If you are unable to read this National Update, click here for the website version.   

                                                                                         

Consumer Family and Citizen Empowerment
 
  NATIONAL UPDATE
 Public policy and social innovation for empowerment
 
    September Issue:

    EditorialThe revolution in public services
   
Charlie Leadbeater The User Generated State: Public Services 2.0
   
Noel Pearson Supported self-help after ATSIC
   
Transforming Our Schools A national parent-teacher initiative
   
Revolution in Castlemaine Winters Flat Primary School
   
Health reform A health service 2.0
   
Consumer-Centred Health Care National Conference 22-23 March 2010
    CIMID Health Plan Chronic Illness, Mental Illness, Disability
   
Leadership Development Program for Families 2010 Intake
   
Noel Pearson, Peter Shergold, Phillip Blond: After Neo-Liberalism:
  
 Participation, Ownership and Redistribution of Power
  October 28-29 
   
Social Enterprise Coalition  Invitation to social enterprises
   
Phillip Blond Capitalism for the poor   
    Rediscovering Christian Social Thought
Conference October 23
   
Christians in Politics National Summit A Christian Social Agenda
   
Community Building National Network
    Neighbourhood Cultural Exchange   
   
AGM Season 2009 What's wrong with advocacy organisations?
   
Volunteer  Three roles available with the Centre for Civil Society
    Organising by Federal Electorate Become involved in your area
    Events

 

    Editorial The revolution in public services   
   

   
In May 2008, the Centre for Civil Society hosted a forum
    in Melbourne with Caroline Tomlinson, a parent of a then
    19 year old son Joe, who has multiple disabilities.
    Caroline was one of the instigators of
In Control in the
    UK, a social enterprise in which families with loved ones
    with disabilities assume control of an individual budget
    which consolidates funds from various programs for the
    personalised acquisition of supports for their family
    members. [Photo at right: Caroline Tomlinson]

    Charlie Leadbeater is a writer and innovator in the UK whose booklet
   
Making it Personal has had a huge international impact in driving innovation
    towards what has become known as "the personalisation agenda". Charlie's
    latest essay The User Generated State: Public Services 2.0 continues that
    work and extends it to public services in health and education.
  

    Users of services are the key to
    innovation, says Charlie.
"The
    benefits of In Control do not just
    come from giving Caroline and her
    son an individualised budget to
    spend as they see fit...
   
[Photo at right: Joe Tomlinson]

    Lead users tend to have more
    extreme and intensely felt needs which put them at the leading edge of
    change in a field. Lead users often have greater knowledge, they use
    products more intensively and they have skills that allow them to adap
t
    products. What they want now, other consumers will want in due course.
    Many technology and computer games companies are well versed in working
    with their most demanding and innovative lead users to work out ideas for
    future products and applications. Caroline Tomlinson is a lead user of public
    services. Her family's complex and intense needs highlight how more
    mainstream services, for example care of elderly people, long term
    conditions, learning programmes could be reformed.

    In modern media, software, games and cultural industries, user generated
    content is all the rage, spawning social networking sites like My Space and
    Bebo, mass computer games like the War of Witchraft, volunteer created
    encyclopedia like Wikipedia and Citizendium, news services such as Oh My
    News in Korea which has 55,000 citizen journalists, trading systems such as
    Graigslist and eBay and the fast growing virtual world of Second Life. Most of
    these examples are built on a dynamic relationship between a company or
    core organisation that provides the kernel or platform and a large community
    of users who generate, shared, amend and distribute content. What would
    the public sector be like if it too mobilised mass user generated content for
    care, health, safety and education?

    In this National Update, we explore this question with a focus on health and
    education.

    Astute readers, though, will have already identified a looming problem: the
    thorny issue of relations between users and professionals.

    "Professionals have an inbuilt tendency, despite the best intentions of many
    individuals, to become cartels, a kind of priesthood. They are not just
    gatekeepers of knowledge, resources and status. They determine what is
    valid, legitimate, needed or deviant. They tell us where we are deficient in our
    learning, health or behaviour, and what we need to do to correct our
    shortcomings. The public service professions may have started life with a
    vocation to serve, by providing specialist expertise but they now exert a
    self-justifying monopoly over many areas of life. Education has become what
    teachers deliver in school. Doctors and hospitals define what it is to be
    healthy. Care is what social and care workers organise for us. Professions
    may serve us but at the price of ensnaring us in their language, protocols
    and codes and in the process they disable us, by rendering us confused and
    dependent.
..

    By definition what is not professional, institutionalised and properly
    accredited - the self-taught, the self-administered - must become odd-ball
    and maverick, drop outs and deviants, not to be trusted. As professionals
    extend their dominion over our lives our confidence in our abilities to make
    decisions and provide solutions for ourselves diminishes. We become
    incapable of acting without prior professional approval. When we do not get
    the service we have come to expect, when doctors are not available, or
    cannot dispense the miracle cure, we become angry and resentful."

   

    Charlie's essay draws on and rehabilitates the ideas of Ivan
    Illich, a Catholic priest and social critic, whose books in the
    1970s sat alongside those of E.F.Schumacher and Paolo
    Freire as enormously readable but seemingly slightly
   
impractical texts on social change. They were found
    everywhere on the shelves of the radical and the idealistic,
    and many readers will remember titles such as Deschooling Society, Limits
    to Medicine, Disabling Professions
and Tools for Conviviality.

