Hi Craig, you've mentioned this a couple of times now and it would be interesting to hear more about it. Both the notion that human activity has limited influence over climate (I presume you might have someone like Bjorn Lomborg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bj%C3%B8rn_Lomborg in mind?) and the kind of vested interests crerading and plugging this concept might serve.
John
________________________________________________ Dr John McGowan, Year/Academic Director, Centre for Applied Social and Psychological Development, Canterbury Christchurch University, Salomons Broomhill Road Southborough Tunbridge Wells Kent TN3 0TG +44 (0)1892 507778 [log in to unmask] www.salomonscaspd.org.uk www.canterbury.ac.uk
________________________________
From: The UK Community Psychology Discussion List on behalf of CRAIG NEWNES
Sent: Fri 17/04/2009 11:30 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate change - room for equality and diversity
Does ANYONE on the list understand that the "idea" of climate change serves vested interests?
Craig
--- On Fri, 17/4/09, John McGowan <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: John McGowan <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate change - room for equality and diversity
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Friday, 17 April, 2009, 9:19 PM
A little late to this. The prospect of a conference on these issues sounds very
interesting. I'm genuinely curious as to the contribution psychological
thinking can make in these areas. Had a look at the Manchester website. It looks
as if it is quite conprehensive in some ways. It does however seem to place
grerat faith in local production of commodities as a way of reducing carbon
emmissions. This often seems quite questionable. My view of this is a little
skewed I think by my local transition town group (Lewes in East Sussex) who
basically seem to be a club of middle class people who really struggle to say
anything relevant to the wider community and place all thier faith in the notion
of local purchasing and a large (and incredibly widely publicised) LETs scheme
which seems to have little demostrable value beyond novelty.
I also wonder about if a climate change adgenda with a social justice one as
the two may not always be the most natural bedfellows. Obviously the reality is
that poor people tend to get disproportionately screwed by climate change but
the debate often tends to scapegoat them too (flying too much, or shopping in
ASDA os whatever etc). It leaves me curious as to how, short of taking a
completely dystopian view that the collapse of many familier entities is
imminent, is is possible to involve wider communities in initiatives relevant to
them. Especially in tough economic times wiere the low road to ASDA may look
more attractive.
There is a case to be made that a number of capitalist tools such as managed
markets might have some controbution to make if the caps can be brought low
enough. This kind of tool does seem to have had a powerful effect on acid rain.
Anyway, friday night and perhaps am not making much sense.
John
________________________________________________ Dr John McGowan, Year/Academic
Director, Centre for Applied Social and Psychological Development, Canterbury
Christchurch University, Salomons Broomhill Road Southborough Tunbridge Wells
Kent TN3 0TG +44 (0)1892 507778 [log in to unmask]
www.salomonscaspd.org.uk www.canterbury.ac.uk
________________________________
From: The UK Community Psychology Discussion List on behalf of Annie Mitchell
Sent: Wed 15/04/2009 3:28 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate change -
room for equality and diversity
Yes. Following though on this link, you can find
in an interview reported on BBC home page, Ian Stewart from University of
Plymouth School of Earth, Ocean and Environmental Science who presented BBC
Earth: Climate Wars, saying stuff that surely should give us pause as
(community) psychologists and get us thinking about our role/contribution ( or
lack of so far) (I've cut and pasted):
If society is to make any progress on effectively dealing with climate change
at a regional or global level, what is imperative is that ordinary people help
build a political climate at grass-roots level that accepts the problem exists
and demands some serious actions by business and government. For me, that begins
with people accepting that there is no hiding place left in the science - the
overwhelming consensus of the vast body of scientists that study climate is that
the trends we are seeing in the air, the oceans and in our ecosystems are
entirely consistent with the theory of global warming, while the alternatives
offered by sceptical scientists - even the much heralded role of the Sun - so
far fail that test.
