Dundee City Council’s consultation on a new bridge at Magdalen Green has been branded “shockingly poor”.
How depressingly unsurprising.
I have little faith in these consultations. I don’t think they even deserve the name “consultation”.
An example. Some time ago I was peripherally involved in the installation of a computer programme. The new programme was awful. Horribly ill-suited to the use it was being put to.
But the project leader, a job-climbing sycophant, didn’t have the guts to tell his superiors they’d been sold a pup.
He delivered a post-project survey that asked: “Do you think the new system is A: wonderful? Or B: brilliant?
That’s a slight exaggeration, but there was certainly no way to say what you really thought.
This is largely how modern consultations work. You don’t get to say “no”. You only get to choose a variation of “yes”.
These consultations prevent you giving answers that truly represent how you feel, or twist the answers you’ve given out of shape.
You’re asked: “Do you agree things could be better?” Well, of course, things can always be better.
That will be spun into: “97% of respondents urged us to act”.
Or they say: “Would it be better to have a cycle path on street A (clearly not feasible) or street B (which could, at a push, be done)?” Then present that as: “95% demanded a cycle path on street B”.
There was no question asking: “Is a cycle path needed at all?”
This, I fear, is one of the things happening in the West End; and what we will find when Dundee’s wider active travel consultation is published.
Councils impose things you didn’t want, didn’t vote for, and will never use. Then tell you, actually, if you look at our consultation it shows this is exactly what you wanted and what you asked for.
Whether you took part in it or not.
These “consultations” are rarely conducted with the “pro” side explaining their position, and the “anti” side given equal weight.
Was there a “don’t waste money on this” argument included in the active travel routes survey? Of course not.
The worst bit is many of the people who conduct these consultations treat us like idiots.
They think the public isn’t clever enough to see past the smoke and mirrors.
They think we’ll drink in computer-generated images of 20-year-olds wheeling along in the sunshine with their good-looking friends – like a scene from a 1990s Hugh Grant movie – and all gullibly believe: “Yes, that’s the life we’ll live in Dundee when active travel routes are installed.”
But being for or against cycle paths – or bridges – isn’t really the point I’m making.
Look at the bigger picture. Because there’ll be another “consultation” along soon that you’ll be on the other side of – but it will railroad you, ignore you, or manipulate your “no” until it is some form of “yes”.
Welcome to modern Scotland, where not only are you not supposed to speak truth unto power – there isn’t a way to speak truth to power.
STEVE FINAN: Will Magdalen Green bridge become latest smoke and mirrors ‘consultation’?
22
23
10.04.2024
Dundee City Council’s consultation on a new bridge at Magdalen Green has been branded “shockingly poor”.
How depressingly unsurprising.
I have little faith in these consultations. I don’t think they even deserve the name “consultation”.
An example. Some time ago I was peripherally involved in the installation of a computer programme. The new programme was awful. Horribly ill-suited to the use it was being put to.
But the project leader, a job-climbing sycophant, didn’t have the guts to tell his superiors they’d been sold a pup.
He delivered a post-project survey that asked: “Do you think the new system is A: wonderful? Or B: brilliant?
That’s a slight exaggeration, but there was certainly no way to say what you really........
© The Courier
visit website
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Mort Laitner
Donald Low
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
