Well I will at least have some case study material re groups trying to
move the agenda onwards so that local government, RDA and other bodies
plan and act in ways that are proportionate to the challenge.
We are using some survey material in a limited (by resources) way
towards this, but more to illustrate public views than to scientifically
map them.
Frederic Stansfield wrote:
> I haven't been following this thread, but surely we ought to be
> looking at how climate issues impact at the local level. Research on
> attitudes to climate change and programmes for attitude change would
> seem obvious examples of what we should be doing.
>
> For many people, the big environmental issue is the deterioration of
> arrangements to collect waste, or "empty the dustbins" as we called it
> in the good old days. This spreads into the imposition of impractical,
> often "big brother" demands upon ordinary people by "the authorities",
> rather than action relating to government or business
> efficiency. After all, ordinary people have to dispose of packaging
> from the supermarket somewhere, however frequent their
> dustbin collections and whatever the charges.
>
> If we have a conference, what fieldwork or empirical data do people
> have to report at it? Alternatively, how would a
> get-together kick-start such work?
>
> This is exactly the sort of issue where community psychologists should
> be out there on the housing estates etc. working with the people affected.
>
> Frederic Stansfield
>
> --- On *Sun, 19/4/09, Mark Burton /<[log in to unmask]>/* wrote:
>
> From: Mark Burton <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate
> change - room for equality and diversity
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Date: Sunday, 19 April, 2009, 6:56 PM
>
> Maybe they can - Karl Figlio's work on chronic disease used the
> term 'social constitution' to capture this idea. In other words
> the phenomenon has a physical material base and is understood
> (reconstructed?) ideologically.
> Thanks for the Tony Wainwright review - we are talking about CC
> now, but it feels like it's taken a few goes to get here and he
> identifies the same issue. I don't think it's particularly hard
> to analyse the reluctance to face up to CC and peak energy, it's
> about investment (emotional and economic) and dependence.
>
>
> richard pemberton wrote:
>> I am not sure that things can be both real/true and socially
>> constructed?
>>
>> This review by tony wainwright which was in the psychologist a
>> while ago is both interesting and helpful.
>>
>> http://www.isse.ucar.edu/communication/book/pdf/psychologist_bookreview.pdf
>>
>>
>> I am pro the lewes pound and similar initiatives. I dont see it
>> as just middle class posturing. Its launch was truely impressive
>> 600+ out of a population of 12,000. Its worked as a catalyst for
>> a community to grapple with and organise/collectively respond to
>> the implications of climate change(its definately noticeably
>> hotter down here in the south), peak oil, and the relentless
>> march of the supermarkets. I spotted psychology all over the place.
>>
>> Richard
>>
>>
>>
>> On 4/18/09, *Deborah Chinn* <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>> Just because something is real, doesnt mean it's not also
>> socially constructed. Ian Hacking's book is good on the idea
>> that there might be different degrees of social
>> constructedness in different contexts.
>>
>> Actually I think it is a good idea to think about the
>> different discourses that cohere around 'climate change' and
>> wonder which interests they serve. Discourses do have
>> unpredictable and contradictory effects and can be pressed
>> into action by 'goodies' and 'baddies'
>>
>> The other point is whether 'climate change' is a theme that
>> we want to collectively organise around specifically as
>> critical/community psychologists or whatever. Are there
>> communities or groups who are would jump at the chance of
>> getting a psychologist on board to think with them about
>> 'climate change' issues? Or would they rather have a town
>> planner or a gardener, or an engineer?
>>
>> Deborah
>>
>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Burton"
>> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Sent: Saturday, April 18, 2009 10:03 AM
>>
>> Subject: Re: UKCP Conference addressing climate change - room
>> for equality and diversity
>>
>>
>> Before we get into a sterile debate about whether or not CC
>> is areality
>> - here is a compilaion that debunks the supposed arguments
>> that it isn't
>> really happening - or if it is it wasn't me (or SHell,
>> Texaco, Coal) guv.
>> http://www.scholarsandrogues.com/2007/07/23/anti-global-heating-claims-a-reasonably-thorough-debunking/
>>
>>
>> John McGowan wrote:
>>
>> 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]
>> <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: Fri 17/04/2009 11:30 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: John McGowan <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference
>> addressing climate change - room for equality and diversity
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <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 Annie Mitchell
>> Sent: Wed 15/04/2009 3:28 PM
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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
>> <[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image005.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%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
>> <[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%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
>> <[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image007.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%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
>> <[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%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
>> <[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%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
>> <[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%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
>> <[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%20UKCP%20Conference%20addressing%20climate%20change%20-%20room%20for%20equality%20and%20diversity.EML/1_multipart/image006.png" target="_blank">https:[log in to unmask]:%20%5BCOMMUNITYPSYCHUK%5D%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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On Behalf Of
>> richard pemberton
>> Sent: 15 April 2009 14:33
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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
>> <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/>
>> <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]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: David Fryer <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference
>> addressing climate change -
>> room for equality and diversity
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: Fryer, David <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference
>> addressing climate change -
>> room for equality and diversity
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
>> From: David Fryer
>> <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> Subject:
>> [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference
>> addressing climate change - room for equality and
>> diversity To:
>> [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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/>
>> <http://www.sustainabilityconference.com/>
>> best wishes, David
>> ________________________________ From: jacqui lovell
>> <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> To:
>> [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]> Subject:
>> [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK]
>> UKCP Conference addressing climate change from a
>> community critical standpoint?
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> To:
>> [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>] On
>> Behalf Of
>> David Fryer [[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>] Sent: 10 April
>> 2009 11:31 To: [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>> To:
>> [log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>] On Behalf Of
>> Mark Burton [[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>] On Behalf Of
>> Annie Mitchell > [[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>] On Behalf Of
>> Frederic Stansfield >
>> [[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote: >
>> From: CRAIG NEWNES <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote:
>> > From: Wendy Franks
>> <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>>
>> wrote: > From: John McGowan
>> <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> > www.salomonscaspd.org.uk
>> <http://www.salomonscaspd.org.uk/>
>> <http://www.salomonscaspd.org.uk/>
>> www.canterbury.ac.uk <http://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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>> wrote: > > >
>> From: John Cromby <[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[log in to unmask]
>> <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> > Personal webpage: http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/~hujc4/
>> <http://www-staff.lboro.ac.uk/%7Ehujc4/> > Co-Editor,
>> "Subjectivity": www.palgrave-journals.com/sub
>> <http://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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:[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]><mailto:
>>
>> ...
>>
>> [Message clipped]
>>
>>
>> ___________________________________ 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])
|