Blaming scientific uncertainty is now not an option to delay action. Sure,
actions by individuals can make a difference, but real progress will only come
when individuals come together with a strong, common voice to demand that
rhetoric turns into regulation. And that's where I see my role - in
convincing ordinary folk that this is an issue that they should care about, not
because it will affect them but, more insidiously, it will be their legacy to
their kids and grandkids.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/f/t.gif<[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image005.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image005.png>
PROGRAMME INFO:
· Network Radio
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/radio/wk38/>
· Nations
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/nations/index.shtml>
· Feature Films
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/films/index.shtml>
· The Week's Guests
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/guests/index.shtml>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/f/t.gif<[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png>
NETWORK TV
http://www.bbc.co.uk/f/t.gif<[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image007.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image007.png>
· Week 3 (17-23 Jan)
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/2009/wk3/>
· Week 2 (10-16 Jan)
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/2009/wk2/>
· Week 1 (3-9 Jan)
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/2009/wk1/>
· Week 52/53 (20 Dec-2 Jan)
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk52/>
· Week 51 (13-19 Dec)
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk51/>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/f/t.gif<[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png>
NETWORK TV - FEATURES
· Highlights of the week
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/index.shtml>
· Earth - The Climate Wars Feature
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/feature_earth.shtml>
· Tess Of The D'Urbervilles Feature
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/feature_tess.shtml>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/f/t.gif<[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png>
NETWORK TV - DAYS
· Unplaced programmes
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/unplaced.shtml>
· Saturday 13 Sep 2008
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/sat.shtml>
· Sunday 14 Sep 2008
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/sun.shtml>
· Monday 15 Sep 2008
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/mon.shtml>
· Tuesday 16 Sep 2008
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/tue.shtml>
· Wednesday 17 Sep 2008
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/wed.shtml>
· Thursday 18 Sep 2008
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/thu.shtml>
· Friday 19 Sep 2008
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/fri.shtml>
· 7-day print version
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/print/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/wk38/7day.shtml>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/f/t.gif<[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png>
Information for journalists
<http://www.bbc.co.uk/pressoffice/proginfo/tv/infoforjournalists.shtml>
http://www.bbc.co.uk/f/t.gif<[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20[COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png>
From: The UK Community Psychology Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of richard pemberton
Sent: 15 April 2009 14:33
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate change -
room for equality and diversity
Don't offset - sandbag
<http://pagead2.googlesyndication.com/aclk?sa=l&ai=BtxVq7ODlSeHFKIiGnwPJ0oTGC5H5-4kB4_yY6AvAjbcBsMwLEAEYASCGj4ACKAQ4AFDgo963_v____8BYLu-roPQCrIBCWdtYWlsLmNvbcgBAdoBMGh0dHA6Ly9nbWFpbC5jb20vN3M0NTB3bmVpYnZlZHdwM3Q3OXoyMmdjcjNwOTE4bYACAakC5eDRw6L7uD6oAwHoA_0D6AO0A-gD2gPoA_wE9QMCAAAE&num=1&sig=AGiWqtw3rlIeCxkhRQtFfODugeWNUIwaFg&adurl=http://sandbag.org.uk>
- sandbag.org.uk <http://sandbag.org.uk/> - Make a real difference in
the battle against climate change.
Richard
On 4/15/09, CRAIG NEWNES <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
The "idea" of climate change is indeed promoted by individual action
with vested interest (selling tropical plants in Halifax, anyone). But
"climate change" happens in cycles far removed from human endeavour.
The climate is way beyond human control or influence - unlike newspaper articles
which are wriiten by over-excited "experts" getting their slice of
cake.
Craig
--- On Tue, 14/4/09, David Fryer <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: David Fryer <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate change -
room for equality and diversity
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tuesday, 14 April, 2009, 11:53 PM
Hi Craig,
Obvious but ... to assert that destructive climate change has been brought
about by the behaviours (or actions as I prefer prefer) of individual people
and that it can be reversed or prevented from getting even worse by
psychologists changing the behaviour or action of individual people one at a
time, as 'institutional' psychologists do, even if they were effective
in doing so which, as you say, is not the case, is not only silly but hugely
problematic at practical, theoretical and ideological levels. That needs
pointing out ... but we claim as 'community' psychologists to know
something about less problematic ways of deploying psychology. So why not do
both through a uk ccp climate change initiative? No point in pointing at the
mainstream acritical institutional psychologists saying 'told you so' as
the water covers all our heads?
By the way I am not sure psychologists need to know a lot about behaviour
change to be complicit in it happening ... the roles of psychology in
governmentality and control of behaviour / action) have been pretty persuasively
spelled out by Foucault and Rose in my view.
David
________________________________
From: CRAIG NEWNES <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, 14 April, 2009 23:01:19
Subject: Re: UKCP Conference addressing climate change - room for equality and
diversity
David, Psychologists know FUCK ALL about behaviour change. As you know, it just
happens, and we don't know why (even if you were to believe in the rather
silly concept of "why"). To claim they know might give them 5 minutes
of fame but, hey, look what just happened to "financial experts"
Cx
--- On Tue, 14/4/09, Fryer, David <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Fryer, David <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate change -
room for equality and diversity
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tuesday, 14 April, 2009, 1:56 PM
Hi Craig, I agree that any achieved progressive change would be wonderful
and worth more than any number of futile gestures. I agree that any small
achievable change re psy complex tyranny would be really worthwhile but think
any small achievable change re climate change would be worthwhile too (both may
be possible simultaneously given some psy-complexperimenters' insistence
that climate change can be addressed through behaviour change) - we would not
need to address the whole problem of climate change (or psycomplex tyranny) in
order to achieve something worthwhile? However there seems to be enthusiasm
on the list to see what we can offer distinctively as community critical
psychologists in relation to climate change so why not go for that as a
starting place? David ________________________________ From: The UK
Community Psychology Discussion List on behalf of CRAIG NEWNES Sent: Tue
14/04/2009 22:00 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: UKCP
Conference addressing climate change - room for equality and diversity
Some time ago I suggested that the list considers putting effort (not talk)
into ONE small achievable change. Climate Change seems a little - er - big and
way outside of human, let alone Community Psychology control. It's not as if
there aren't countless groups protesting, marching, publicly debating the
economics of American and post-industrial exploitation etc, etc. Agreeing on ONE
focus does not take away from the need to address process, mutual respect and
so on but it might make a small difference -
to us and the wider community. We could, for example, as a group voacalise
the need for a ban on psychiatric and psychological diagnoses. We could fight
for ONE example of the PSYcomplex's tyranny to be overturned - e.g., there
is a case in Holland of parents trying to have their son killed (euthanased) on
the basis he is diagnosed with ADHD - this has been in the courts for three
years and has yet to appear in the UK press. In a way, it doesn't matter
which target we aim at, as long as it is achievable. After all cling film was
originally designed exclusively for the Apollo missions - and now it's
taken over the world. Craig --- On Tue, 14/4/09, David Fryer
<[log in to unmask]> wrote: From: David Fryer
<[log in to unmask]> Subject: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference
addressing climate change - room for equality and diversity To:
[log in to unmask] Date: Tuesday, 14 April, 2009, 1:36 AM
Dear Jacqui I will reply separately to the two issues so
they have different subject lines for ongoing discussion In case
it was not clear I agree that equality and diversity are absolutely key issues
in relation to climate change and would hope and expect that they would be
addressed either directly or indirectly in all conference debates. But I am
suggesting we try to focus debate at our conferences rather more in the future
than in the past. I suggest a community critical conference focusing on climate
change which addressed issues of equality, diversity, participation, power,
ideology, praxis, poverty in relation to climate change would be exciting and
potentially more productive re leading to action than our meetings have tended
to be recently. I think a title directing people to the focal issue of climate
change from a community critical perspective and some fairly tight reviewing of
submissions could help produce a more
focused and more effective conference whilst still making room for all.
