| Abstract: | In contrast to recent experiences of other innovative programs in both Australia and the United States, the participatory aspect of a social program in an Adelaide working class estate seemed satisfactory to both public officials and residents. The restricted nature of the resident participation, allowing a desirable degree of planning autonomy to officials, may be the key factor. It is suggested that parliamentary regimes may be more capable than the American political system of providing political supervision to participatory programs, thus substantively representing the interests of the poor, and perhaps reconciling participation with planning. |
