Webchat with Steve Hilton, ex-adviser to David Cameron and author of More Human, on Thursday 26 May at 1pm

[BojanaMumsnet]

Hello,

We’re pleased to announce a webchat with Steve Hilton, author of More Human: Designing a World Where People Come First, on Thursday 26 May at 1pm.

Steve was formerly senior adviser to David Cameron, working closely with him (on projects such as the Big Society, hugging huskies and the Nudge Unit) until 2012, when he left Westminster for California. He is co-founder and CEO of Crowdpac, a Silicon Valley political tech start-up, and a visiting professor at Stanford University. He has also recently come out strongly in favour of Brexit.

More Human: Designing a World Where People Come First argues that the frustrations people feel with government, politics, their economic circumstances and their daily lives are caused by deep structural problems with systems that have become too big, bureaucratic and distant from the human scale. The book proposes radical solutions, such as banning internet-enabled devices for children.

Please do join the chat on Thursday, or if you can’t make it, please leave a question here in advance. And do bear in mind the webchat guidelines - one question each only (follow-ups allowed if there’s time) and please do be polite.

Thanks
MNHQ

@Givepeasachance

This thing about controlling decisions - which ones don't we control already?

I only ever hear about bananas

Employment law is a good example. And there are many others but there's a deeper point that doesn't get made enough: around 70% of what the government does comes from the EU. Most of that is stuff that no-one here voted for and which the government disagrees with. You can't over-state the amount of time and energy that ministers and civil servants waste fighting off things we don't want or processing things we have to concede on instead on focusing on the actual policy changes they were elected to bring in.

What do you think about GM food and Monsanto/Bayer and what do you think about TTIP?

@DontTellTheBride

Hi,

What do people in power (not necessarily the Conservatives, just people in government) really think about doing face-to-face stuff with the public (and webchats ) - is it thought of as a massive boring chore or just a huge potential egg-on-face moment? Do any of them really enjoy it?

Thanks

Generally, I think people in power are far too nervous of making so-called gaffes and that's what makes them talk in that slick, prepared robotic way that drives people crazy. That's true in all contexts, whether that's face-to-face, in webchats or on TV.

I think they do genuinely like engaging with people and the best of them (and I would count David Cameron amongst those) really learn from those encounters and apply the practical insights they gain to their thinking around policy.

@TresDesolee

Hello Steve

And also (with grim inevitability) what's your favourite biscuit (do behavioural scientists who live in Silicon Valley eat biscuits?)

I not only eat biscuits, I bake my own and so my current favourite (I pretend it's the kids' favourite, but really it's for me) is known in our household as triple-chip shortbread. But I am also very partial to the Lotus biscuits sitting in front of me at Mumsnet Towers.

@BoffinMum

I thought your book started well but then kind of tailed off into the usual disruption stuff really. Sorry Steve.

Which bits do you mean? I found that a lot of people really liked the food chapter the most. I guess that's near the beginning so maybe that fits with your criticism. I actually feel very strongly about the chapters on poverty and inequality that come towards the end. For me they are probably the most important in the whole book.

So your example is employment law but you give no examples

What specifically?

What are the things the EU have specifically done to harm the uk?

What would we do differently if Brussels weren't butting in?

Isn't it also true that the UK puts forward more policy to the EU than any other country?!?

Seconding claig, I want to know about GM food and TTIP too.

Steve - one of the reasons I'm in favour of leaving the EU is that I think smaller sovereign democracies with proper accountability are far better placed than huge blocs to meet 21st century globalisation in a way that benefits the majority rather than just the 1%. Why do you think it is that the 'leave for democracy' argument is falling so flat when it's so important?

And (I know I'm not supposed to ask loads but still) any thoughts on why the left is so silent on Brexit, when there is a clear left-wing case for leaving?

@Bobettie

Hi Steve

I'd like to know how you view data and sharing of data if we leave the EU.

My understanding is that is is very difficult to share data with other non-EU countries due to shared data protection laws.