Of course we will all have ideas and it will be the conference organisers
... Annie, Lisa and their colleagues who should decide on what form the
conference takes if they decide they are going to proceed but I took Annie to
request list people to contribute their ideas etc so am glad you and I are
doing so Since my earlier message I heard of a conference which
may also be of interest not so much because many of us will be able to present
actually or virtually but because it illustrates a different and interesting
way of tackling the issues SIXTH INTERNATIONAL
CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENTAL, CULTURAL, ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY
University of Cuenca, Ecuador 5-7 January 2010
http://www.SustainabilityConference.com
<http://www.sustainabilityconference.com/>
<http://www.sustainabilityconference.com/> best wishes,
David
________________________________ From: jacqui lovell
<[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, 14 April, 2009 5:01:29 Subject: Re: UKCP Conference
addressing climate change from a community critical standpoint?
"tetchy" David, I prefer to think that from the frustration comes the
growth! I agree with David that a focus may be good but can we
leave room for equality and diversity in this as well please Annie, I like your
original title, "equality, sustainability and community well-being"
as this has room for all. Jac
________________________________ Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 22:45:58
+0000 From: [log in to unmask] Subject: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]
UKCP Conference addressing climate change from a community critical standpoint?
To: [log in to unmask] Dear Annie,
I think your tentative suggestion of the UKCP Conference
addressing climate change from a community critical standpoint is really
valuable. We seem to have got into a pattern of organising our conferences to
be as wide in topic as possible so that anyone interested in CP could present
whatever they are doing. That is well intentioned but leads to very general
conference conference reflected in all inclusive titles (even 'Equality,
Sustainability and Community Well-Being' verges on that). That has been OK
up to a point but we have had some rather unfocused and sometimes defensive or
even tetchy meetings. I think it is worth trying a different tack. I think
going for a specific focused problem such as climate change, ensuring it is
addressed searchingly from a community critical psychology perspective, and
designing it from the start to be ecologically sound in process (e.g. reducing
its carbon footprint) and action oriented in outcome, would be good. In line
with our approach, this can be
inclusive in the sense that people need not be experts in climate change to
contribute but can apply whatever experience, interests and skills they have to
climate change issues. For example there has been a lot of interest in the NHS
and 'the market' on this list lately and some might like to think about
how the NHS and/or market are related to climate change. Others might be
interested in interrelations between poverty and climate change ... you might
remember that Cathy McCormack talked to us at one conference about radical
tenants' activism in relation to damp housing, health and mental health
which also addressed climate changes (the poorest in Glasgow were spending
massive proportions of their inadequate benefit to heat the sky yet shivering
and suffering damp related illness and misery. Others with participatory working
skills might like to think how to deploy them re climate change. Others can
develop effective praxis in related to
climate change. Others can critique the discipline of psychology in relation
to climate change etc. I think there is a lot of important international
lessons to learn. For example Trisha Conway taught me recently that middle
class climate change activists have much to learn from the US environmental
justice movement within which poor Americans, often black, have collectively
fearlessly challenged the (re) location of their communities in ecologically
toxic sites. I strongly support you in thinking about hosting
the next CP conference in Devon in Spring 2010 but when you are thinking about
dates please remember the III International Conference on Community Psychology
will be held in Puebla, México, from 3rd to 5th June 2010 please try to avoid
a clash of dates as some - including me - might want to attend both. Just
before or just after would be great (for me) David
________________________________ From: Annie
Mitchell <[log in to unmask]> To:
[log in to unmask] Sent: Friday, 10 April, 2009 18:45:25
Subject: Re: thanks Annie Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a
market-based NHS - BY 30 APRIL Dear David and all,
Seems unlikely to be a co-incidence, as you say - frustrating process and v
unsettling as you say re mainstream academic and applied psychology uncritical
position re climate change - and it sounds from what you say that the latest
planned BPS event will, true to current BPS form, be pretty uncritical...be
great if we as community psychologists could assemble a more critical take
(beyond " large scale behaviour change projects" ), that puts together
the social inequalities agenda, along with the climate change/peak oil issue
and economic collapse ( linking perhaps with some of the more critical medics
who are writing on this topic using public health arguments as their way in) . I
thought
that mark's essay on the site he posted us to came the closest yet of
anything I;ve read to do that - ( do read it everyone who is interested in this
debate!); also there is a good chapter on this in Richard Wilkinson's/
kate Picket's Spirit Level isnt there . A community psych
conference might be a good way to take a more critical stance... lisa thorne
and i are hoping to be able to announce via this list by end of April that we
would be willing and able to host next conference in Devon spring 2010, but we
are still not certain ... meantime, at this pre-planning stage - any comments
