Equality and the association of fear of uncertain times!

By ClentonFarquharson  |  2010/08/25 10:55 Posted in By Clenton Farquharson  |  Comments (0)

One of the side effects of living in this state of uncertainty and stress is that our relationships with others begin to erode, because we are always looking out for the “enemy”. This links back to the hard wiring that comes from our Freeze, Flight or Fight response to feeling threatened.  When this kicks in we begin to see others as a threat and we begin to create the “Us and Them” situations.

In the last election social ills were placed as “Broken Britain”,  it is in this environment that prejudice comes out of the shadows and where prejudice lies and discrimination lurks not far away.  When these two emerge, harassment and bullying also begin to take root.  If this environment is allowed to continue, hatred grows and violent hate crimes can show themselves.   This hostile environment is destructive to our wellbeing.  Fear and anger are the most destructive and negative emotions we can experience.  

So what is the answer that the ConDem government have brought to our attention, the “Big Society”.

David Cameron has been allowed to steal the traditional values of mutualism, association and relationships for his Big Society – or at least to clothe himself in Labour language.  The truth is that Labour in power stopped building relationships with people; it stopped building a politics of dialogue and mutual respect. It did not indicate that it valued people.

In policy terms, that has led to a traditional Conservative response: voluntary groups are better at intervention than the state; wealth redistribution is not a solution to social dysfunction; marriage is the foundation stone of a happy family and should be encouraged by the tax system.

Those are contentious propositions. The last one is disputed even within the Tory party on ideological grounds, reducing government intervention should also mean staying out of marital arrangements; on practical grounds there’s no way of subsidising marriage without perverse unintended consequences; and fiscal grounds tax breaks for marriage are a waste of money in austere times. But the biggest problem with Mr Cameron’s plans is not coherence, but scale. If the problems are as universal as he describes, he must surely be aiming for a massive social transformation.  But how, given his strong dislike, disgust of state solutions, will he do that? What institutions, funds, people will drive change if not local government, departmental budgets, schools and social workers? Will it all come from volunteers? What if their contribution is dwarfed by the task? 

The Big Society:

  1. Social Action – the government will foster and support a new culture of voluntarism and philanthropy
  2. Public service reform – getting rid of the centralised bureaucracy and in its place giving professionals much more freedom, opening up public services to new providers like charities, social enterprises and private companies so we get more innovation, diversity and responsiveness to public need
  3. Community empowerment – creating communities with neighbourhoods who are in charge of their own destiny, who feel if they club together and get involved they can shape the world around them.

Under a Conservative government, charities, voluntary groups and a new generation of community organisers will help tackle some of the most stubborn social problems.

I think that Big Society will need a drive from the top as well.

What do you think?

Does it matter?

Share
Delicious
Save

Equality – take that opportunity

By ChristinaSarginson  |  2010/08/24 10:20 Posted in By Christina Sarginson  |  Comments (0)

Last week all the young people who had taken their A levels qualifications in the UK  got their results; today it is the turn of the young people who have taken their GCSE’s.

Having had two children myself go through this process I can understand the pressure and stress this situation puts onto these individuals. The results they get form the future of their life’s path and can determine what type of job they have in the future. Does it have to be this way? I don’t think so.

I suppose what I am saying is that if the results aren’t what they want it is not the end of the world. I do know how disappointing it is to not get the result you want to get into the university you wanted but it really is not the end of the world and that pressure should not be put on young people.

Life does have a funny way of turning out right, even though the path may have many twists and turns along the way.

For me I wasn’t given the opportunity to go to university even though I wanted to. It was not something many women of my generation did. I have to say thank goodness for equality and diversity because things have changed so much and more women have opportunities today than they did 40 years ago. However, not having that opportunity did not stop me from having the chances in my life and taking those chances has been an exciting adventure which I would not have missed.

I left school at 15 with no qualifications but quickly went to day release and got qualifications in office management. I didn’t do any more formal qualifications until I was in my early forties when I decided I wanted to learn more.

I did however, get lots of experience in different jobs and used that to progress as much as I could to a senior management role in the NHS.

I have always had a passion for equality and diversity, so in my forties when I was undertaking a degree in psychology I decided to set up a social enterprise with a very good friend of mine working in equality and Human Rights.

For the last ten years after almost twenty seven years working for the NHS I have put all my energies into making this social enterprise a success. I have along with my colleagues battled the elements to bring the voice of reason to people who are interested in equality and diversity (and some who weren’t); changing lives and mindsets which has had flashes of ecstasy along with moments of despair.

So if I had gone to university what would I have done, would my life have been different from what it is now? Well the answer to that one is unknown but I can guess it would have been, I wanted to be an actress so who knows where that path would have led me.

The point I am trying to make is that if you don’t get what you want now, life will give you opportunities, if you decide to take them you will get what you want it’s just about recognising them and being brave enough to take them.

Share
Delicious
Save

Equality and Uncertaintity

By GeorgeRowley  |  2010/08/09 13:06 Posted in By Christina Sarginson  |  Comments (0)

Living with uncertainty is one of the most difficult things I have had to do in my life. Having your own business/social enterprise particularly in these times of cut backs etc is tough and sometimes unbearable.   You need to understand this situation thoroughly before you decide to establish your business/social enterprise. Also work in something you know about; equality and diversity is my focus and although times are tough I still feel the passion for it.