Aren't there jobs in the City which depend on global customers and data sharing within the EU that are going to be lost if we leave the EU?

How are we going to replace talent especially in the City if we leave the EU? we'd have to have work permits and Visas which would make it very hard for us to recruit high calibre graduates and professionals who currently work in the City.

I'm afraid I don't know enough about the data stuff to give you a good answer. In terms of City jobs - I am very pro-immigration because I think it helps our economy and our society. I think that being in the EU prevents us from being open to immigrants from all over the world, not just Europe who could come here and do the sorts of jobs you describe. So I would like us to control our own immigration system and make it one that was far more welcoming to people from places like China, India, Russia, Brazil - wherever there are bright talented people who want to come here and make a contribution.

You say you've been wanting to do a Mumsnet webchat for years - why is that?

Hi Steve I was very much in favour of Brexit but have family who work in the city in Big Data. They are worried that brexit would impact on their jobs because there is an EU agreement to share data and companies outside the EU won't trade or deal with companies not covered by EU data agreement.

As someone in Silicon Valley how do you see this?

The thing is, I am one of those so-called 'experts' except I have spent 25 immersed in data in order to get to that level. And then I am elbowed out of the way by the disrupters, being told I am 'stuck' and 'people don't trust experts' and 'there is a new future' and all the public should do is listen to the disrupters of the world and a wonderful society beckons on the horizon. Then when they have disrupted the initial thing they get bored and shuffle off to disrupt someone else's patch. They spend their time hanging out with other disrupters whilst congratulating each other on how much disruption they have managed to achieve, like notches on a bed post. Probably in the Garrick Club for all I know, where women are not allowed.

To me this rather resembles the kid with ADHD in the nursery who mucks up all the Lego constructions made by the other kids, causing a state of entropy, and then disappears off to leave others to clear up the mess.

I'm afraid I don't know enough about the data stuff to give you a good answer

My point exactly and why you haven't got any arguments to make that most people on here will consider worth listening to.

@CFSKate

Seconding claig, I want to know about GM food and TTIP too.

I'm pretty sceptical/hostile to GM food. I was outraged for example, by the US regulators' recent decison to allow GM fish into the food supply chain adn for it not to be labelled as such.

In answer to the earlier question on Monsanto etc, I think these giant food and agri-businesses are some of the most destructive and evil organisations on the planet. Their impact on people's health, the health of the soil and the environment more generally is harmful in ways that people barely realise. The way that these companies use lobbying to buy the outcomes they want from the political system, whether that's in the US or the EU is one of the best examples of the kind of centralisation of power that I argue against in More Human.

TTIP I think is going nowhere because the EU is so hopeless and can't agree anything. So whether it's a good thing or not, it is almost beside the point.

Hi Steve

sorry you answered while I was posting.

I am told specifically that companies who deal with big data have a problem trading with companies outside the EU when it comes to data sharing. I was always going to vote for Brexit but the impact on city jobs is now making me re-think.

@kittykitty

You say you've been wanting to do a Mumsnet webchat for years - why is that?

I made David Cameron do the first senior politician's webchat on Mumsnet soon after becoming leader of the opposition and taking time off for paternity leave. I thought it was just a great way to engage with people without smart-alec journalists getting in the way.

Which US presidential candidate would you pick to win, and why?

Also, just a note on your response to the climate change question:

Surely if you feel strongly about nature and biodiversity, you see the urgency of the climate change, which is directly responsible for the exponential loss of habitats and biodiversity.

Hi Steve

You're known for being a 'barefoot, blue-sky thinker'. I have two questions (sorry!) Firstly, were you really barefoot in Downing St and secondly - do you have tips for getting organisations to think differently, without terrifying the hell out of everyone?

So, you don't know wnough about data stuff, you are not interested in climate change, you have not given much thought to proporional representation...

@Givepeasachance

Can you convince me you are not one of those white liberals who is really only liberal in the areas that suit you and your type?