re whether this would make a good conference theme very welcome.: we are
thinking so far something along the lines of "equality, sustainability
and community well-being". Good wishes, Annie
________________________________________ From: The UK
Community Psychology Discussion List [[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of
David Fryer [[log in to unmask]] Sent: 10 April 2009 11:31
To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] thanks
Annie Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS - BY 30 APRIL
Dear Annie and everyone on this list, Annie wrote
"I know David Fryer was involved in what he called a "high
level" BPS event planning re climate change which didn't happen for
some reason ( unexplained)." Here is an explanation. There
are two parts to the explanation. After consulting people who
had been elected Fellows of the BPS (collectively sometimes known as 'The
College of Fellows') the Committee of the College of Fellows of the BPS, of
which I was a member and then Chairperson, decided to address a series of
issues identified by Fellows as important. The first of these was a day
conference on community psychology. This was held in London. Half of the day
involved presentations by Ed Cairns
(Northern Ireland), Serdar Degirmencioglu (Turkey), Reachout Mental Health
Expressive Arts group (Scotland), Cathy McCormack (Scotland) and me. The second
half was discussion. As you can tell it was critical in standpoint. It was a
sell out. The second issue to be addressed was 'psychology and climate
change'. Lots of effort went into planning this, a date was set and Ian
Parker invited as Key Speaker and accepted. Ian was preparing his talk which
promised to argue something along the lines that neo-liberal manifestations of
capitalism required the rape of the planet and the exploitation of its peoples
and psychology was complicit with the maintenance of the current neo-liberal
status quo. Officers of the BPS then got in touch with the CoF and told us that
the Society had decided to put a lot of resources and effort into a big climate
change event, that the CoF climate change event could detract / distract
attention from this /duplicate /
etc and asked if the CoF would go in with the bigger event instead of doing
its own thing. After much agonising the CoF decided to do that but only on
condition that the invitation issued to Ian Parker was honoured and he spoke at
the bigger do. That was agreed at the time. See below. Note here though that
shortly after this, the Society decided to reconsider if there was a role for
the CoF and eventually decided there was not and to wind it up and that has now
happened. As Chair of the CoF I had been asked to sit on a
Society Committee to develop the bigger Climate Change event. It was made clear
at the first meeting that the new committee did not consider itself bound by
the decision to invite Ian Parker to address the new conference and decided not
to do so. There were quite a few meetings and a lot of work was done. I was not
that happy with the discussions myself as it seemed to me to be largely
acritical and individualistic.
Nevertheless I persisted in arguing for community psychology and critical
inputs at the conference. Then out of the blue the BPS decided that it was in
financial difficulties, that it needed to trim its activities and suddenly the
climate change conference - even in its incipient conservative version - was
put on the back burner. Even so the committee persisted and the latest plans
are for a half day meeting maybe in October which will publicise
multi-disciplinary and multi-centred large scale behaviour change projects
drawing on psychological research at the principle research centres and then
give short presentations on contributions of health, counselling, clinical,
organisational & community psychology I think there is
something very coincidental about two climate change conferences being
cancelled. I also think there i something very unsettling about the uncritical
position of mainstream psychology re climate change.
Psychology and climate change is at risk of becoming a middle class hobby
horses concerned with getting people to recycle their claret bottles. The
complicity of institutional psychology (including clinical psychology) with the
preservation of the neo-liberal status quo which is hell bent on exploitative
expansionism damaging people and ecosystems is not receiving the critique it
requires. David ________________________________
From: Annie Mitchell <[log in to unmask]> To:
[log in to unmask] Sent: Friday, 10 April, 2009 8:15:05
Subject: Re: thanks Annie Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based
NHS - BY 30 APRIL thanks Mark excellent links. So great to read
what you are doing in Manchester. Here in Devon some of us are involved in the
Transition Town movement. Working with others re climate change
surely should be now our top priority . It links with everything community
psychology is about: challenging power and vested interests re consumerism
and capitalism, bottom up political action, reducing social inequalities
internationally as well as nationally, linking local l with global concerns;
community well-being and resilience with sustainability etc etc; not to mention
leaving a world behind so our grandchildren can live. It is very
disappointing how behind the times both academic and applied psychology is on
this topic; I know there was a recent special issue in the Psychologist
recently with a few good articles ( none very radical though) but for example
almost every issue now of BMJ has climate change/ public health in there
somewhere. I know David Fryer was involved in what he called a
"high level" BPS event planning re climate change which didn't
happen for some reason ( unexplained) . Now - if I were less of
a luddite I guess this is the moment when I should turn to the new technology
Grant has initiated for us, as there are at least 2 different topics
budding off here: save our NHS ( can Sustainable Communities Act help etc etc);
climate change action ( what could/shuld community psycholgists do etc etc).