    In Public Services 2.0, Charlie generates some critical insights into how the
    role of professionals and work reform issues can be addressed in ways that
    defuse kneejerk opposition to self-direction and builds trust and new
    relationships. In the Centre we are very keen to promote these perspectives.
 

    We also explore, in this issue, the problem of
    how to make sense of the many advocacy
    organisations around the country that identify
    more with service providers than with their
    users. Charlie describes it in these terms:
"The voluntary sector will be vital
    to provide additional support and services for people to self-help... But some
    voluntary groups see their main role as advocates for better services within
    the traditional professional service model"
.

    Indeed they do. The Carers Associations around the country are a prime
    example. They are well funded, professional advocates of passive welfare.
    The State School Parents Associations are another. Parents are entitled to
    fundraise for their school, but not to set foot inside the classroom.

    CLICK HERE to tell us your views

   
    Charlie Leadbeater The User Generated State: Public Services 2.0
   
   
"We need a new way to create public goods that take
    their lead from the culture of self-organisation and
    participation emerging from the Web that forms a
    central part of modern culture, especially for young
    consumers and future citizens. Increasingly the state
    cannot deliver collective solutions from on high: it is too
    cumbersome and distant. The state can help to create public goods - like
    better education and health - by encouraging t
hem to emerge from within
    society. The tax system increasingly depends on mass involvement in self-
    assessment a
nd reporting. Welfare to work and active labour market
    programmes depend on the user as a participant, who takes responsibility
    for building up their skills and contacts. Neighbourhood renewal has to come
    from within localities, it cannot be delivered top down from the state. Public
    goods are rarely created by the state alone but by cumulative changes in
    private behaviour...

    The triumph of the modern industrial public sector is is the creation of
    institutions on a vast scale, which provide services such as education,
    health and policing, that were might have once been limited to just a few.
    These universal systems aspire to deliver services that are fair and reliable.
    Yet that in turn requires codes, protocols and procedures, which often make
    them dehumanising. After Ivan Illich trained as a priest he went to work in a
    poor Puerto Rican neighbourhood in New York and he was struck by how
    many other institutions seemed to be modelled on the church and how many
    professions seemed to take their cue from the priesthood. These institutions
    and the resources they control become the power base for the new
    priesthoods: the public service professionals.

    The dominance of professions, creates two big problems, according to Illich:
    counter-productivity and dependency culture.

    As people become more dependent on the expert knowledge of
    professionals so they lose faith in their own capacity to act. The rise of
    professional power is mirrored by a loss of individual responsibility. We
    become cases to be processed by the system. Education and health come
    to be commodities to be acquired rather than capabilities we develop in
    ourselves to live better lives. We now identify services delivered by
    professionals with the ultimate goods we want as a society: health, learning,
    safety, order, justice.

    Yet despite the rhetorical backing for more participative approaches the
    progress on the ground is more limited for three main reasons. First,
    established mainstream services still gobble up most of the resources,
    most clearly in the health system. It is difficult to create a new community-
    based and participative health care system when most of the resources are
    still locked up in servicing large hospitals. Second, most attempts at
    promoting participation are locked into the current system: they are
    sustaining innovations designed to make the current system work better
    rather than radical and disruptive innovations designed to create something
    new... Thirdly, creating more participative approaches is not easy and as In
    Control shows it takes not just thoughtful design but also a good deal of
    political struggle to fight off opposition from vested and professional
    interests.

    Attempts to create the user generated public sector will have to
    confront twelve main issues:

   

    Economics: is it too costly?

   

    The assumption is that participative
    approaches require lots more support from

  
 professionals to tailor solutions to individual
    needs and people will tend to want to claim
    and spend more. The evidence from In Control is that participative
    approaches do not have to be more expensive so long as authorities employ
    realistic cost controls and encourage people to mobilise complementary
    resources.

   
Equity: is it just for the middle classes?

    The assumption is that opportunities for choice and participation will be
    taken by the most articulate and confident. The professionally controlled
    state system at least protects the vulnerable with some guarantee of equity.
    Yet In Control has managed to give voice and control to some of the most
    vulnerable and at risk people in society. Mass state services do not
    guarantee consistency and equity: they can be highly arbitrary and
    capricious in the way they allocate funding and make decisions. Well
    designed participative approaches benefit those least able to benefit from
    the current system. The implications for equity depend on how they are
    designed and who they are designed for. Choice and participation can
    benefit the least well off if the systems are designed for them.


   
Fraud and risk: will greater freedom be abused?

    Previous experiences with co individualised budgets such as Individual
    Learning Accounts suggests there may be considerable scope for fraud and
    abuse. Yet In Control suggests not: most people do not try to over claim and
    they are very careful spenders of their money. Once it becomes their money
    they tend to look after it very well, as Caroline Tomlinson says, getting
    maximum value for money from it.


    Changing roles of professionals


    Professional power is at the heart of public service system of assessing
    need, regulating risk and measuring quality of outcomes. More person
    centred approaches to planning would challenge professional power and so
    provoke resistance. Successful In Control authorities have developed
    approaches that bring clear compensating benefits to professionals, for
    example by restoring professional vocational roles. Strategies for workforce
    reform and expansion - bringing in a wider range of skills and support - will
    be critical.


