The Liberal campaign promised to make government more open, transparent and collaborative. At the end of last week, lots of people were wondering if that commitment had been thrown under the bus. Was it? It depends who you talk to.In one view, Open Government was always a fraud. People who think this often admire the way Justin Trudeau used it to defeat Harper, but they insist it will never work in practice. Liberals, they say, are learning the hard way that getting things done requires discipline, secrecy and control.The government's behavior of late—limiting debate on bills, dominating the committee on electoral reform, tabling Motion 6—is seen as a clear signal that it's backing away from its campaign commitment.Personally, I doubt it. Lurching or even drifting toward Harper-style governance would be a huge mistake—a betrayal—that would almost certainly end badly for the government. We all know how volatile public opinion is. The only way forward is forward.As for the claim that Open Government is unworkable, it is as flimsy as it is uniformed. Much of the criticism seems to rest on simplistic views about collaboration. Here are three precepts that I hope will help dispel some of the confusion.Collaboration does not commit a government to seeking consensus. There may be no consensus to be found.Pipelines are a timely example. Lots of people and stakeholders are committed to Yes or No and no amount of discussion will change their minds. For them, pipelines are a zero-sum game with winners and losers. Collaboration here is a waste of time.But not all people or organizations are inflexible. Many are open to discussion. Unfortunately, traditional consultation leaves little room to explore options they may care about. For example, the National Energy Board's environmental review process focuses mainly on risks to the environment and whether a project is in "the public interest," which essentially means that it attracts investment and creates jobs.This narrow focus badly understates the complexity and diversity of the issues around big projects like pipelines. As a result, debate tends to polarize around jobs and the environment, as those in the middle get pulled one way or the other.Looking at pipelines through a sustainable development lens, as Prime Minister Trudeau proposes, creates a larger context that invites more wide-ranging discussions on Indigenous rights, quality of life, different kinds of jobs, wellbeing, and so on. As a result, the choice is no longer just between jobs and the environment.On Kinder Morgan, Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr proposes to explore these broader issues through a second process that reaches out to Indigenous peoples and affected communities in an effort to get “community buy-in.”At a minimum, this means the discussion at the cabinet table will be more informed. Very possibly, it will uncover new opportunities for trade-offs and collaboration and new ways of building agreement among these stakeholders, which brings us to our second point.Collaboration does not require that a government turn its policy choices over to stakeholders. Rather, it helps ensure that governments have the support they need to implement their decisions.Suppose the government favoured the pipeline, but was unsure if it could muster enough public support to establish social license. In this case, Carr's extra round of consultations wouldn't get him where he needs to be.Consultation signals that the government is still unsure what it wants to do and is asking the public for their views so it can weigh the pros and cons and make a decision. What Carr would really need is support for the pipeline from a critical mass of stakeholders.The way to get this is by finding new and attractive ways to build agreement around the goal; and that comes from engaging stakeholders in a more wide-ranging discussion of the issues. This takes us way beyond consultation.In such a process, government is a highly engaged participant, raising questions, providing information, challenging views, and presenting options. In short, it plays the role of facilitator and interlocutor to help shape and direct the discussion.The process need not involve those who are firmly opposed to the goal. Earlier consultations have already provided ample opportunity for them to be heard. Now the focus is shifting from consultation to dialogue, and this requires a level of openness that opponents admit they do not have.Finally, the dialogue should be iterative, that is, it should progress through several stages so it can evolve toward solutions.In the end, such a process will either succeed or it won't. If it fails to build enough support for the goal, the government will simply declare that there is no social license and that is the end of it. If it succeeds, the government can claim to have social license, which gives it the legitimacy it needs to move ahead. This brings us to our final point:Opposition parties are inclined to defer to a substantial coalition of stakeholders who have reached agreement on an issue through open dialogue and collaboration. Collaboration is thus an effective way to discipline parliamentary debate.This last point simply notes that if a government succeeds in bringing a substantial group of stakeholders to agreement through a process of trade-offs, compromises and collaboration, it will be very hard for opposition parties to slough it off.So, those who argue that openness, transparency and collaboration hamstring a government or turn control of the public agenda over to stakeholders actually have things backward Collaboration is a disciplined and methodical way of bringing stakeholders and citizens together around a share goal; and of creating a kind of legitimacy around decision-making that makes the implementation of complex and controversial decisions far more manageable. Not only would governments benefit from more collaboration, they badly need it.Dr. Don Lenihan is Senior Associate, Policy and Engagement, at Canada 2020, Canada's leading, independent progressive think-tank. Don is an internationally recognized expert on democracy and Open Government. He is currently the Government of Ontario's principal advisor on its Open Dialogue Initiative. The views expressed here are those of the columnist alone. Don can be reached at:[email protected] or follow him on Twitter at: @DonLenihan