1 / 23

Social justice through service provision and advocacy

Social justice through service provision and advocacy. Dr Sandra Grey and Dr Charles Sedgwick Social Justice in Communities Conference 23-24 October 2014 s andra.grey@vuw.ac.nz charlespsedgwick@gmail.com. The sector and democratic debate. Our question

portia-dennis
Download Presentation

Social justice through service provision and advocacy

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Social justice through service provision and advocacy Dr Sandra Grey and Dr Charles Sedgwick Social Justice in Communities Conference 23-24 October 2014 sandra.grey@vuw.ac.nz charlespsedgwick@gmail.com

  2. The sector and democratic debate Our question How is democracy – as measured by the involvement of the community and voluntary sector in public debate and policy making – faring?

  3. The sector and democratic debate • Comparing data from two surveys conducted in 2008/09 and 2013/14 • Quantitative and qualitative analysis 447 and 597 participant statements for first and second surveys respectively • 93 participants from around New Zealand

  4. The sector and democratic debate

  5. Attitudes of governments to debate, 1999 to 2013

  6. “Debate is tolerated” [Under Labour] There was not a great fear that speaking out … would be “punished” by for example loss of contracts. However there was not a total encouragement of debate either, e.g. all the fuss about “advocacy” in 2005. [Under National] There always seems to be a subtext of ‘already made our minds up but we will listen to appear like ‘the good guys’.

  7. “It’s getting harder to challenge”

  8. Dissenting organisations are valued

  9. Dissenting organisations are valued [Under National] This particular government does not seem to listen or take into consideration any conflicting opinion or EVIDENCE contrary to its outlook… If they continue to “high handedly” proceed with actions and policies without REAL consultation or regard to social or environmental consequences it will be a big turn off & people become disengaged with our democratic system.

  10. Getting key concerns heard

  11. Gettingkey concerns heard? Change driven by Ministers who listen to vested interests of industry too much. Public servants follow orders – do not/are not able to act as advisors. [Our influence has been] more in implementation than in major policy topics – e.g. MSD funding processes – we have influenced decisions about changed processes. Review of incorporated societies / Development of accounting stats.

  12. Contracts that constrain Gag clauses • 12.9% of the 2008/09 respondents • 25.8% of the 2013/14 respondents. [It’s] contractual. Must seek departmental sign-off before speaking up about the contract, the contract negotiations, or the work. We are not allowed [to make] public criticism.

  13. Dissenters risk their funding

  14. Dissenters risk their funding …removed from appointments/committees after media article critical of government policy (unrelated to [the] committee). Funding not renewed after criticising. Government actually threatened to immediately cease funding us if we proceeded with a discussion document with the purpose of establishing some shared understanding between all Social Service Agencies. … we are very cautious about what we say publicly as we cannot afford to lose our funding.

  15. Lack of space and respect Government pushes too many things through under urgency – denying proper process.   Poor facilitation of reference group. Obfuscation, delays in documentation. Less frequent meetings than expected. Broken promises from officials. Funding from MOH, MSD, is based on no negotiation ... Take it or leave it, our way or no way. Consultation was: “this is what we require – how will you measure.”

  16. Lack of resources NGOs are being requested to take more responsibility and give “more for less.” NGOs used to refer clients to Government Department’s now it is the opposite. Government policies are not well thought through and NGOs are left to pick up the pieces.

  17. Lack of certainty NGO’s suffer from uncertainty over their future because of short term funding model used / Excessive resources involved in seeking & maintaining funding / by economic necessity focus on short term project work rather than long term change.

  18. The bigger picture

  19. What does it all mean? Democracy is constantly being undermined and decisions are being manipulated/negotiated behind closed doors by key power-holders. There is a climate of intimidation and management so that ministers only hear “good news” as far as possible… There is also a narrow focus on short term measured targets at the expense of other health measures that are as important.

  20. What does it all mean? Intolerable and untenable environment Plagued with contradictions which damage the sector

  21. Where to? • Work out core messages for engagement • Make demands and define yourselves • Seek a review of the Charities Act • Seek to change what is ‘counted’ • Public support crucial

More Related