Annie ________________________________________
From: The UK Community Psychology Discussion List
[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
On Behalf Of Mark Burton
[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] Sent: 09 April
2009 23:26 To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] thanks Annie Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to
a market-based NHS - BY 30 APRIL Thanks Annie Good to see you are
ative onclimate change - despite my recent attempts ther has been almost zero
interest from the list on this and related topics. Anyway I'm quite busy
on a couple of inititiatives
http://greendealmanchester.wordpress.com/ includes my latest analysis
of th 'crisis' http://www.calltorealaction.wordpress.com/
Mark > further to my email below , here attached
for those who want to know more, > or who want to alert others, the
Local Works guide to the Sustainable > Communitities Act. >
> Annie > > >
________________________________________ > From: The UK Community
Psychology Discussion List >
[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
On Behalf Of Annie Mitchell >
[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
> Sent: 09 April 2009 22:31 > To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS - BY 30
> APRIL > > I wonder whether actions under the
umbrella of the new
Sustainable > Communitites Act may be medium/ long term helpful re NHS (
and potentially > in other socially progressive ways too). >
> This Act is being described ( by some) as the biggest constitutional
> change in UK for decades. > > I have been exploring it
because our local climate change organisations > in Devon are very
hopeful that it may assist with democratic grass roots > bottom up change
towards dealing with/ mitigating the effects of climate > change and
peak oil. I haven't fully got my head around it but I;ll do my
> best to explain as I understand it - and would be keen to have comments
> from others - eg Mark -( I know you are active re climate change/
> chaos) ? - who know more than me: > > The general idea is
that the Act enables local authorities ( they can to > chose whether
to opt in) to receive, consider and put forward for national >
consideration, locally prioritised suggestions from local individuals or
> organisations about changes in central government legislation that would,
> if enacted, help build more sustainable communitities ie enhance , >
social, economic and environmental functioning . These local suggestions >
will then go to a panel at central level, who will decide on national
> priorities. Central government has a duty to reach agreement on how to
> take ( some of) these forward; with a published action plan on which
> central government may be held to account by the electorate. The new bit
> here is the duty to reach agreement, so this is ( in theory anyway) not
> just another empty consultative process. It's ( intended to be) about
> medium and long term change from the bottom up. > >
The trick will be to suggest, in solidarity with others, suggestions that
> can make a positive difference through
legislative changes. there are > many many pitfalls ( eg will local
grass roots suggestions simply tend to > promote the interests of the
haves versus the have-nots?) but this is an > important Act, which we
need to get our collective heads around.. This > will be an annual process;
the first wave is happening now. > > Find out more from
Local Works, the campaigning organisation who have been > behind the Act,
on http://www.localworks.org/ > > Happy spring time, all ( at
least, to all in UK - happy times to others > elsewhere) . >
> Annie > > > > >
________________________________________ > From: The UK Community
Psychology Discussion List >
[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
On Behalf Of Frederic Stansfield >
[[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
> Sent: 09
April 2009 17:07 > To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS - BY 30
> APRIL > > I am not sure how to go forward on this.
> > Let's start by thinking how the NHS was originally set up.
It wasn't > totally a top down nationalised industry run from
Whitehall. In fact, much > of it was under the control of local
government. Westminster ran centrally > some parts of the NHS where
national strategic management was necessary > or, as in the case of
teaching hospitals, thought to be necessary. County > Councils ran services
that needed to be provided over a fairly wide area > such as the Ambulance
Service. But many local services, such as local > hospitals and the
management of GPs, where run by District Councils, under > the powerful
guidance of a doctor who held the position
of Medical Health > Officer. The situation was rather more complicated
because of varying > council repsonsibilities, e.g. many larger towns
and cities were unitary > County Boroughs. But you will get the idea.
The NHS was not a separate > bureaucracy, but an integral part of
British democracyin which > responsibility for each part of the service
was devolved to the lowest > practical level (the European principle of
"Subsiduarity"). And there were > professional advisers to
the decision-makers with sufficient power to stop > elected members
doing silly things through ignorance. > > The trouble was
that professionals didn't like to be accountable > (accountability is
always uncomfortable!). The Tories used this to split > of the NHS into
indirectly appointed authorities in the 1974 > re-organisation of local
Government. Ever since, we have seen > accountability destroyed bit by bit,
for instance by replacement of local > suthority nomination of
Health Authority members by Westminster patronage, > and then the
whole charade of private enterprise tendering. The result is > the
badly managed, over-centralised, unfit for purpose, poor value for >
money, shambles that we have today. And the professional doctors etc. who
> didn't like oversight by amateurs now find they have got much much
worse. > > Come back to the current discussion. We are being
encouraged to > contribute to a consultation process on improving
market processes within > the NHS. But the idea of an NHS, inherently
a public service, being > submitted to market forces is inherently
flawed. The whole mess is beyond > reform. It needs to be swept
away, as after World War 2 (although with > less compromise to
professional interests) and replaced by a structure > which, as between
1948 and 1974 but with
improvements, devolves > responsibilty for health services to
directly elected representatives at > the lowest possible level, supported
by Medical Officers of Health > combining the role of professional
adviser and chief adminstrator. > > In the case of Community
Psychology, it is difficult to see why services > should not be
provided and administered in electoral units smaller than > the current
English District Authorities. Clinical Psychology may not be > devolvable
to quite such an extent, but all the same it could be locally > run in the
vast majority of cases. > > If this seems silly, ask yourself why
the United Kingdom's National Health > Service is, I believe, the
third largest employer in the world (after > Indian Railways and the
Chinese Army) when the United Kingdom is nothing > like the third largest
country. Surely the answer is that other countries > think it is a
bad way to run a health service (most other Western > countries
use insurance based services with saftey nets). But will a >
Whitehall led consultation take such a glaringly obvious point on board?
