what are you saying is important to you. what Not what are your constituents saying that you need.
00:08:14
Speaker
Why does this have to happen as the marker for you to achieve what you want? What if you could get another alternative now and then you could you know display for... 51 weeks of the year, the flags that you want in this other location.
00:08:27
Speaker
We don't know because we don't approach conflict in that way. we We don't think about the challenges that we experience when we're telling somebody no or we're saying something is not possible because we haven't understood their viewpoint and we haven't understood their drivers.
00:08:40
Speaker
And so a restorative process would would deal with the people who are harmed by the presence of the flag, as well as those who would be harmed without the flags being present, as well as what are the MPs' interests in in all of this and create that dialogue to work out a workable path forwards.
00:08:57
Speaker
Doesn't that just sound like common sense? Why is it taking yeah so long to try and push this forward? you know, a lot of the things that you mentioned in your white paper do seem like, oh, ah why isn't this obvious? Why hasn't this like happened yet?
00:09:11
Speaker
I totally agree, but it's ultimately because the harm isn't about flags. It's that the harm is grooming gangs, the harm is Grenfell, the harm is Windrush survivors, the harm is um domestic family courts, the harm is the MOD when it's discriminating against an individual or the MOJ or the Home Office.
00:09:31
Speaker
but It is too big, it is too much to suggest that these offences can be looked beyond. and And that weight, that heaviness of the challenge is a total opposition to addressing it, because who's going to take up the mantle? Who's going to think that that's possible? Who's going to think that a process that seems so simple can possibly address and unpick some of these challenges?
Media's Role in Public Trust
00:09:54
Speaker
And then when it comes to you know that kind of group think, then you know looking at those big institutions. So do you think that When we're trying to take away from blame, looking at the big issues that we're still facing and we still continue to face, do you think that there is a realistic way to to break each segment down and not just have necessarily a, all right, let's checkbox. We see the same thing we're doing for flags that we're going to be doing for Grenville survivors.
00:10:21
Speaker
How do you see that working? Well, groupthink is a psychological phenomenon that arises because the desire for harmony or conformity in a group leads to irrational or dysfunctional decision making. Right. So just because everybody agrees to it doesn't mean that it's a good idea.
00:10:35
Speaker
And ah in the government, that can result in poor policy outcomes or a lack of innovation or poor spending choices or most likely the suppression of dissenting voices.
00:10:46
Speaker
So how how are we going to address it um and its perpetuation of ineffective and harmful practices? Again, it's about culture. It's about fostering a culture that allows for critical thinking, that values diverse perspectives, and that creates safe space for people to disagree. and And again, when people don't feel comfortable creating a space for somebody to challenge them or trust in the weight of their narrative that it can be convincing in and of itself,
00:11:11
Speaker
um You know, you need somebody who can be a devil's advocate to to pick apart people's ideologies, to ensure that they carry due weight. And I think when you encourage open debate, when you ensure diversity within decision making, you can mitigate the effects of groupthink and have much more effective governance.
00:11:29
Speaker
um we're Taking off the commons and the the big institutions, you know we see this quite a lot in a lot of the protests that we are having on the streets. I think only this weekend, you know there were some protests ah for trans rights people trying to argue their point in that sense. and But without having that mediator, is it just ends up being a shouting match. And of course, you think that no matter what, people...
00:11:57
Speaker
are gonna argue if they truly believe that their opinion is correct, they do get themselves into an echo chamber and they encourage other people to believe what they believe. Do you think that for people, human beings, not just these institutions, do you think that they really want to be told or maybe even hear that they're not right or their maybe their thought process isn't quite what they're thinking?
00:12:23
Speaker
This is one of the greatest challenges, though, because restorative processes aren't about establishing who's right or who's wrong. In fact, um our legal system isn't isn't even set up to work out who's right or who's who's wrong. that That's much more of a continental approach.
00:12:37
Speaker
um ah People want to feel right because it makes them feel good about themselves. It makes them feel comfortable and it makes them feel safe. And the idea that they could possibly be wrong allowed people to go into spirals of anxiety.
00:12:49
Speaker
um ah Ultimately, i think the bigger issue here is that people don't feel able to have their opinion validated, no matter whether it's distasteful to somebody else or not. And that's why the media's responsibility in fostering informed and constructive public discourse by giving a balanced side of the conversation and reporting fairly and avoiding the amplification of misinformation is so important. And it's a critical part of our white paper. And we've explored this issue because without the media, the wider public narrative is really going to struggle to shift from one of blame and division to one of understanding empathy and collective action.
00:13:26
Speaker
we Talking about the media, you know as well as like political MPs, but also, you know, all of those in the world of politics, you know, people don't trust them. And actually, the trust is at record. a We see conspiracy theories every day. People aren't really sure that anyone's telling them the truth. So they will look for their own, as i said, echo chamber.
00:13:46
Speaker
You know, you you did mention that the media does have a part to play in this wider public narrative. And as you say, it is in the white paper that you discuss about rebuilding this kind of democratic trust.
00:13:58
Speaker
But, you know, do you just do you think that we are getting it kind of wrong? But you think that maybe we are because we've moved away from this regional understanding to have to listen to local people to listen to local cultures, that that's why it could potentially be so low, because we're just seeing one major narrative that's being spread across all media?
00:14:21
Speaker
I'm less convinced by that argument, partly because I think that local media is actually booming insofar as take up for local papers and slots on local radio shows. I think it's more about this this right concern ah about how the media is funded.
00:14:36
Speaker
And I think that that's what's causing a lot of the unrest. I think in terms of having... um a very centralized media. I think the centralized media is very polarized and therefore we're we're not getting one narrative and that's part of the problem. So it's who has the most money who determines what the narrative is.