   
Supply side response

    Most public service provision is organised around inflexible blocks of
    services: schools, hospitals and prisons or block contracts for care. This
    rigidity, justified by economies of scale, limits the ability to services to
    respond to specific needs. Users tend to be fitted into the service boxes
    available to them. Public authorities will have to develop different ways for
    services to be procured that allow for more personalisation and flexibility.
    However it is also essential there should be "backwards compatibility" : the
    new system must also provide room for elements of traditional services that
    some people will want.


   
Audit and accountability

    How should individuals account for the money they spend? Fear that
    individuals might mis-spend money is one justification for continued
    professional control over budgets and onerous requirements to account for
    spending. In Control recognises people need to account for how they spend
    the money but this is made as simple as possible and linked to their care
    plan. The most effective way to kill off participative approaches is to
    distribute funding through individualised budgets but then re-regulate and
    audit in great detail what people can spend their money on: giving with one
    hand but taking back with the other. Finding realistic, robust but simple
    forms of accountability will be essential. This needs to be linked to new
    person centric measures of outcomes.


   
Regulation and Risk

    In social care authorities will be concerned that greater individual discretion
    to shape care might lead people to take risks which would put the authority
    in jeopardy of a breach of duty of care. Person centred plans must involve a
    redistribution of risk assessment and responsibility away from professionals.
    But this needs to be made clear: giving people individualised budgets
    means them also taking on more responsibility for handling risk.


   
Regulation and Innovation

    Participative approaches will be at odds with regulation that might punish
    rather than reward or encourage innovation. Innovating authorities need to
    know how regulators and inspection regimes will respond. Most public
    service regulation and inspection is designed to guarantee consistency and
    delivery of standards. In participative public services inspection would need
    to encourage and endorse far greater diversity of outcomes.


   
Building participant confidence

    Different participants will come with different levels of confidence, support,
    networks, friends and family. A participative approach would have to be very
    responsive to their different needs, starting points and resources. Not
    everyone is ready or wants to be a participant. Most people, some of the
    time, will want to be consumers. Some people will want to be in that position
    all of the time.


   
The role of the voluntary sector

    The voluntary sector will be vital to provide additional support and services
    for people to self-help. Building the voluntary sector's capacity to support
    person centred services will be vital. But some voluntary groups see their
    main role as advocates for better services within the traditional professional
    service model.


   
Political leadership

    The scale of the transformation and the risks involved will require committed
    political leadership at central and local level to meet professional opposition
    to ceding control, media scare stories about risk and fraud and public
    concerns that participative solutions are really a back door route to cut

    services.

    Scaling up

    The biggest challenge in all social and public innovation is how to scale up
    promising ideas. What is being scaled up? (An idea, a set of principles, a
    set of tools, an organisation?) How is it being scaled? (Through franchising,
    policy prescription, campaigning, organisational growth?) The In Control
    community has an open source feel to it: ideas and improvements are
    readily shared. Simon Duffy's In Control's director talks of it as an operating

    system for social care, which can be adapted and amended in different
    contexts applied to different needs. Scaling will also be helped by making
    the system quite modular, so that people can pick, choose and improve just
    what they want to focus upon. Most open source software projects that
    attract a large developer community have this modular structure which allows
    many people to participate in its development.


   
CLICK HERE to read the full text of this article.
 

    Noel Pearson Supported self-help after ATSIC   
   

   "There is nothing the government (or anyone else) can do for
    the Aboriginal people of Australia that the people are
    unwilling to do for themselves.

    If people from the progressive side of the political divide
    reflect on this principle, they will agree. They would realise
    what they think of as self-determination is consistent with this principle:
    nothing will work if the people who are the subjects of reform efforts are not
    willing to make the reform.

    If people from the liberal and conservative side of the cultural and political
    divide reflected on this principle, they would also agree. After all, it is one of
    their own classical nostrums about the relationship between government and
    citizens. They would think of it as the necessary responsibility that must be
    held by citizens.

    Properly understood, what the Left calls self-determination and the Right
    calls responsibility are one and the same thing: the power that people must
    have to take charge of their own destiny.

    In Australia the two sides have failed to recognise this commonality. This is
    because those on the progressive Left side (including the majority of
    indigenous leaders) came to interpret self-determination as all power, no
    responsibility. This was the problem with the Aboriginal and Torres Strait
    Islander Commission: it gave some substantial powers to indigenous people,
    but the mentality was one of "we want power, but it's all the governments'
    fault when there is failure". It's true these powers were residual and many
    areas of failure - not the least health and education - were in fact state and
    commonwealth government responsibilities, rather than ATSIC's. But the
    defining feature of the old ATSIC paradigm was power without responsibility.

    Those on the liberal-conservative side, on the other hand, have also failed
    on responsibility, for two reasons. First, when it comes down to it, Australian
    liberal-conservatives are still big believers in government. They think
    overwhelmingly that it is government that needs to be the main actor in the
    salvation of the indigenes. Like their social democrat opponents, they see it
    largely as a matter of state service delivery rather than what we have come
    to call in Cape York Peninsula supported self-help.

