Hi Annie,
Interesting point about "compassionate reflection" in addition
to critical. It doesn't sound like clinical psychology speak to me!
Quite the reverse.
I think that Craig is right to point out the
likelihood of vested interests in climate change but we need to weigh
up the risks to less powerful groups of not engaging with the issue.
And part of that engagement includes the consideration of whose
interests are being served (including our own). I am still not sure how
strong the arguments are for this being the role of psychologists
rather than citizens?
Best wishes
Jan
Dear John, Thanks for keeping the debate going.
No-one responded to my comments below which I have cut and pasted from an
earlier email - which on reflection I can see may be seen as too meek and mild -
( I guess here I am taking the sort of position Jonathan Porrit takes in his
book Capitalism as if the world matters) and distracting from the real need to
storm the palace. But which palace? Whose palace? And how might we do the
storming? I do feel angry about the inequalities that underpin unsustainable
human functioning and want to take action as a community psychologist along
with others - and feel we tie ourselves up in knots on this list. But maybe
tying ourselves in discursive knots is the best we can do - and is better than
right intentioned action that simply perpetuates inequalities and injustice.
I take issue with Craig's implicitly expected answer to the question :
don't we realise that
climate change serves vested interests?- ( ie aren;t
we too stupid/naive to realise that vested interests are now at play in
promoting the idea of climate change) . well, in one sense, of course - all
ideas serve the interests of some, and the biggest ideas are always turned to
s
. Once climate change business becomes big - ( and in the short/ medium term,
pending the dismantling of capitalism - and I don't see that happening any
time soon despite the current economic mess - , climate change business ( and
politics) becoming big seems humanity's' current best hope) then at
that point I will be ready to support the argument that the idea of climate
change serves the vested interests of the more powerful - but we are not at
that point yet. Unless someone can persuade me otherwise?
Annie
--- On Tue, 5/5/09, Annie Mitchell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
From: Annie Mitchell <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate change - room for equality and diversity
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Tuesday, 5 May, 2009, 12:06 PM
Dear John, Thanks for keeping the debate going.
No-one responded to my comments below which I have cut and pasted from an
earlier email - which on reflection I can see may be seen as too meek and mild -
( I guess here I am taking the sort of position Jonathan Porrit takes in his
book Capitalism as if the world matters) and distracting from the real need to
storm the
palace. But which palace? Whose palace? And how might we do the
storming? I do feel angry about the inequalities that underpin unsustainable
human functioning and want to take action as a community psychologist along
with others - and feel we tie ourselves up in knots on this list. But maybe
tying ourselves in discursive knots is the best we can do - and is better than
right intentioned action that simply perpetuates inequalities and injustice.
I take issue with Craig's implicitly expected answer to the question :
don't we realise that climate change serves vested interests?- ( ie aren;t
we too stupid/naive to realise that vested interests are now at play in
promoting the idea of climate change) . well, in one sense, of course - all
ideas serve the interests of some, and the biggest ideas are always turned to
serve the interests of the haves more often than the have nots, because that is
how ,without critical
reflection ( and I would add without compassionate
reflection, except that it's hard for me to use caring sharing words on this
list without risking being blown out of the water for being a clinical
psychologist!) human societies tend to function. . .( though I would like us to
follow through more on Mark's question about how we create new social
identities around sharing, caring, mutuality etc etc - and I think that aspects
of women 's ways of being, and perhaps the ways of being of others who are
socially marginalised/disadvantaged - at least, of those who don't collude
with current power bases, have a lot to offer here) -
The trouble is that ignoring the reality of climate change ( ie what some would
call climate change denial; and I am taking here a critical realist position,
not a social constructionist/constructivist one) disproportionately serves the
interests of the more powerful groups in society at
this point in human history
. Once climate change business becomes big - ( and in the short/ medium term,
pending the dismantling of capitalism - and I don't see that happening any
time soon despite the current economic mess - , climate change business ( and
politics) becoming big seems humanity's' current best hope) then at
that point I will be ready to support the argument that the idea of climate
change serves the vested interests of the more powerful - but we are not at
that point yet. Unless someone can persuade me otherwise?
Annie
-----Original Message-----
From: The UK Community Psychology Discussion List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of John McGowan
Sent: 05 May 2009 11:05
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference addressing climate change -
room for equality and diversity
Its all gone strangely quiet. Not sure where
the discussion is with this point
but I'd just like to throw in that I've been thinking about what Craig
said below and the notion of dominant discourses serving vested interests in
climate change seems to be everywhere all of a sudden. Certainly in terms of
consumption it can seem to be a strategy to get people to part with more money
for goods because they're local or ethical (whatever that means). The
discourse around fair trade has had a similar function for some time (we pay
much more for the item than the fair trade premium).
This is not to say that there may not be value in localism (though its a
complicated issue) or fair trade or whatever but these badges also often seem to
be a way of encouraging us to consume new things which are branded better or as
new "necessities" and are frequently expensive. And presumably the
exctement of having a new fairly traded, eco-cotten t-shirt might also dent the
will
to storm the palace.
The whole issue of local consumption and local action against climate change
seems to get thornier the more one looks at it. In particular it seems to pose a
question of who is in ones community. The person down the road or a struggling
textile worked in Cambodia (which has a struggling textile industry).
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: Tue 28/04/2009 10:35 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [COMMUNITYPSYCHUK] UKCP Conference
addressing climate change -
room for equality and diversity
John, I don't have any fancy theories in mind - just the notion that those
in charge have a vested interest in distracting the rest of us from their
agendas. They can make the middle classes distracted via guilt (Child Guidance
clinics in the 20s were great at this, somehow pursuading mothers that it was up
to them if their children were non-productive - non-oppressed - citizens, a
movement that spawned countless child psychology experts - many of whom had NO
children eg, Winnicott) - obviously so called climate change has a similar
effect; all that recycling instead of storming the palace. Working classes are
distracted by a desperate search for work - which we are told time upon time is
good for us (actually much better for the factory/call centre/arms industry
owners). I have no idea what distracts those in charge - other than a pressing
need to
think of the next distraction.
Craig
--- On Sat, 18/4/09, 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: Saturday, 18 April, 2009, 8:42 AM
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<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<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<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<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<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<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<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])
___________________________________ 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])
