Having a say: community representation in Australian language policy consultations

© 2018 Dr. Rebecca HetheringtonLanguage as an object of policy presents a challenge for good governance because language is simultaneously a national government resource and a symbolic resource for communities. Within this context, the policy consultation process—which has the potential to position different policy stakeholders against one another—may test the principles of a liberal democratic state that aims to balance broader national needs with the rights and particular requirements of smaller groups. This research bridges the sometime divide between language policy and policy theory by providing an account of language policy consultations and the ways in which they contribute to community representation in policy, with a focus on four federal Australian language policy documents formulated between 1984 and 2012. By drawing on Dryzek’s (2010) model of deliberative democracy as a proxy for representation, it is possible to test an important part of the policy making process in real-world scenarios without resorting to linear models of policy making, and to compare consultation practices across policies. This research also draws on the principles of oral history to guide the practice and interpretation of face-to-face interviews with twenty-two policy stakeholders and, in doing so, to conceptualise subjectivity in the research process. A range of tools within the ambit of content analysis are used to analyse data from both interviews and policy documents. The research reveals that consultations may be inauthentic due to their typically low transparency for communities and their tendency to adopt communication models that are largely one-way, with many features that could enhance community representation determined by individual policy-maker choices rather than more broadly-based consultation practices. Participation in consultations privileges some groups over others and excludes some communities against their wills; the presence of representative organisations often ameliorates these problems but can risk the perpetuation of similar representation problems to those suffered by governments. Further, what counts as meaningful or consequential participation often differs between community and government stakeholders and, in any case, may be difficult to achieve in a policy environment that encourages pragmatism over idealism. The findings therefore suggest that while representation in language policy consultation processes varies, it is ultimately most vulnerable to barriers external to the nominated policy process, such as policy-maker power and the political context which, in turn, undermines the assumptions behind process-based theories of political participation. Nonetheless, the research proposes a model to measure and improve community representation in current policy processes, and thereby contributes to finding a means of incorporating minority perspectives within the confines of a liberal democracy and in the context of language as an object of policy