Project Spotlight: 2017 IAP2 Australasia Project of the Year winner

Engagement officer Marcellus listening to community representative at Pukatja

Can you provide a general overview of your project?

The consultation program aimed to raise the community’s awareness and understanding of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission’s recommendations and findings, and to enable all South Australians to have their say on these important issues.

Over four months from July to October 2016, the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission Consultation and Response Agency (CARA) led the statewide consultation program and engaged tens of thousands of South Australians in a discussion on the themes identified by Citizens’ Jury One. This was the most extensive community consultation ever held in South Australia.

A dedicated Aboriginal engagement program was co-designed with Aboriginal leaders to ensure all activities were culturally appropriate and sensitive to the needs of all Aboriginal communities. The program was further refined through a pre-engagement program with Aboriginal community leaders to discuss and agree on the proposed consultation approach, content, timing and location.

The program included visits to Aboriginal communities where more than 1000 face-to-face conversations were held with Aboriginal people in 31 locations. During these sessions, CARA was supported by technical and scientific experts from ANSTO and CSIRO.

More information about the project can be found at www.nuclear.sa.gov.au.

Tell us about your project:

a. What types of engagement methods/tools did you use?

The opportunities for South Australians to learn about the issues included:

• information days (delivered as all day drop in style events from 11am-7pm) with interactive displays and accessible information such as banners, models, video animations, and information packs. Engagement specialists and technical experts were available to respond to questions and seek feedback. While engaging in the APY lands information was translated into Anangu language for reading, a video story was created using Anangu translation and interpreters were at all Anangu events.
• Free call community hotline for people to engage, discuss and provide feedback
• An online presence (www.nuclear.sa.gov.au) with resources, a discussion board, conversation kits and Facebook and twitter feeds
• Briefings, presentations and forums. This included a two day Aboriginal Human services forum comprising 20 community leaders representing 11 organisations from the human services sector in South Australia.

The avenues through which South Australians could provide feedback included:

• Structured input (responses to set questions): feedback forms, online survey, conversation kit and telephone survey.
• Unstructured input (responses of people’s choice): focus groups, letters, emails, telephone calls, online discussion boards and social media (Facebook, Twitter and YouTube).

Two citizens’ juries also formed part of the statewide engagement program. Over four days in June and July 2016, a randomly selected citizens’ jury of 52 South Australians identified the parts of the Nuclear Fuel Cycle Royal Commission report that the community should discuss. The second Citizens’ Jury met in October and November and involved more than 300 randomly selected community members were tasked with deliberating on the question: ‘Under what circumstances, if any, could South Australia pursue the opportunity to store and dispose of nuclear waste from other countries?’

More information is available at www.nuclear.sa.gov.au about the juries and statewide program.

b. What principles did you find most useful in carrying out this project?

The IAP2 principle of ‘trust’ in the Code of Ethics which requires actions to build trust and credibility for the process and among participants was important.

This was demonstrated through CARA’s commitment to:

• co-designing the engagement program
• ensuring accessibility of information
• providing multiple feedback channels
• transparently reporting feedback
• promoting an evidence based conversation.

c. How were you able to reach such a large portion of the community?

Pre-engagement with Aboriginal leaders and communities provided guidance about the engagement program including cultural considerations, specific regional needs and the types of information that would be most valued. For example, interest in geology and hydrology was highlighted during pre-engagement.

To assist in raising awareness, Aboriginal communities were mailed information packs, comprising posters to place in community areas and Aboriginal-owned buildings, postcards for distribution in mailboxes, and information sheets for display. A state-wide communications program across multiple channels also sought to raise awareness and encourage participation.

CARA used translation services where appropriate and information materials were translated, including digital stories voiced in Anangu. Community views were obtained in several ways, including feedback forms translated into Anangu, audio recordings, interpreter-facilitated feedback and written statements.

Aboriginal people were pleased and appreciative of the efforts made to ensure that everyone had the opportunity to participate. On many occasions staff were thanked for taking the time and listening to people’s views and in some instances invited back to have further discussions with those unable to attend the session.

For those unable to attend events an online portal was developed to ensure views were captured. Further events were organised to meet with industry, Aboriginal representative groups, university and school students, rotary groups and multicultural associations.

Community members at Mimili reading information from display banners

Did you apply the IAP2 Spectrum or the IAP2 Core Values in this project ?

CARA had a clear purpose in engaging with the South Australian public. The purpose of the engagement program was to:

• Promote community awareness of the Royal Commission report
• Assist the communities understanding of the Commissioners recommendations and findings; and
• Seek the community’s feedback on what the government needs to consider as part of its decision making.

The IAP2 Spectrum was important in designing the engagement program, for example, to ensure people were informed about the proposition, the community was consulted and encouraged to be involved in the conversation and provide their feedback. CARA placed a high level of emphasis on building relationships and ensuring trust and respect were upheld at all points.

The Community Views Report, available at www.nuclear.sa.gov.au, summarises the feedback collected during the engagement program ensuring a closing of the loop with participants.

What did you find the most rewarding aspect of working on this project?

The following is a reflection from the Leader for Engagement, Jason:

“There was an overwhelming response from Aboriginal people who participated in the face to face engagement which was extraordinarily humbling. As controversial as the subject matter was to many people, the respect and honesty from those we spoke with was genuine. We spoke with children, teenagers, adults and Elders, some who had English as a second language. We listened to people who were directly impacted by atomic bomb testing and who wanted the government to listen, and we did. We spoke to others who saw genuine opportunity for themselves and future generations if the program continued. We captured their stories in community centres and open spaces, in their homes, on their country at formal events and informal conversations around the campfire. We were thanked and asked to return in many instances. The genuine honesty and respect from these conversations was powerful and in some cases emotional for the story tellers and those recording them. All staff who participated in these engagement events have reflected on the engagement program and considered this as their most challenging and rewarding experience of their professional careers”. Jason Downs Leader for Engagement

You can watch a video about the project here

What are some of the learnt lessons from this project that others could learn from?

• Co-design with Aboriginal leaders and service providers early on was fundamental in achieving a comprehensive and respectful approach. In doing so there was a shared sense of ownership and commitment to support involvement in the conversation.
• Working with local Aboriginal leaders, service providers, Aboriginal staff and translators to deliver and support the engagement program provided a point of difference. In addition, at events community facilities were hired and communities contracted to provide catering for the events to support local economic participation.
• Inherent program flexibility from the team ensured there was a daily calibration of events based on individual community preferences. This included having formal and informal engagement conversations, extending conversations to evening campfire discussions, moving one event to a river location, one on one private conversations and personal depositions from Elders.
• Multiple methods of information and communication including visual aids, models, information banners, videos in English and Anangu, fact sheets, technical experts at all events, translators and multiple ways to provide feedback.
• Staff undertook engagement training specifically designed for the program and Cultural Awareness from a respected Aboriginal Elder.
• Relationships with Aboriginal people in the co-design phase have been strengthened through debriefs and sharing information and is enabling reflection on how to undertake other future engagement initiatives.