> You know the answer, don't you. > > If we want UK
health services brought back under democratic control, > wherever
possible under local government, the fundamental question is what >
actions will be effective towards this end. Is responding to a >
consultation process that will only act on answers already sharing the >
bueaucrats' mistaken values such an action? > > Frederic
Stansfield > > --- On Thu, 9/4/09, CRAIG NEWNES
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
wrote: > From: CRAIG NEWNES
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS - BY 30
> APRIL > To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thursday, 9 April, 2009, 1:23 AM > > What a lovely
idea "choice" is - for marketeers > Craig >
> --- On Thu, 9/4/09, Wendy Franks
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
> From: Wendy Franks
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS - BY 30
> APRIL > To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thursday, 9 April, 2009, 12:15 AM > > Hello all,
> > I'm not sure how exactly how to fit it into this argument,
but I'm going > to throw something in anyway, and hope someone who
knows more about it > (...Mark? Carolyn? others?) can help me out with
the details. > > I'm learning a
bit about Boundary Critique at the moment, and am hoping to > find
it useful in developing some coherence for myself around >
participatory research. I wonder if it is helpful in this argument too.
> As far as I can reasonably simplify it (always tricky to simplify
> something complex that you're in the early stages of grasping, so
sorry > about this), Boundary Critique enables us to take a critical
position on > where/how/with whom we draw the boundaries around an object
of discussion, > interest, study, etc. In a way, it reminds me a bit
of quantum uncertainty > in physics (of which I also have a very, very
tentative grasp!) - in that > - the way in which you choose to measure a
phenomenon (as a wave or > particle for example) has an impact on the
measurement you get. In this > case, we can make choices about whether we
look at the NHS as though it is > a market, and make certain
judgements and claims about it on that basis. > Another of many
options is that we can also look at it as if it is a > service
(shock, horror!) that is, as John Cromby expressed it, something > that is
there to care for, heal and if we could so imagine, even nurture > us.
> > Each way of addressing the issue at hand is likely to produce
different > conclusions. Of the things that I find appealing about
Boundary Critique > (as described by Midgley, 2000, in 'Systemic
Intervention'), is the > recognition of the role of ethics and
values in informing the judgements > we make. > > I think
my point might be something like this: > Of course we can look at
everything we do as if it is in some way driven > by a market and all the
stuff that gets exchanged in that market as > commodoties.
> Or we can choose to conceptualise all of those things in different terms,
> and make
different judgements about them informed by other frameworks. >
> I think I'll leave it there for now. I'm only half way through
Midgley's > book, it's getting late, and I might get a bit unstuck!
> > Of course, it would be great for me if someone with a
better understanding > could suggest how Boundary Critique could
help with this argument. Always > good to have an idea of how theory
works in practice. > > Thanks, > > Wendy
> > > > --- On Wed, 8/4/09, John McGowan
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
wrote: > From: John McGowan
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS - BY
30 > APRIL > To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wednesday, 8 April,
2009, 9:58 PM > > > I clearly did an absolutely
rubbish job of trying say what I was trying to > say > about
markets. The gist of it was that marketisation of the NHS might not > be a
> completely unalloyed evil and that "resisting it
absolutly" might be > going a bit far. I realise this view might
be a tough sell in this crowd > but > it's worth go. >
> Penny Priest came closest to what I was meaning I think when she said
> mentioned > market corrections. I've been wondering lately if
markets (as opposed to > The > Market) are quite as bad as I thought
they were in say 1985. For starters > we're all part of them. Every
time we by or choose somethine we're part > of a process of
compiling collective judgements on commodities or services > or >
innovations. This goes from which which care we drive, coffe we drink ISP >
hosting the community psych
website or whatever. Some things flourish and > other >
things don't make the cut and often the way that gets decided is by a
> bunch > of collective judgements saying one thing is more
suitable than another. > You may > not always think we get
it right (my wife would rather we used hot air > balloons >
instead of planes) but a lot of the time we do. All of these activities >
are > basically are markets choosing one thing over another and there is
quite a > bit > of literature on the conditions needed for them to
function well or badly. > > One of the features of the NHS is
that it has adopted certain market > principles > but is less
engaged with others. If two groups are tendering for a service > it is
> possible to choose one group over another on the basis that
they're > cheaper > but the two basically selling the
same thing: whats recommended by
NICE. > We get > the cost control side but not the
innovation that would happen in a real > business. > >
The reason for using IAPT as an example (other than the special feeling
> help > for it on this list) is that I think it is worth
appropriating commercial > language to point out that one way of looking
at it is as a very poor > business > model. In some ways its
like if Lord Layard took over my local shop. > Implausibile and not
entirley reassuring given his record bu who knows > where >
this recession might lead. You can imagine how his plan would look. >
> "We have good professional evidence that bread is a versatile
product and > will be very popular therfore that's what I will
sell. My advisors in the > baking industry assure me that the trials
they've conducted will translate > into consumer demand".