    Second, while they are keen for individual responsibility, they would prefer to
    ignore any group, community or people as holders of responsibility. Their
    aversion to collectivism makes their position too extreme. So they want to
    abolish indigenous organisations, and replace them with what? Large,
    mainstream, welfare-delivering non-government organisations like the Smith
    Family, Mission Australia and so on? As if they do a better job of delivering
    welfare.
"

    CLICK HERE to read the full text of this article.   
   

    Transforming Our Schools A national parent-teacher initiative

    Transforming Our Schools grew out of ideas and insights generated in
    forums in Sydney on 17th August 2009 and Melbourne on 18th August 2009.

    It is a comprehensive approach to breaking the stalemate in education
    reform in Australia. It begins with parents and teachers, and seeks political
    and policy support for measures which empower grassroots people and drive
    innovation towards a Real Education Revolution.

    There are three components to Transforming Our Schools:

    Partners in Learning is a parent-school partnership model, directed to
    schools, and oriented to school-based innovation;

 

    The Parent Teacher Guarantee is directed to governments and MPs, and is
    oriented to political campaigning;

 
    Charter for a Real Education Revolution is a longer term vision and policy
    direction statement.
 
    Partners in Learning
 
    This is a parent-school partnership model,
    oriented to school-based innovation and
    partnership with parents which is applicable
    to every school in Australia. It is oriented to
    parents at the school level who want to
    partner with their school in shaping and
    governing the design and culture of what their
    school can offer to students and their parents.
 
    The model based on four key features:
 
    1. Groups of parents participating in Partners in Learning determine an
    educational philosophy, culture and pedagogy that fits what they want for
    their child, and this philosophy, culture and pedagogy are subject to a
    process of negotiation and agreement with their school (there may be one
    or
more parent groups in each school);
 
    2. Schools which embrace the Partners in Learning model undertake to form
    a partnership with the participating parent group(s) to implement their
    preferred approaches to learning;
 
    3. Parents, teachers and administrators in Partners in Learning schools
    undertake to manage the partnership in a collaborative manner, with
    reciprocal rights and responsibilities;
 
    4. Parents and teachers combine to select and appoint a non-parent, non-
    teacher mentor for each child as an additional partner in each child's
    learning.
 
    Partners in Learning has a 5 step process based on the experience of
    parents and teachers at Winters Flat Primary School in Victoria.

    CLICK HERE for more information.

    CLICK HERE to register your interest

 
    The Parent Teacher Guarantee
 
    The Parent-Teacher Guarantee is directed to governments, MPs, and
    political players, and is oriented to campaigning by parents and teachers. It
    is a campaign to get MPs, parties and governments to sign the guarantee.
 
    Text of The Guarantee:
 
    "In public office, I/We will support the introduction of the following measures
    to guarantee a quantum leap in the quality of our schools:
 
    1.Every child and student is entitled to a portable
   
Individual Learning Plan that will be accepted by
    schools, teachers and specialist practitioners as a
    foundation document and ongoing tool for the design
    and management of each student's learning.
 
    2. Every parent is entitled to negotiate with and enter
    into partnerships with schools and other education
    providers to shape and govern the educational philosophy, culture and
    pedagogy that best fits their child.

    3. Every parent is entitled to a student-centred funding entitlement for their
    child and young person with a weighting for educational and socio-economic
    disadvantage, rural and remote location, and disability or developmental
    challenges, to give parents greater leverage in selecting an appropriate
    school for their unique child and in negotiating with and forming partnerships
    with schools and other education providers.

 
    4. Every parent is entitled to an annual financial report from their school on
    how their student-centred funding entitlement is spent.
 
    5. Every parent and student is entitled to at least four certificate options to
    mark the completion of their child's school education so that the choice of
    an appropriate certificate is available to meet the needs of a diverse range of
    students.
 
    6. Every conscientious and talented teacher is entitled to ongoing public
    investment in their skills, professional development and remuneration to
    retain quality teachers in the profession and to attract the best and brightest
    of each generation into the teaching profession.
 
    7. Every teacher who is not suited to teaching is entitled to active support
    from schools and education departments in exiting the teaching profession
    without industrial relations agendas inhibiting their rapid movement out of the
    profession.
 
   8. Every parent and teacher is entitled to adequate resourcing, both financial
   and human, in building partnerships that enhance the quality of learning for
   each child.

    9. Every student on reaching the age of 18 is entitled to a Lifelong Learning  
    Account, in which post-school education, training and further education and
    community education funds may be held and retained for lifelong use as the
    student chooses."

    CLICK HERE to register your interest.

 
   Charter for a Real Education Revolution
 
    The Charter is a longer term vision and policy direction statement. It is not
    intended for immediate campaign use, but for the development of a more
    sophisticated and strategic public debate about school and education
    reform.

    CLICK HERE to read the full text of the Charter.

    CLICK HERE to register your interest in Transforming Our Schools.


    Revolution in Castlemaine Winters Flat Primary School
 

    At Winters Flat Primary School in
    Castlemaine in central Victoria, a group of
    parents have begun a real 'Education
    Revolution'. They have successfully negotiated
    with a state school to introduce a stream of
    education running parallel to the conventional
    stream, characterised by a high level of
    parental involvement in the classroom around
    a negotiated curriculum and educational
    philosophy. The Community Class at Winters
    Flat Primary now has 75 kids in 3 classes.
    Next year, the parent group will undertake the
    same process as their kids move on to
    secondary school.