I left a job which was as a senior manager in the NHS some 10 years ago. I loved the NHS and I learnt a lot about project management and organisation of teams etc. The people who work in the NHS are generally speaking friendly people they are working in an ever changing environment with little budgets and  big hearts.

 I had always had a dream to establish an organisation which would fight for the rights of vulnerable people, promote justice and get the message out through training and consultancy about equality and diversity.

 My belief was that if you were good at what you did and knew your subject (equality and diversity) and prepared yourself for the road ahead you would succeed. Little did I know. I was blissfully naive at the time and was not aware of some of the pitfalls that lay ahead?

The pitfalls are some of the downside of running a business/social enterprise and they are there around each corner and you must be prepared for them.

 One of the major pitfalls is cash flow. This is something that most businesses suffer whether it is a large blue chip company, a small voluntary organisation or social enterprise. Getting the money in and ensuring you have money to pay your own creditors and staff is always a pressure, also there is yourself who needs to be paid to live. However, if it is your business you are last on the list.

 Equality is something that all public sector organisations have a duty to promote and train on, which means our social enterprise should be thriving.  However decisions we made when we were new, have resonated in our lives today and we are still paying the price for these. This is of course debt and borrowing money whether it is for the business or personally and my business partner and I have unfortunately done both.

You do need to understand business things like VAT and corporation tax and ensure you have the money for both of them when they are due. You need to have an invoicing process in place which is robust, where you can chase up debtors who do not pay quickly. Remember cash is the life blood of you business and you need it to keep going.

In my next few blogs I will explain some of my experiences which have taken me to places where as someone who worked previously in the public sector scared the life out of me.

Share
Delicious
Save

Equality and the Government

By ChristinaSarginson  |  2010/08/05 09:24 Posted in By Christina Sarginson  |  Comments (0)

The Mail online have reported today that the Government may have not followed the correct process for the emergency Budget in June and the Government  are running a real risk of breaking equality laws. This issue was pointed out to George Osborne in a letter from Theresa May the equality minister two weeks before the Budget was announced.

The issue is that the Budget runs a real risk to certain groups such as women, disabled people and ethnic minority and the Government have a duty under the new Equality Act 2010 to ensure that certain groups are not disproportionately affected by the budget.

Mrs May pointed out in the letter that there could be a risk of a successful legal challenge and advised the Treasury to take extra steps to show they had considered this. By this I think the equality minster meant the Treasury should carry out an equality impact assessment.

This is a tool which should be used by all public sector bodies identifying the impact on different groups evidencing if any discrimination is taking place. When carrying out an equality impact assessment it would consider the impact on all the equality categories e.g. sex, disability, race etc.

The Treasury have announced that they took all the necessary steps and have met their responsibility under the new Equality Act 2010, but as the Mail online have reported it, I wonder if they have?

Many of the groups such as the Fawcett Society have filed a High Court challenge to the budget arguing it is hitting women unfairly. Other ethnic minority groups are considering challenging it legally; it all seems a bit of a mess.

There are a few questions which I think remain unanswered and that is are the Coalition Government so determined to make the deep and wide cuts into the public sector that the letter from Theresa May regarding the equality issues was ignored, was an equality impact assessment carried out at all and if so why was it not identified that 72% of the cuts would be from women (this is the figure reported by the Mail online).

I applaud Theresa May for writing to the Government department highlighting the equality issues and bringing it to their attention. She advised of the processes that should have taken place and this should have raised the importance of equality and diversity. This is legislation and as such is important and real I do hope they have done their duty and carried out the correct processes. So we must watch this space as this issue and equality and diversity will not go away.

Share
Delicious
Save

Equality and the relationship of intolerance and indifference.

By ClentonFarquharson  |  2010/08/04 10:19 Posted in By Clenton Farquharson  |  Comments (0)

Intolerance is itself a form of violence and an obstacle to the growth of a true democratic spirit.  – Mohandas Gandhi
Possibly the oldest human worldview is fear of strangers, right next to that is the anger, as a by product of that fear.

If a political party wants to gain attention and votes then it makes short-term sense to stir up fear of strangers and turn it into anger. It might even work once, but it makes it virtually impossible to govern. It’s a short-term strategy that eats itself, because sooner or later, everyone is a stranger, and fear is no foundation for work that matters, the fostering of cooperation and trust, along with respect and dignity.

It seems as though we’re entering an age in which it’s easy to shun or become righteously resentful over someone because they are vulnerable, or because of their gender or age, disability or national origin, skin colour or religion, sexual orientation or their post code. We create them as the strangers and enemies to vent our social ills on.

David Cameron visited Birmingham yesterday, the city where I work and spend my life. He spoke on BBC WM about how the collation government created stress and strained the leaders of both parties, but insisted on it being a strong foundation for it to work. I want to know, if Mr Cameron insists that having these two different parties working together is a good thing, why his policies separate communities and create inequalities.

To get into government, he played on our fear of strangers, but now he works with them. Everyone is angry at the welfare state, the NHS, the lechers of society, all enhanced by the Tories’ rise to power. It is now his responsibility and his job to bring people and communities together, but will he do it?

I think Margret Mead best put it “The principle that human nature, in its psychological aspects, is nothing more than a product of history and given social relations removes all barriers to coercion and manipulation by the powerful.” 

If this is the best a politician can do to organise and lead, then we all lose.

What do you think?

Does it Matter?

Share
Delicious
Save
Partly powered by CleverPlugins.com