2020- 2022 Policy Process | Green Party of Canada
Where GPC membership collaborates to develop our policies
G21-D009 Include Subject-Matter Experts in the Policy Development Process
Submitter Name
Michelle Bowman
Ratification Vote Results: Adopted
Proposal
Adopt a more holistic policy development approach by including multidisciplinary research expertise that reflects the six interdependent GPC core values.
Objective
Interdependencies among issues make policy development complex (for example, climate change). Translating evidence-based policy into public support and desired outcomes requires effective knowledge translation. The GPC should adopt a more holistic approach to incorporating the six interdependent GPC core values into policies by including subject-matter experts in the process.
Benefit
A more holistic policy process that includes researchers with a range of expertise (for example, both social and physical sciences) can strengthen environmental, social and economic outcomes, improve knowledge translation, minimize trade-offs among policy objectives, and improve actual and perceived policy standards.
Supporting Comments from Submitter
Stronger policy leads to better environmental, social, and economic outcomes while minimizing trade-offs among competing policy objectives we want to achieve.
The work of policy experts and researchers is increasing in complexity, so it is important to take a holistic approach and consult researchers during policy development.
Existing GPC policy process: “The process increases the representation of diverse viewpoints by seeking participation from across the regions of Canada, from groups who are affected by a particular proposal, from party members, and from policy experts.”
A similar proposal to include Green Party Member Knowledge Clusters and Critic Portfolio Brain Trust was included in Annamie Paul's leadership platform
https://www.annamiepaul.ca/shadow_cabinet and is included in her current approach to strengthening the Shadow Cabinet.
Green Value(s)
Ecological Wisdom, Sustainability, Participatory Democracy, Social Justice, Respect for Diversity, Non-Violence.
Relation to Existing Policy
Add to current GPC policy.
We're building a new kind of politics. One that is open, participatory, and people-powered
If you believe in what we're doing, please consider making a small donation to help us build it
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
Comment details
You are seeing a single comment
View all comments
Conversation with Blocked user
I oppose the proposal but not because I disagree with its objectives. It is just that all Parties claim to be evidence-based. And none of them really are in any meaningful way, including ours. So talk is cheap, yes? And wishes cheaper still.
So yep we have a problem, but we are not going to solve it without substantial changes to the way we make decisions and the way we get work done. Getting 50% of the members to say that they support the principle of emplyong 'holistic' expertise (strictly defined as?) without committing to any specific action is... innocuous. But with only 15 proposals available to us, a redundant and vague affirmation of values with no specific prescription or interdiction just doesn't make the cut.
Or else what would this motion specifically require to happen? It is ignorable. Deep structural reform is needed to make our party evidence-based. I only wish I could say what that should look like.
We were required to state the problem and specific objective without specifying specific action - those were the rules.
I’ll amend to give concrete examples of possible actions such as an open call for members of Shadow Cabinet and Knowledge Clusters (which happened in 2021-22) and this tool that will hopefully be used for continuous policy development with more input from members with interest, lived experience and expertise.
It would be really useful to minimize the number of proposals to consider at Convention; 86 is wayyy too many for limited time available (official business such as policy debates/workshops/votes needs to be transacted within a window of time when folks in all Canadian time zones can reasonably attend). So, I agree with AGAINST, as this proposal does not substantially reform our Policy Making Procedures.
As Sarah stated, usually a Proposer IS highly knowledgable about the subject, &/or would choose to seek multi-sectoral expertise prior to drafting; and if not, presumably the Policy Process Committee ought to have that as a key element of the guidance that they should offer / encourage for each Proposal.
Loading comments ...