    The precedent has been set. Parents and
    state schools can enter into partnerships to
    shape our education system for the 21st
    century.

    CLICK HERE to register your interest in Transforming Our Schools.


   
Wanted A parent and teacher contact in every school

   

    Your participation in Transforming Our
    Schools
is warmly invited. There are
    many ways to become involved,  and
    there is no cost.

    Our goal is to have a parent contact in
    every school in Australia, and a  teacher
    contact in every school.

    To register your participation, complete this online registration form.
 

    Health reform A health service 2.0
   
    Charlie Leadbeater outlines the case for a health service 2.0:

    "All over the developed world the assumption is the same: health is what
    hospitals and doctors deliver. The more that hospitals can produce high
    quality, personalised, mass customised treatment, along a more or less
    linear patient pathway which looks something like a production line, the
    better health care we will get. The patient goes in at one end ill, is worked on
    by doctors and nurses, and emerges out the other, like a finished product,
    well again....

    The hospital based health care system was a response to the spread of
    contagious and acute disease born by urbanisation and industrialisation in
    the late 19th century. Now this system of professional diagnosis,
    prescription and monitoring has to deal with an epidemic of chronic disease,
    much of it associated with a society in which people live for longer...

    In the UK, 45% of the adult population have one or more long-standing
    medical condition. Amongst the population more than 75 years old, the
    fastest growing group of the population, the figure is 75%. By 2030 the
    proportion of 65-year olds with a long-term condition will double. In 1990,
    heart conditions and cancer were responsible for 19% of deaths: most
    people died too young to be troubled by chronic conditions. In 2004
    circulatory diseases and cancer were responsible for 63% of deaths. They
    are one of the main reasons people go to see doctors. About 80% of
    consultations with a general practitioner are about an aspect of a long-term
    condition. Another 10% are for minor ailments and conditions that are best
    dealt with through self-treatment and over the counter drugs. General
    practice is increasingly a reassurance service for people who have minor
    ailments that doctors can do little or nothing about or long-term conditions
    that are also incurable...
   

    The closed, professionalised system is too centralised,
    cumbersome and closed to cope with the epidemic of
    chronic conditions which mainly stem from people's
    lifestyles. The front line of health care is not in hospitals nor
    even general practice waiting rooms, but in people's living
    rooms and kitchens, pubs and clubs, supermarkets and
    restaurants, gyms and parks. By the time someone realises
    they have a chronic condition that warrants a visit to the
    doctor it is too late. We need a health system which catches conditions
    early, even better prevents them altogether and allo
ws people to take action
    without having to wait to see a doctor. Such a health system would have as
    its prime aim enabling people to stay healthy and well. That in turn would
    mean patients and users becoming participants in and producers of their
    own health: user generated health care.

    We will not deal with the health challenges of the 21st century - ageing and
    chronic disease - with a professional service, hospital health system
    designed for the contagious diseases of the 19th century, which leaves
    people dependent upon doctors for solutions they usually cannot deliver
    because it is too late to do much. People need to become participants in
    and producers of their own health rather than passive patients. A healthy
    society is not what doctors deliver to us, but what we produce together.
    Social innovation by the masses not just for the masses is what we need.
    Motivation is the new medicine. Public services will be more effective the
    more they motivate, support and educate people towards more effective self-
    help: the user generated state.
"

     CLICK HERE to read the full text of this article.


   

    Consumer-Centred Health Care National Conference 22-23 March 2010

    Melbourne 22-23 March 2010
    Angliss Conference Centre

    This national conference over two days will explore the emerging agenda of
    consumer-centred health care.

   

    Key themes include:

    Commonwealth reform initiatives: driving change
    Self-care and self-management in heath
    Medicare Select: opt-in health plans
    Organising and empowering health consumers
    Consumer-centred systems
    Consumer-centred funding arrangements
    Community engagement in health reform
    Partnerships between practitioners and consumers

 

    CLICK HERE to contribute a paper or presentation.


    CLICK HERE to register


    CLICK HERE for more information.
 

    CIMID Health Plan Chronic Illness, Mental Illness, Disability          

    The CIMID Health Plan is a voluntary opt-in health plan
    for people with chronic illness, mental illness and
    disability (
CIMID = Chronic Illness, Mental Illness and
    Disability
)
. Individuals with these conditions, and their
    families/carers, are invited to enrol with the Plan; the Plan
    will then negotiate with the Commonwealth Department of
    Health and Ageing (as a number of indigenous health organisations currently
    do) for funding arrangements for the development of
packages of integrated
    care for its enrolled members.
 

    This project is in response to the ground-breaking recommendation of the
    Final Report of the National Hospital and Health Reform Commission
  
 (NHHRC) on 30 June 2009, that the Commonwealth consider over the next
    two years the development of a system of competing health plans, as a
    consumer-centred, consumer choice-based extension of Medicare, badged
    in the Report as Medicare Select.
 

    This is a unique opportunity for people with chronic illness, mental illness
    and disability to take some giant steps towards integrated person-centred
    health care, with a strong emphasis on coordinated care and preventative
    strategies.

 

    The CIMID Health Plan will be a demonstration project in how a health
    plan for person-centred care might be developed and implemented by and for
    people with chronic illnesses, mental illnesses and disability.
 

