Question GOV 02

GOV-02 How should people who would use or be affected by the service help shape it and see the result of their contribution?

Start here · Questions · Progress · People decide

Why this matters

Seeking varied experience gives the design a better chance of working for tradespeople, drivers, artists, nurses, retirees, students and others across the community.

What to bring back

An engagement plan with accessible participation, groups to seek out, ways to decline, a feedback and correction record, design responses and space for continuing disagreement.

What we know so far

• comprehensive rebuild plan — reviewed source; public copy can be added through the evidence process (Sections 8 and 10)
• supporting research — reviewed source; public copy can be added through the evidence process (GAJRA values and UNGA81 contribution)
• Proposed councils, teams and committees model for the Aura age (Proposed shared handbook home, organising meeting, XR/Aura/AI/SI/robot participation, delegated tasks and records; adoption and appointments are development milestones.)
• Council plan crosswalk and proposed Aura integration (Relevant question row identifies the management/recovery source section and printed/PDF page. AI-generated analysis, 21 October 2026; proposed checks and actual review/operating agreements retain separate status.)

AI-generated potential answers

For discussion and review · research checked 2026-10-20. These are AI-generated options and transfer assessments. The user's request and research method identify the source of this work. The source catalogue states what the references establish. The decision and approval record retains its own status.

Invite residents, visitors, workers, community groups and people with varied access needs to try practical examples. Keep a public response record showing what changed, what remains contested and the next opportunity to influence the design.

Existing-practice adaptation

AI-generated adaptation of an existing pattern. Run short workshops around real tasks: finding a ferry update, understanding a stale notice and offering help. Combine conversation, paper feedback and hands-on trials; publish themes and design responses with permission and protect individual private details.

Research basis: Digital Performance Standard: measure service success · Privacy and the use of commercially available AI products.

Future concept to explore

AI-generated future concept. Use accessible XR walkthroughs and Aura-assisted participation to let people explore a proposed kiosk in their own time. Summaries should distinguish each person's contribution from AI synthesis and give them an easy way to correct representation.

Examples and local differences

• Digital Performance Standard: measure service success: AI transfer assessment: Assess success against the user's intended task rather than the amount of technology shown. Local difference to check: A national digital-service benchmark needs local participants and phone-free, account-free and assisted ways to contribute.

Evidence to bring back next

• Recruit a varied first trial group through authorised outreach.
• Test whether participants can trace one suggestion into a design response and correct the record.

People and connected choices

Who reviews: Luke, as project initiator, coordinates the invitation and prepares responses to design feedback. Participants choose their involvement and express their own views; anyone representing a wider group needs that group's authority. Participants help shape the proposal and see how their contributions are addressed.

Connected questions: OPS-01, OPS-02

Work state: open. Assigned person or AI assistant: Ready to be assigned.

Research and alternatives can move ahead while connected decisions develop. Before acting on a choice, check the people, evidence and approved scope in People decide.