Dr. Joanne McEvoy:

I thank the Senators for the questions. I am probably going to pick up on some of what has been said. Around the question of what might be a way forward, what is the best approach and where we go from here, what the participants were saying to us in our research feeds into that kind of process and options. They talked about the need for lots of information around expertise, academic research and so on. They were keen on participating and welcomed participation.

They want participation to be fully inclusive and far-reaching. That probably taps into some of the potential ways in which you could do this through the sequencing of very locally based deliberative events. What people want to talk about is more related to bread-and-butter socioeconomic issues. I refer to the policy issues that matter to their everyday lives rather than the high politics of big constitutional questions, which they regard as very abstract and ideological and that can bring about fears, sensitivities and emotions based on memories of the past. There are ways to create the comfortable space that allows people to talk about the issues they feel are important to them. It is important to ask people what they want to talk about and need to know. It is only in doing so that we can help design some kind of sequencing of events, participatory constitutionalism and inclusive ways forward.

It is worth thinking about the channels of communication between citizens, grassroots organisations and policymakers. Citizens and grassroots organisations were telling us in our research that they welcomed these conversations but asked what happens with them and where the information goes in order to be fed into policy. People asked how they could critique the policy and what an iterative process that allows citizens to give feedback on what policy looks like. There are no clear, easy answers, but widespread participation and asking people what they regard as their main priorities and what they need to know is a starting point.