    Its strategy is to draw participants from existing networks and groups who
    have an interest in care coordination, consumer choice and self-
    management.
It is envisaged that several partners will participate in the Plan
    from the corporate, academic and community organisation fields. It is also
    hoped to partner with several national bodies in the health reform debate.

 

    By describing this as a demonstration project, it is acknowledged that there
    will be a lot of trialling and testing of innovative arrangements for mutual
    benefit.
 

    Governments are searching for innovative models in chronic and mental
    illness and aged frailty/disability, but the perennial obstacle to their efforts is
    the lack of a mechanism for demand aggregation (that is, a means of
    developing a pool of consumers for whom alternative funding and care
    arrangements can be planned, assembled, implemented and evaluated).
 

    As an opt-in pool of consumers and families with close familiarity with
    various service models in disability, mental and chronic illness, and aged
    frailty, we can assist the Commonwealth, and ourselves, by generating our
    own mechanism for demand aggregation. We understand, more than the
    average healthy citizen, what an agenda of coordinated care is all about.
    Hence our own Health Plan.

 

    The experiences gained by the Plan over the next six months will be
    presented at the National Conference on
Consumer-Centred Health Care:
    Policy, Innovation and Empowerment
on 22-23 March 2010.

     CLICK HERE to enrol. There is no cost.

     CLICK HERE for more information.
 

    Leadership Development Program for Families 2010 Intake   

    Applications are invited for participants in the
    2010 Leadership Development Program for
    Families.

    The Program runs from February 2010 to
    November 2010.
   

    This is a leadership development program for
    families (parents/siblings) who meet four
    criteria:
 
    1. have a family member with challenges (disability, mental illness, chronic
    illness, aged frailty, addictions, etc);
 
    2. are searching for living solutions for their loved one in social support,
    accommodation, meaningful paid or voluntary work, or financial security;

    3. have experienced obstacles, frustration, and powerlessness along the
    way; and
 

    4. want to play a leadership role in assisting other families in developing
    solutions, through both public policy change and social innovation.
 
    Participants are required to nominate two key challenges that they are facing
    at the start of the program, and each group will participate in a shared
    search for solutions to these challenges as they move through the year.
 
    The program will consist of:
 
    1. Three residential weekends for visioning, learning and skill development;
 
    2. One three day tour of arrangements/models;

    3. Online learning program with a focus on key case studies and models;


    4. Shared group input into two nominated challenges facing the participants
    over the course of the 10 months; and

    5.Occasional forums, dinners and meetings.

    Diane Gow from Melbourne is the Program Director.

    Di has worked in the disability field for 35 years, and is
    passionate about family support and empowerment, social
    inclusion and community building. She has worked in the
    UK and Australia in planning person and family-centred
    solutions to the challenges facing families with loved ones
    who have complex issues. She has three sons and a foster child.

    The 10 month program is auspiced by the National Federation of Parents,
    Families and Carers.


    An online registration form is available here.

    CLICK HERE for more information.


    Noel Pearson, Peter Shergold, Phillip Blond: After Neo-Liberalism:
    Participation, Ownership and Redistribution of Power
  October 28-
29

    National Policy Conference on the New Policy Paradigm
    Sydney 28-29 October 2009

    Register Here    

    Call for Papers

    "Too much government is delivered today in ways that
    create passivity. It need not be so. Already there are
    important signs of change emerging, if only they can be liberated from the
    institutional forms of the past. New approaches, enhanced by the
    transformative potential of social media, can create a government2.0 in
    which the citizen is placed at the centre of power." Peter Shergold

    
(Macquarie Group Foundation Chair at the Centre for Social Impact, and former secretary of the
     Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet.)

 
    Papers and presentations are invited which examine the emerging shift in
    public policy towards a new paradigm "in which the citizen in placed at the
    centre of power".

    Papers are invited which address these themes in the following four streams:

    1. Policy analysis, case studies, innovation proposals or policy reform
    proposals in social policy in the fields of:

  • Health
  • Education
  • Welfare
  • Disability, ageing and social support
  • Rural and regional affairs
  • Indigenous affairs
  • Family and social relationships
  • Community strengthening and civil society
  • Rights and responsibilities frameworks

    2. Policy analysis, case studies, innovation proposals or policy reform
    proposals in economic policy in the areas of:

  • Civilising global capital
  • Building the capital assets of the bottom half of society
  • Disaggregating concentrations of ownership
  • Making competition work for small consumers and small business
  • Tackling corporate and middle class welfare

    3. Critical assessments of and prognoses for:

  • Notions of Left and Right
  • Neo-liberalism
  • Social democracy
  • Managerialism
  • Communitarianism and mutualism
  • Third Way perspectives       
    [Photo at right: Phillip Blond, ResPublica, UK]

    4. Strategic perspectives on:

  • Processes of  public policy change
  • Processes of empowerment of citizens and communities
  • Diversifying and deepening public debate
  • Citizen participation in reform of the political system

    Expressions of interest in presenting a paper or workshop or display should
    be forwarded, in no more than 300 words by 30 September 2009, to:

    Vern Hughes, Conference Convenor. vern@civilsociety.org.au
    Tel: 0425 722 890

    Register Here    

    CLICK HERE for more information.
    