> > At this point I'd be inclinded to
toddle along and ask a few obvious > questions: > Q: Don't you
think it might be worth selling other products? What about > milk or
cheese? > A: As and when the evidence becomes available we will consider
stocking > other > things, but my baking advisers point out
dairy products have been sold for > years > without RCT
evidence of consumer appeal. > > Q:You don't think this bread
thing is a passing fancy then? Surely there > is > evidence for
other things > A: The bulk of the evidence is mainly there for bread
so that's the way > we're going. > > Q: I at
least fancy a few lentils or maybe some baked beans. > A: I am convinded
that "third-wave" breads such as wholemeal and > multigrain can
address consumer demand in these areas. > > > I could
(and I'm sure you could) go on and on but I think that joke has >
gone too far already. In this
situation I could do one of two things. One > would > be
to go and get evidence for the saleability of beans, chocolate, Cillit
> Bang, > Sepcial Brew or whatever else I fancied. this would
probably take a few > years. > The other (which ould take 5
minutes) would be to go to the shop down the > road >
along with most of the other people in my neighbourhood and watch Lord L's
> shop close after a few days. > > My point is really
that in the NHS its difficult to go to the IAPT service > down
> the road beacuse there isn't one. If there was (and I'd be happy
to take > tenders for 173 million from users of this list) it might just
turn out to > be > better. > > Its always
been difficult to get this sort of market aggregation of > judgements
> in the NHS. Darzi's proposals might actually lead to some kind effect
of > collective judgement around some
aspects of GP services (i.e. the surgery > with > rude staff
and a crappy appointment system may have to shape up). Making > such
> judgements around competing variations on something like IAPT would need
a > lot > of thought. I'm not for a moment trying to contend
that this is an ideal > solution but in the face of the NICE guidelines
I'm wondering if we need > more not less of this. >
> Happy Easter > > John > >
> ________________________________________________ Dr John McGowan, >
Year/Academic > Director, Centre for Applied Social and Psychological
Development, > Canterbury > Christchurch University, Salomons
Broomhill Road Southborough Tunbridge > Wells > Kent TN3 0TG
+44 (0)1892 507778
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> www.salomonscaspd.org.uk <http://www.salomonscaspd.org.uk/>
www.canterbury.ac.uk <http://www.canterbury.ac.uk/> >
>
________________________________ > > From: The UK
Community Psychology Discussion List on behalf of CRAIG > NEWNES
> Sent: Wed 08/04/2009 4:53 PM > To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS - BY
30 > APRIL > > > Anyone with responsibility
for budgets in the NHS will recognize this red > herring before you can
say, " THE NHS exists to subsidize Big Pharma and > its PSY
acolytes." For almost 20 years I defended a psy-budget against the >
so-called overspend on GP drug budgets. In 2006 the drug budget in >
Shropshire > was ?5M in the red so the budget managers were told to, yet
again, cut > posts to > pay the bill. The NHS is already a
marketplace. Thank goodness that the > IAPT > scheme will
enable all these unemployed NHS staff to go to CBT therapists
> and - > er - get jobs as cleaners or whatever. >
Craig > > --- On Wed, 8/4/09, John Cromby
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote: >
> > From: John Cromby
<[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> >
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS - >
BY 30 APRIL > To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wednesday, 8 April, 2009, 4:40 PM > > > Our
health needs and social care needs have been thoroughly > distorted by
> top-down policy imperatives and so-called 'evidence based
> practice', > and > consistently subordinated to budgetary
constraints that prioritise > the > fighting > of
neo-colonial wars. Meanwhile, on the home front the 'war on >
terror' > legitimates extensive and growing government spending
on > technologies to > monitor > and control us rather
than care for, heal or - dare I even say it > - nurture > us.