It's just your desire to abolish maternity rights made me think you don't give a shit about women and all your lovely ideas are designed to progress the white male.

First of all, if you read my book, I think you'll see that it's pretty consistent. Whether it is liberal or not, slightly depends on what you mean by that term. In America I think of myself as a liberal conservative which totally confuses everyone as they think those things are mutually exclusive. I do think I'm pretty liberal on social and cultural issues. I think that it's hard to sustain a claim that I don't give a shit about women, if you look at what I've actually done and campaigned for - everything from making myself unbelievably unpopular in the Tory party by pushing for action to get more women MPs to my intense work in government to improve support for families in a very practical way, whether that's expanding and improving the health visitor service, childcare or parenting support. I totally understand that those things are not just aimed at women, but they do make a big difference in women's lives if done well.

@trailblazer86

Which US presidential candidate would you pick to win, and why?

Also, just a note on your response to the climate change question:

Surely if you feel strongly about nature and biodiversity, you see the urgency of the climate change, which is directly responsible for the exponential loss of habitats and biodiversity.

My first choice on the Republican side was John Kasich who I am not sure is particularly well-known here but who for me was a great example of a really human politician. If you google 'John Kasich hug', you'll see what I mean.

Now we are left Trump vs Hillary, it's a really tough choice. I think that Trump is actually doing something incredibly useful and refreshing: shining a spotlight on the failures of the technocratic agenda and corrupt political system that has been built up over the years by both parties in the US.

I like his attitude of shaking things up but I don't see a set of concrete plans that would give me any confidence that real change along the lines I would want to see, would actually happen.

As for Hillary, there's no doubt that she's incredibly knowledgeable and thoughtful about the detail of policy and I particularly appreciate her emphasis on early years support and family policy, but in many ways she represents exactly the old establishment that I think needs challenging.

Good question Hugo Manatee.

@woeface

Hi Steve

You're known for being a 'barefoot, blue-sky thinker'. I have two questions (sorry!) Firstly, were you really barefoot in Downing St and secondly - do you have tips for getting organisations to think differently, without terrifying the hell out of everyone?

No, but I did always take my shoes off. the main reason for that is that Downing Street is actually a converted residential home full of soft furnishings and plush carpets and it just felt weird to me to wear shoes. What makes me laugh is that almost every article talking about this describes me as 'padding around in stockinged feet'. Who talks like that?

The second question is really profound. I've learnt a lot about that from teaching at the d.school at Stanford. I now understand how incredibly important it is to involve people in designing the change you want to bring about, not just telling them about it.

Do you like The Thick Of It? Which character is you?

@BoffinMum

The thing is, I am one of those so-called 'experts' except I have spent 25 immersed in data in order to get to that level. And then I am elbowed out of the way by the disrupters, being told I am 'stuck' and 'people don't trust experts' and 'there is a new future' and all the public should do is listen to the disrupters of the world and a wonderful society beckons on the horizon. Then when they have disrupted the initial thing they get bored and shuffle off to disrupt someone else's patch. They spend their time hanging out with other disrupters whilst congratulating each other on how much disruption they have managed to achieve, like notches on a bed post. Probably in the Garrick Club for all I know, where women are not allowed.

To me this rather resembles the kid with ADHD in the nursery who mucks up all the Lego constructions made by the other kids, causing a state of entropy, and then disappears off to leave others to clear up the mess.

i think the great thing about data is that we can now put it in everyone's hands giving them more power to make informed decisions and choices. Of course there is a vital place in our society for people who have studied things in depth and to a level that most people can't and we should respect that. What I'm talking about is different. It's ministers and advisers and civil servants who sit in offices and make decisions on behalf of people miles away without knowing anything about their lives. A great example is the news story I saw this week about the government closing down community pharmacies. Jeremy Hunt seems to be sitting in his office in Whitehall putting dots on a map deciding where pharmacies should be located, based on how many minutes it takes people to walk there. It's insane. this is the kind of arrogant, top-down centralisation that I think we have to fight whenever we see it.