    Social Enterprise Coalition Invitation to social enterprises   

    The Social Enterprise Coalition Australia
    was formed on 29th July 2009 in
    Melbourne. It is a peer-generated
    leadership voice and strategic
    development tool for the emerging social
    enterprise sector in Australia.

    Membership of the Coalition is open to
    all social enterprises who meet the
    eligibility criteria. There is no fee.

 

 

 

    The Coalition is a lean development-oriented innovation-focussed network - it
    is not a provider of services or member benefits, nor is it a consultancy.
 

    The members of the inaugural Leadership Council of the Coalition are:

    Dianne Batterham, General Manager, Westgate Health Cooperative, South
    Kingsville VIC

    Denis Grehan, CEO, Maroondah Credit Union, Ringwood VIC

    Greg Peel, CEO, Community Sector Banking, Bendigo VIC

    John Simpson, CEO, Finding Workable Solutions, Mt Barker SA

    Peter Collins, Business Manager, Bleeding Heart, Brisbane QLD

    Robert Pekin, CEO and Enterprise Coordinator, FoodConnect, Brisbane
    QLD
 

    Paul Knight, Managing Director, Djenbella Group, Sydney NSW  

    Peter Challis, CEO, Wangaratta and Wodonga Credit Union, Wodonga VIC

    Mark Thomson, Director, The TVS Partnership, Brisbane QLD

    Robert Chewying, Managing Director, ChewYings Lawn and Horticulture,
    Nowra NSW

    Gail Slocombe, CEO, PeakCare, Brisbane QLD

    Simon Cox, Employment Training Coordinator, HopeStreet, Sydney NSW
 

    Cynthia Nadai, Director Balmain / Rozelle Community Bank© a branch of
    Bendigo Bank, NSW


    Vern Hughes, Director, Social Enterprise Partnerships, North Melbourne
    VIC

    To join the Coalition, complete this online membership form.

    CLICK HERE for more information.

   
    Phillip Blond Capitalism for the poor
    
    Phillip Blond, philosopher, theologian and economist, will
    be in Australia in October as a guest of the Centre for Civil
    Society
. His
Progressive Conservatism Project in Britain is
    turning the left-right spectrum upside down in a way we
    haven't seen for a century.

    Blond describes 'progressive conservatism' as 'using conservative means
    to achieve progressive goals'. This means using the institutions of civil
    society (families, neighbourhoods, voluntary associations) to achieve social
    goals rather than government departments, quangos and NGOs. This is a
    revolution in public policy. It is the revolution we need in Australia too.

    "Over the last 30 years the Anglo-Saxon world has adopted the most
    disingenuous of economic systems. Under the guise of capitalism for all, we
    have produced an extraordinary amount of capital but an ever diminishing
    number of capitalists. Rather than trickling downwards, wealth has leveraged
    upwards – denying increasing numbers of people the ability to truly own,
    trade and prosper.

    In 1976, excluding property, the bottom half of the UK population owned 12%
    of the marketable wealth; by 2003 that had fallen to just 1%. Economists at
    Société Générale recently calculated that in the United States, the income
    of the highest paid fifth rose by 60% after 1970, while for all others it has
    fallen by 10%. Through monopolisation of capital markets, deployment of
    unprecedented leverage capital has centralised around a model of debt-
    financed speculation that – without any due diligence – has been transferred
    wholesale to the taxpayer, more than doubling the entire national debt.

    The key political aim ... must be the generation of an asset effect for the
    decapitalised bottom half of society. Assets must, however, come from
    somewhere, and since redistribution and expenditure via the state has such
    a poor record in alleviating dependency, a fresh approach is required.
    Welfare or public expenditure should move from a spending to an investment
    model. The aim must be to free the poor from welfare subsidy through the
    generation of asset independence.

    The following are some ideas as to how this might be achieved:"   

    CLICK HERE to read the full text of this article.   


    Rediscovering Christian Social Thought October 23
   

    Centre for Theology and Ministry

    Melbourne
   

    Phillip Blond will also be a key speaker at this
    Ecumenical Conference in Melbourne on
    October 23.

    Expressions of interest are invited in
    presentation of papers on the following
    conference themes:

  • Historical Formulations of Christian Social Thought
  • Catholic Social Thought and Distributism in Australia
  • Anglican and Reformed Traditions of Christian Social Thought in Australia
  • Economics, Capital Ownership and Markets in Christian Social Thought
  • Associative Relationships in Theology, Economics, Society, Politics
  • Re-Framing Social Justice
  • Theological Liberalism and Conservatism/Political Liberalism and Conservatism
  • Christian Social Thought and notions of Left and Right

     Expressions of interest should be forwarded by email to Vern Hughes in no
     more than 300 words.
   

    Register Here  

    Enquiries: Scott Stephens 0411 320 349 scott.stephens73@gmail.com

    CLICK HERE fro more information.

   
   
Christians in Politics National Summit A Christian Social Agenda
   

    National Summit
    Centre for Theology and Ministry
    24 October 2009

    This event is a political action summit,
    strategic and action-oriented in style.
    Expressions of interest are invited in
    presentation of ideas, strategies and proposals in the following two areas:

    Perspectives on social and economic policy::

  • Persons and social relationships in public policy
  • Building the economic assets of the bottom half of society
  • Making markets and competition serve social purposes
  • Community and associative principles in governance and policy
  • Localism and globalism in Christian thinking
  • Church institutions and public service delivery
  • Rights and responsibilities

    Strategic perspectives on:

  • Christian identity and values and social plurality
  • Processes of  public policy change
  • Christian communities and processes of empowerment of citizens and neighbourhoods
  • Diversifying and deepening public debate
  • Christian participation in reform of the political system

    Register Here  

    Enquiries: Scott Stephens 0411 320 349 scott.stephens73@gmail.com

    CLICK HERE fro more information.
 