> Legitimate challenges to this insane situation, this situation >
structured by > an > insane rationality, are increasingly
portrayed as 'extremist'. > And, > consonant with its
own rational insanity, the reproduction of this > exploitative
> social order is to be achieved by any means that those in power >
imagine that > they can get away with. As of today, it seems that this can
even > include > telling > lies about and excusing the
death of a bystander caught up in last > week's > anti-G20
demonstrations in London: Ian Tomlinson, who was beaten > and pushed to
> the floor by the police, without provocation, just minutes before
> he died of a > heart attack. > > In this
rationally insane situation, insane
solutions to > manufactured problems > can gain a
superficial appeal. Marketisation of the NHS or social > care is just
> such an insane solution. We should resist it absolutely. >
> J. > > > > > John McGowan
wrote: > > This is extremely interesting. Thank you so much for
sending it > to the > list. > > I've been
thinking recently however that perhaps an increase in > certain kinds
marketisation might actually be a helpful in the > NHS. In some
> way > markets (i.e. aggregating the people's decisions about
alternative > business > models) could potentially provide an
alternative to the rigidity > of the NICE > guidelines. The Dazi
review tries to create a market of sorts > through, > nominally
> at least, prioritising choice. > > IAPT is potentially
quite a good example of where markets > might >
actually > help. I can't help feeling that if there was 173
million quid > available > and > the question of improving
return to (and retention within) work > was put out to > tender
some very innovative proposals (including some from members > of this
> list) > might have come back. Perhaps they might even have
produced better > results > than > the plan
we've got! > > John McGowan > > > >
________________________________ > > > > From: The UK
Community Psychology Discussion List on behalf of > Wendy >
Franks > > Sent: Tue 07/04/2009 9:23 PM > > To:
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> > Subject: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] FW: Say no to a market-based NHS -
> BY 30 > APRIL > > > > > >
Hello all, > > In case you are not already receiving these
emails, here's an > opportunity to voice your objections. All the
best, Wendy > > > > > > > > >
> From NHS Support Federation, a founder organisation of > Keep
Our NHS > Public > > NHS services are now to be provided
by a wide range of > organisations all > competing within a market.
The new Co-operation and Competition > Panel >
<http://www.ccpanel.org.uk/> for NHS-funded services is to help >
deliver > the supposed benefits of competition. It will investigate
> potential breaches > of > the Principles and Rules >
<http://www.ccpanel.org.uk/content/Principle-and-rules-for-Cooperation-and-Competition.pdf>
> as defined by the Department of Health. It will also advise the
> Department of > Health and the foundation trust regulator
Monitor. The > Co-operation and > Competition Panel is a misnomer
as its
remit is weighted so > heavily in favour > of >
promoting competition, whilst neglecting the considerable benefits >
of > cooperation. > > > > We need your help to
respond forcefully to the Panel's > current > consultation and
to lobby MPs. Please write a letter objecting to > the > imposition
> of competition and commercial values on the NHS and raising the >
crucial > questions listed below. Send your letter to the Co-operation
and > Competition > Panel at the address below and a copy to your MP.
> > > > Send to: Interim Guidelines Consultation, >
Cooperation and Competition > Panel, 1 Horse Guards Road, London,
SW1A 2HQ or email >
[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>.
Respond by 30 April. > > > > Points to make: > >
> > 1. Will the panel ensure that the
alternative of a > publicly led service > is included in
consultations about future tenders? 2. Is > the duplication of >
services to produce choice a good use of resources which > constitutes
economic > efficiency, especially given that the benefits of
competition in > healthcare > are > unproven (indeed Minster of
State Ben Bradshaw said that the "mix > of > competition and
co-operation in the NHS is a unique model in the > world")? >
3. Will the tendering process be fair and > transparent, with no
discrimination > against NHS organisations in favour of either
commercial or > voluntary bodies > or > social
enterprises? 4. Will the public be consulted on an > ongoing basis
about > local tenders e.g. via local involvement networks (LINks)?
5. > Will the panel > foster co-operation not only between
commissioners and providers, > but between
> providers, a hope expressed by Richard Taylor MP in a debate in
> Parliament on > 24 > February? > > > >
> > It is vital to protect and promote a publicly led NHS >
which has an ethos > which is truly patient-centred. We must insist to the
Panel that > our > objections > to the notion of a health
service based on a competitive market > are widely > shared. With
your help we must ensure that our views are not > ignored. >
> > > You can see the consultation paper >
<http://www.ccpanel.org.uk/content/consultation-paper.pdf> , the >
four > guidance documents which are the subject of the consultation,
and > the response > template at >
http://www.ccpanel.org.uk/reports-and-guidance/guidance-documents.html.
> > > > > > Please send us copies of your letters or
emails. Thanks > for your help.
> > NHS Support Federation > > > > >
> ___________________________________ 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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
> any > problems > or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant
Jeffrey >
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK > > For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant > Jeffrey
>
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>) >
> -- ******************************************************** > John
Cromby > Department of Human Sciences > Loughborough University
> Loughborough, Leics > LE11 3TU England > Tel: 01509
223000 > Email: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
> Personal webpage: http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~hujc4/ > Co-Editor,
"Subjectivity": www.palgrave-journals.com/sub >
******************************************************** > >
___________________________________ > 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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK > For any
problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant > Jeffrey
>
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For >
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey >
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK > For any
problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey >
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For any >
problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey >
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For any >
problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey >
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For any >
problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey >
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK > For any
problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey >
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK > For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey >
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([log in to unmask]<mailto:[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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For any
problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For any
problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([log in to unmask]) ________________________________ Get the
New Internet Explore 8 Optimised for MSN. Download Now
<http://extras.uk.msn.com/internet-explorer-8/?ocid=T010MSN07A0716U>
___________________________________ 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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For any problems
or queries, contact the list
moderator: Grant Jeffrey ([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For any problems
or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey ([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For
any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey
([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey ([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/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=COMMUNITYPSYCHUK
For any problems or queries, contact the list moderator: Grant Jeffrey ([log in to unmask])
|
