By Aneeta Prem MBE
Public service has taught me that listening is harder than it sounds.
We all hear information through our own experiences. We notice some details more quickly than others. We make assumptions. We fill gaps.
And sometimes the first version of a story is not the whole story.
That is one reason evidence matters so much.
Listening is not the same as agreeing
Good listening does not require automatic agreement.
It requires enough discipline to understand what somebody is actually saying before deciding what weight to give it.
That principle applies in many parts of life. It matters in safeguarding. It matters in charities. It matters when assessing evidence. It matters when somebody describes pain that cannot be seen. And it matters when people disagree.
Listening is not weakness. Done properly, it is part of rigorous decision-making.
Evidence can be uncomfortable
People often say they want evidence-based decisions. That is easier when the evidence supports what we already believe.
The harder test comes when it does not.
If new evidence changes the picture, a responsible person should be willing to change their conclusion. If a statistic has been misunderstood, correct it. If a source is weaker than first thought, say so. If somebody you disagree with makes a valid point, acknowledge it.
Public confidence depends on institutions being capable of doing this. So does personal credibility.
Independence matters
I have held public and charitable roles while also campaigning on issues I care deeply about.
Those roles must remain distinct.
My campaigning views are my own. They do not represent the judiciary, and judicial office should never be used to give personal campaigning an authority it does not possess.
That separation is important to me.
Independence is not an inconvenience. It protects public trust.
The person behind the evidence still matters
There is another mistake institutions can make.
In trying to become objective, they can become detached from the human being affected by the decision.
Evidence should protect us from making decisions purely through emotion. It should not remove humanity from the process.
A safeguarding referral is information on a file. It is also a child.
A patient survey contains percentages. It also contains people trying to explain what happened to them.
A court document contains allegations and evidence. It also concerns lives that may be changed by the outcome.
Holding both truths at once is part of responsible public service.
Ask what you do not know
One of the most useful questions in any difficult decision is: What am I missing?
Who has not been heard? What assumption am I making? What evidence would change my mind? Is the information current? Is this a fact, an interpretation or an allegation? Are two apparently contradictory things both capable of being true?
Those questions slow decisions down in a useful way. They can also prevent confidence becoming certainty before the evidence deserves it.
Why this connects my work
At first glance, my work in human rights, safeguarding, patient advocacy, writing and public service may appear to belong in separate boxes.
For me, a common thread runs through them.
Who has a voice? Who is being heard? Who is making the decision? What evidence are they using? What happens when the person with the least power tries to say no?
Those questions appear in very different settings. The answers will not always be the same. But the discipline required to ask them properly is remarkably similar.
Public service should leave room for humility
Experience matters. So does knowing its limits.
The longer I work with difficult subjects, the less impressed I am by absolute certainty.
Serious safeguarding cases are complicated. Human behaviour is complicated. Chronic pain is complicated. Institutions are complicated.
Being willing to say “I don’t know yet” can be far more responsible than producing an immediate answer simply because one is expected.
Humility and authority are not opposites. Sometimes humility is what makes authority trustworthy.
Final thought
Public service has reinforced something I believed long before I held public office.
Fairness is not achieved by treating every situation as identical.
It comes from listening carefully, applying the right principles, testing the evidence and remembering the human being at the centre of the decision.
The strongest decisions are not those made with the loudest certainty. They are the ones that can withstand the evidence.
