The changing nature of democracy has raised many questions for policy-makers and others concerned about participation.

Decisions often appear to be made without any real involvement by many of those affected by the outcomes. Voter apathy is widespread. Transparent accountability is demanded but rarely delivered. Recent polls confirm that people, especially young people, have little confidence in the political process.

People are disillusioned because the political process fails to address many of their core concerns. The escalating cost of housing, for example, is putting home ownership beyond the reach of most middle-income people. The scale of social-housing development (including local authority housing) is far too small to reverse the steep rise in the number of households on waiting lists.

Healthcare is another area of real concern to many people. Despite a huge increase in real terms in the Budget allocation for healthcare, waiting lists remain stubbornly long and the reality of a two-tier system is clear.

The widening gap between poor people and the rest of society is now obvious to all. Budget decisions that contributed to this widening have been roundly condemned and polls have continued to show that Irish people want to see this process reversed.

A social contract against exclusion

The failure of the political process to address problems in areas such as housing, healthcare and the widening rich/poor gap contribute in no small way to the growing disillusionment felt by many people with the political process. Government seeks to respond to these and similar issues but the scale or urgency required in such a response seems to many to be missing. The failure to address these issues adequately is contributing, in no small measure, to the growing apathy and disillusionment with the political process.

The recent MRBI/Irish Times poll contains some interesting results in this regard. It identified house prices, healthcare and the gap between rich and poor as the three most important issues for the next election. A total of 64 per cent of respondents highlighted one or other of these issues as their principal concern.

A new, more radical approach is required if participation is to be maximised and people's confidence restored. A more radical approach is also required if social exclusion is to be given the priority needed to reverse present trends. A new social contract against exclusion is required. Such a contract would involve the development of basic measures in the economic, political, cultural and social fields aimed at maximising participation and eliminating social exclusion.

It could be developed by government and social partners and put into operation immediately. It would build on commitments contained in the Programme for Prosperity and Fairness and ensure that the resources currently available would be used in a concerted way to reverse present trends that are being worsened by inflation.

A forum for dialogue on civil society issues

A second issue that is contributing to disillusionment with the political process concerns the range of civil society issues that are of major concern to large numbers of people. These are issues many people feel are not being addressed adequately and insofar as a discussion or debate does take place they feel they are not allowed to participate in any real way.

Social partnership is one process aimed at improving the participation of various sectors in Ireland. However, it is in danger of being overloaded. The various social partners in the four pillars of social partnership - employers, trade unions, farmers and the community and voluntary sector - represent large segments of Irish society. However, they do not represent, or claim to represent, all of Irish society. In fact the case is made, with some legitimacy, that none of these social partners represents its own sector entirely.

The development of a new forum within which a civil society debate could be conducted on an ongoing basis would be a welcome addition to the political landscape in Ireland. Such a forum could make a major contribution to improving participation by a wide range of groups in Irish society. Establishment of such a forum would ensure that civil society issues were not being loaded on to the already extensive work of social partnership in the socio-economic area. It would also be complementary to the work of the National Economic and Social Forum and the National Economic and Social Council, both of whom already have extensive agendas.

In a paper presented by Brigid Reynolds and myself to CORI's recent social policy conference, the case for such a forum was presented. We proposed that Government authorise and resource an initiative to identify how a civil society debate could be developed and maintained in an ongoing way in Ireland and to examine how it might connect to the growing debate at European level around civil society issues.

There are many issues such a forum could address. One that comes to mind, given recent developments, is the issue of citizenship, its rights, responsibilities, possibilities and limitations. Another is the shape of the social model Ireland wishes to develop in the decades ahead. Do we follow a European model or a US one? Or do we want to create an alternative - and if so, what shape would it have and how could it be delivered? The issues a civil society forum could address are many and varied. Ireland would benefit immensely from having such a forum.

Impact on the democratic process

Would a civil society forum and a new social contract against exclusion take from the democratic process? Democracy means rule by the people. This implies that people participate in shaping the decisions that affect them most closely. What we have, in practice, is a highly centralised government in which we are "represented" by professional politicians. The more powerful a political party becomes, the more distant it seems to become from the electorate.

Party policies on a range of major issues are often difficult to discern. Backbenchers have little control over, or influence on, government ministers, opposition spokespersons or shadow cabinets. Even within the cabinet, some ministers seem to be able to ignore their cabinet colleagues.

The democratic process has certainly benefited from the participation of various sectors in other arenas such as social partnership. It would also benefit from taking up the proposals to develop a new social contract against exclusion and a new forum for dialogue on civil society issues.

The decline in participation is exacerbated by the primacy given to the market by so many analysts, commentators, policy-makers and politicians. Many people feel their views or comments are ignored or patronised while the views of those who see the market as solving most, if not all, of society's problems are treated with the greatest respect.

Markets have a limited effect

But it needs to be honestly acknowledged that markets produce very mixed results when left to their own devices. In terms of many policy goals they are extremely limited. Consequently, other mechanisms are required to ensure that some rebalancing, at least, is achieved. The mechanisms proposed here are simply two that would be positive in improving participation in a 21st-century society.

Sean Healy is director of CORI; with his co-director, Brigid Reynolds, he edited the recently published Participation and Democracy: Opportunities and Challenges