Edinburgh Sucks! | Let jury decide oncapital’s traffic woes

Andrew Burns

Let jury decide on
capital’s traffic woes

By The Basa ⋅ May 18, 2005 ⋅

In today’s Scotsman there is an opinion piece by Keith Geddes. We feel that it should be reposted here in it’s entirety. Keith has a background in local government and has held a number of senior positions including President of the Convention of Local Authorities (1996-1999), Leader of the City of Edinburgh Council and chair of Lothian Region’s Education Committee. During his time in local government he pioneered the development of a number public/private projects and was a leading advocate of democratic renewal in local government. He ran twice unsuccessfully under the Labour banner for the constituency of Tweeddale, Ettrick & Lauderdale in the 1997 and 2001 general elections. His full biography can be found here.

He starts….

The City of Edinburgh Council’s failed congestion charging referendum, combined with the inability of car owners to recognise that car growth cannot remain unrestricted, threatens to paralyse new thinking on the capital’s transport problems.

The climate of distrust has encouraged some motorists - and not just taxi drivers - to express the view that the implementation of the Central Edinburgh Traffic Management Central Edinburgh Traffic Management scheme is the council’s revenge for the No vote in the referendum.

The problem faced by the council is that attempts to impose an elitist command-and-control model as far as transport policy is concerned are long past their sell-by date. With an increasingly informed and educated electorate, the concept that all knowledge and wisdom reside within the City Chambers is long outdated. Moving Edinburgh’s transport agenda forward requires the council to begin a two-way communication process designed to create a consensus.



	How can Edinburgh’s citizens be sure the outcome of any consultation is not biased?

The problem is one of transparency. How can Edinburgh’s citizens be sure the outcome of any consultation is not biased? The answer may lie in the council engaging with the Edinburgh Traffic Forum, a coalition of concerned parents, car drivers, public transport users and others who have come together to try to secure some sort of unity on the way forward.

Perhaps the most relevant way in which the two bodies could co-operate would be to agree to set up a “Citizens’ Jury”, tasked with developing solutions designed to tackle the city’s growing congestion problem.

Since 1997, more than 100 juries have been established in the UK on issues as diverse as health rationing, waste disposal and genetic testing. The concept behind such juries is simple. A representative sample of, say, 100 Edinburgh citizens would be statistically selected, provided with existing policy and background documents and given access to professional advice. They would have the opportunity to call and cross-examine witnesses, consider the evidence and then make a judgment.

The benefit of such an approach is two-fold. First, it forces a recognition that the congestion crisis is not just “the council’s fault”. Too often, those unprepared to recognise their own contribution to congestion find the easy way out by laying the blame for the problems arising out of society’s reliance on the car on others. Second, the citizens’ jury approach takes the issue of policy development outwith the council chamber, thereby helping to ensure the desired and necessary consensus on the way forward.

What is certain is that action needs to be taken to break down the level of distrust between large sections of the local community and the council. Edinburgh cannot move forward if the impasse is not resolved. By reaching out and working with the people it seeks to represent, the council would be going a long way to finding realistic solutions to a problem that will not go away.

• Keith Geddes is the policy director of Pagoda Public Relations.