This paper argues that the development of a deliberative system can be usefully informed by insights gained from the empirical study of minipublic deliberation. It argues that the development of deliberative systems needs to keep an eye on not only the processes whereby arguments are articulated into outcomes; it is also necessary to account for way in which the system shapes and transforms the will of the public — usually expressed in terms of public opinion. The imperative for this approach is illustrated using the example of climate change, particularly in the Australian context, where effective action is very much connected to public opinion, which is itself shaped by the intervention of dominant actors in the public sphere. This raises the question regarding what minipublics can tell us about a ‘legitimate’ outcome that reflects a deliberative form of public will, as well as the sort of dispositions and capabilities involved to achieve them. The paper goes on to argue that there is a need for deliberative theory to develop an account of the ‘deliberative person’ at the heart of the deliberative system drawing on the example of economic theory. While the overt rationalism ascribed to the idea of the economic person is rejected, the paper draws on tentative evidence to suggest what a ‘deliberative person’ might look like and the implications for the development of a deliberative system.
