Falling oil prices may look like a disaster for Alberta Premier Jim Prentice, but there is a political opportunity here that could turn this into a big win for him. What if he gave Albertans a real say in how to deal with the revenue shortfall? He may already be thinking about this. As Graham Thomson observes, Prentice's musings on whether Alberta needs a sales tax looks a lot like a signal that he wants to try and have a “mature discussion” with Albertans on how to respond. I think this is a good idea. With the right kind of engagement process, he could quickly rally public support behind a plan to deal with his government's plummeting revenues. The real question is whether the new premier has the confidence in Albertans to rise to the occasion. At least some of his advisors will surely have doubts. Talk of a public debate on raising taxes will conjure up images of unruly crowds gathering in town halls across the province to lecture one another and holler at politicians. We've seen that movie, they will say, and it is more likely to divide Albertans than unite them. Not so. The right kind of engagement process—and it must be the right kind—may be the politically safest and most effective way for the premier to deal with this issue. This is just the sort of issue where Albertans should take some ownership. Consider: Everyone knows that falling oil prices are causing a huge shortfall in the government's revenues, so they will be expecting tough decisions. No one thinks it is the premier's fault, so people won't use the process to attack him. And there are only a few acceptable ways to respond, so the discussion can be focused and brief. Thomson identifies the two main options he thinks Prentice is facing: introduce a sales tax or replace Alberta's flat income tax with a more progressive tax. I would add two more: go into deficit or respond to falling revenues with government cuts. Of course, very few people would argue that all of the estimated $7 billion shortfall should be dealt with either through deficits or program cuts. The former would fly in the face of good management; and the latter would almost certainly throw the province into recession. So along with Thomson's two options, the process would probably also need to ask Albertans about the right balance between cuts or deficits, on one hand, and whatever tax changes they propose, on the other. I think both sets of questions could be handled by a well-designed process. So what does that look like? The basic distinction Prentice needs here is between consultation and deliberation. In traditional consultation, stakeholders express their views on a topic to government; but once their views have been aired, officials withdraw to deliberate in private over what they have heard and to make decisions about what the government will do. In short, government does all the weighing of alternatives, assessing of evidence, and making of compromises—and it does so behind closed doors. This is how governments usually engage the public, but it would be the wrong way to engage Albertans on this issue. Asking them to appear before a committee to talk about their preferences gives them no real opportunity or reason to listen to each other, accommodate competing interests or seek reasonable compromises. The process leaves all that to government. As a result, Albertans will feel no ownership of the final decision. If they disagree with it—as many will—the government will be left trying to explain the rationale for its choices. I don't think Prentice wants to find himself here. By contrast, a deliberative process gets participants to explore the issues and solutions together. This forces them to listen to one another's views, assess the evidence and, where appropriate, make efforts to accommodate their differences. Deliberation not only leads to understanding, it builds mutual respect. Skeptics may be shaking their heads. But seeing is believing, so let me offer an example. Ontario's Condominium Act, 1998 came into effect over a decade ago. Since then, Ontario's condo sector has undergone remarkable growth and change. Today, condos account for half of all new homes built in Ontario. As the sector expanded, so did the size and complexity of the issues around condo ownership and management. In my former role at the Public Policy Forum, I designed and led a three-stage, 18-month public engagement process to renew the Act. The process involved a couple of thousand people in total, who worked together to identify, frame and discuss dozens of issues. (A case study of the process is available here.) Perhaps the most striking thing about this process was how stakeholders and owners worked together to overcome their differences fairly, respectfully and rationally. As long as they felt others were working to accommodate them, they did the same. No one expected to get everything they wanted. The key to this was their belief that the government really was giving them a say in the decisions. It made them feel responsible for the process and, as a result, they were willing to live with many of the decisions they would not have supported otherwise. In the end, there was very significant agreement on some 40 pages of recommendations, which are now being drafted into a bill that is expected to be tabled in the Ontario legislature by the spring. This process was not an exception. Over the years I've led many engagement processes. As a general rule, I can say that, if people are given a real and meaningful say, they usually rise to the occasion. But the government must be willing to show confidence in them. To guard against the unforeseen, Prentice could say that as premier the final decision will rest with him, but he would need to tell people that, as long as the process produces a clear option that is a clear preference, he will act on it. If he is willing to do this, the revenue shortfall in Alberta has all the makings of a winner. If I were him, I'd already be drawing up the process plan.   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. His recent projects include chairing an expert group on citizen engagement for the UN and the OECD; and chairing the Ontario Open Government Engagement Team. The views expressed here are those of the columnist alone. Don can be reached at: [email protected] or follow him on Twitter at: @DonLenihan