I can see how it would be important to get agreement on a definition in 
order to publish a group response on future occasions. However, I'm just not 
sure that this would be that easy, even under the idea of a minimum set of 
core principles. What has been so heartening and encouraging with this 
latest statement, to me, has been a real sense of unity against the idea of 
IAPT. But this is precisely because we often don't have unity on this list, 
which of course is fine and useful, when we're discussing stuff. It's been 
really heated at times, hasn't it? I would imagine there will always we 
stuff that comes up which we can't be united on, despite maybe having agreed 
on a minimum set of core principles (which would possibly change for 
different people through time anyway, perhaps). I know this isn't very 
helpful and doesn't offer any solutions. But maybe how we've done it this 
time is the best we can hope for, and expect that we may have to go through 
a similar process whenever something similar happens in future. As Mark 
said, it's a beautiful piece of collective action, but also just a snapshot 
at this point in time.
Penny


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "John Cromby" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] definitions of CP


> The perceived need for a definition of CP is closely associated with the 
> issue that's just arisen re the (marvelloulsy crafted, perfectly pitched - 
> nice work everyone) media statement the list has just collectively 
> produced.
>
> Aside from this need, there may be other advantages to formulating an 
> agreed definition, although I do think DF has a point when he cautions 
> that this involves the perhaps arbitrary or exclusionary exercise of 
> power.
>
> One way of negotiating the issue might be to try to agree a set of minimum 
> or 'core' principles that one must adhere to in order to be sensibly 
> described as a community psychologist, a very short list of values or 
> beliefs that we'd see as necessary but not sufficient.
>
> But we also need to address the issue of how the list or network can have 
> a voice, and its clear that if we can speak as a group rather than as 
> individuals from a group then - however spurious this may be - we're 
> perceived to have more credibility.
>
> PD's raised the possibility of tackling this by formalising structure, and 
> that's certainly a possible solution.
>
> Another solution would be to adopt a principle that the CP network or list 
> is, on any occasion, simply those who speak in its name. That is, any 
> group of people from the list (we could, perhaps, set a minimum number?) 
> are free to issue statements in the name of the list. Not all of us need 
> agree with all of the fine detail of any such statement, but we could 
> perhaps trust each other to the extent that their general thrust would be 
> acceptable.
>
> This approach would work best in conjunction with the 'core principles' 
> idea, since these would then act as some kind of guarantor that what goes 
> out is (broadly) acceptable to (almost) all of us. It has the advantage of 
> retaining maximum flexibilty and speed of response, and of allowing 
> various tendencies within CP to own a voice -albeit within the constraints 
> of whatever 'core' principles were adopted.
>
> I have no firms views on this issue, but push this out simply as food for 
> thought. I strongly agree with PD's point, though, that we should quickly 
> move towards a position where being able to take political action in the 
> name of the list/network is possible.
>
> J.
> ___________________________________
> COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in the UK.
> To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website:
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/COMMUNITYPSYCHUK.HTML
> For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator Rebekah Pratt on 
> [log in to unmask] or Grant Jeffrey on [log in to unmask] 

___________________________________
COMMUNITYPSYCHUK - The discussion list for community psychology in the UK.
To unsubscribe or to change your details visit the website:
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/COMMUNITYPSYCHUK.HTML
For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator Rebekah Pratt on [log in to unmask] or Grant Jeffrey on [log in to unmask]