00:14:53
Speaker
And so I think at the the root of that that ah issue is how do we create more transparency um and ensure that they there transparency I suppose clarity and accountability in the the ways in which stories are um ah brought to the surface. We saw this in the general election um and in in fact immediately following the general election and the way in which repeatedly the Labour government cabinet ministers experienced a huge amount of media vitriol.
00:15:20
Speaker
um And it was like, well, the the natural reaction to this is who was funding that? And thats that's not what we as a British public should have to engage with when we're considering whether or not we can trust what we're hearing on our radio airwaves or on the TV.
00:15:34
Speaker
Oh, no, absolutely. But when it comes to that ah narrative, though, you when you say that there's disparity between the stations, one has a right wing, potentially left wing, there's all of these ah political aspects, but they're still telling the same story, even though it's through ah their different ah ways of descripting a describing it instead of potentially. So, for example, um you know This weekend, again, we've had some like awful news abroad, the Air India crash. All of our major stations, of course, did ah go into it and they got their own experts.
00:16:10
Speaker
and But someone, say, in Great Yarmouth might have also experienced, not as obviously as traumatic as an air crash, something, and they feel like maybe they're missing out and they're not getting heard.
00:16:22
Speaker
So this kind of, when it comes to the the disparity in media between regional and local, and ah I potentially think that maybe some people are seeing that as not being able to trust it because that they're not hearing what they want to say.
Building Consensus for Change
00:16:40
Speaker
think this has always been a challenge, though. And I think, you know, there was another air crash over the over the weekend. um And again, lost lives, not as significant. um I do think, though, that ah The media will always prioritize stories that sell papers and that there is always going to be a commercial reality there. And whilst that is uncomfortable, um that has that is not a new challenge.
00:17:05
Speaker
um I think the onus is on local news providers to be reporting on those stories. And that also comes down to funding and the funding challenges that we're having in this economy, ensuring that good journalism can be properly funded, particularly good investigative journalism.
00:17:19
Speaker
um And so I think that that that's another question for the government. um How important is it to hear from your public about what's going on for them and what they need? And the the key resource for that is, of course, their MPs.
00:17:30
Speaker
Absolutely. and We'll move away from media and get back into yeah the the actual paper. There is, it seems that the sometimes when reading it through, the the the challenge is its so immense that it's going to take quite a while. do you think that there's going to be can be some meaningful small changes that can happen in the meantime?
00:17:55
Speaker
What's your prediction? Call me a cockeyed optimist. I think that incremental change is still change. um I think that part of the change that we're calling for in this white paper is long term.
00:18:09
Speaker
We're setting out a 10 year plan um for some of those bigger changes. um But I think the biggest part of the challenge is getting people on board to have a common consensus of what the problem is.
00:18:20
Speaker
So if we can have consensus on what the problem is, then of course we can make incremental changes to to move it forwards. um And I think society has shown that transformation is possible where there's collective will.
00:18:33
Speaker
um And so the the challenge here is to convince people of the power of restorative practices, um to to create a a desire to heal divides and to get and institutions to actually commit to a process of evolution um so that we're focusing on repair before we're focusing on reform.
Grassroots Movements & Change Catalysts
00:18:51
Speaker
um And also there's been a huge community movement. The grassroots um movements are incredible at the moment. And it's going to be the resilience of those communities that catalyst the change that we want to see at the top. And then do you think that people might trust a bit more in democracy following that?
00:19:08
Speaker
I think dialogue goes a long way to to rebuilding that trust. And and then we were already seeing citizens' assemblies. We're seeing um conversations between local authorities and community groups. We're seeing leaders intervening as a conduit between, um for the very purpose of rebuilding that trust. I don't think democracy has failed, not in the UK.
00:19:28
Speaker
We can have a different conversation about the wider world. um but But I do think that there is a desire for these values of of empathy and accountability and collaboration, which are part of the bedrock of democracy.
00:19:40
Speaker
And we need to work out how to get back to those in a way that is lived out across the entire ecosystem, not just in pockets. So when the white paper does come out and um and everyone can have a look and read and give their opinions and peer ah guidance and all, what are you hoping for? What's What is the first reaction that you would like?
Educating for Accountability
00:20:05
Speaker
One of the purposes of of the white paper is to educate. And the second purpose is to catalyse change. And I'm really hopeful for the the second. um When I started doing this work, people were very clear, oh, Leah, you're not the first person to write about restorative justice. And I said, goodness, no, I hope not.
00:20:22
Speaker
um ah What I hope for is that we can build a coalition for institutional accountability that can commit to a 10-year program of work so that we can see the change that is desperately needed, that that people don't want to be unpopular enough to stand behind.
00:20:35
Speaker
I'm willing to be unpopular. I'm willing to do things differently. I think differently. I'm very naive. um And therefore, I think that things are possible before I'm willing to hear that that they need to be shut down.
00:20:46
Speaker
um And that kind of um tenacity and and persistence is what is is needed here. And I think that if we can get to a place where institutional accountability becomes desirable, we're going to be halfway there.
00:20:59
Speaker
Well, you I have hope that change is possible as well. And you can be, not a cockeyed optimist on your own there. So thank you so much though, for going through some of the points of the white paper.
00:21:12
Speaker
There are a lot, um and of course well we could to cover more, but we have run out of time. So I thank you so much for coming on today to to share a little bit of an insight with us. Thank you so much for having me, Alex.
00:21:23
Speaker
Thank you.
00:21:33
Speaker
The Observations podcast has been brought to you by Democracy Volunteers, the UK's leading election observation group. Democracy Volunteers is non-partisan and does not necessarily share the opinions of participants in the podcast.
00:21:47
Speaker
It brings the podcast to you to improve knowledge of elections, both national and international.