    Community Building National Network

    Following a National Symposium on Community
    Building: Critical Voices, Alternative Strategies
   
on 19 June 2007, a national network of community
    builders was established.

    July's National Conference on Natural
    Neighbourhoods, Real Communities
adopted a number of initiatives for
    national development and coordination of key community building strategies
    that will be taken up by the Network.
These are:

  • Street by Street
  • Neighbourhood Power
  • Circles of Support 
  • KeyRing Supported Living Networks
  • The Sharehood
  • Neighbourhood Cultural Exchange
  • National Street Party Weekend November 28-29
  • Social Inclusion Week November 23-29

    CLICK HERE to participate in the Network. There is no cost.

   
CLICK HERE for information on the Network.
 

    Neighbourhood Cultural Exchange
   
    Heinz Kreuz is an elected councillor in the City of
    Boroondara in Melbourne, and a Professor of Germanic
    Studies and Linguistics at Monash University. This is not
    a common double role.

    Having developed a university-based conversation and
    cultural exchange program between ageing immigrants to
    Melbourne from Italy, Spain, Germany and Greece, and
    young students learning these languages, Heinz is keen to extend this
    program into the community. His vision is for community-based conversation
    and cultural exchange programs linking people across generations in
    settings of cultural diversity.

    Heinz is keen to receive ideas and suggestions about how this might be
    developed and implemented on a large scale.

    CLICK HERE to send through your ideas and comments, or to express your
    interest in this project.
   

   
  

   
    AGM Season 2009: What's wrong with advocacy organisations?

    "Building the voluntary sector's
    capacity to support person   
    centred services will be vital. But
    some voluntary groups see their
    main role as advocates for better
    services within the traditional
    professional service model.
"
    Charlie Leadbeater

    We'd like to hear from readers on why advocacy organisations so often lose
    their way and succumb to a kind of Stockholm Syndrome - identifying more
    with policy officers and officials in government and service providers than with
    user, consumers and families?

    One partial explanation is that career paths in the service sector frequently
    see staff move backwards and forwards between service providers,
    government agencies and and advocacy organisations, so that distinctions
    between them become blurred. And policy officers in one area tend to feel
    more in common with policy officers in another area than with the unpaid,
    anonymous users they might sometimes be employed to 'advocate' for.

    The Carers Associations and the Mental Illness Fellowship of Victoria are
    cases in point. The Fellowship was formed by families of people with
    schizophrenia in 1977. But over the years families and consumers have been
    steadily squeezed out. The 'Fellowship' has been turned into a service
    provider, just like any other service provider. Its policy officers, advocates and
    most of its board members will move in and out of various professional and
    consulting roles in the mental health industry.
 

    Today the Mental Illness Fellowship of Victoria has a board of between 12
    and 20. Just 2 of these are from families with a person with a mental illness.
   
 
    A group of parents and individuals with a mental illness are gathering support
    for a General Meeting in MI Fellowship to change the Constitution to require
    at least 6 of its board members to be families or carers of a person with a
    mental illness, and at least 2 to be consumers. That's hardly radical for a
    'fellowship' of people in mental health. 
 
    CLICK HERE to contact Liz Stewart if you are a member of MIF and are
    able to add your name to the requisition to hold a General Meeting to make
    this change.

    The movement of policy officers in Carers Victoria is even more of a merry-
    go-round. Like many organisations initially set up to serve an advocacy role,
    gradually and seamlessly, a service provision function has been added to the
    advocacy function, creating impossible conflicts of interest in the process. A
    loss of identity and an almost complete capitulation to the logic and culture
    of professional service delivery models is the result.

    A meeting of Carers Victoria members to plan a reform campaign will be held
    on Sunday 4th October at 2.30pm in Melbourne.

    CLICK HERE to contact Liz Stewart if you are interested in participating.

    Complete this AGM Expression of Interest Form to express your interest
    or to tell us your views on organisations you believe need a leadership
    challenge. Tell us too if you want to assist others who are nominating for a
    board or committee, through moral or practical support.

    Click here for more information. 
 

    Volunteer  Three roles available with the Centre for Civil Society

    The Centre for Civil Society is experiencing huge growth in the scope and
    scale of its activities. If you are looking for a volunteer role that is
    intellectually stimulating and practically challenging, we want to hear from
    you.

    We have three roles for which we are seeking to appoint volunteers.
    Applicants are invited from all states and territories, for varying time
    commitments.

  • Events Organiser - assisting in the organisation of forums and conferences
  • Writer - mentoring and support is available in writing news and opinion pieces on various topics which fit the Centre's agenda
  • Administrative Assistant - assisting in various administrative, financial and database management tasks

    If you have an interest in any of these roles, please send a CV and the
    names of 3 referees along with a covering letter on your interest in the work
    of the Centre to
Liz Stewart.
 

    Organising by Federal Electorate

    CLICK HERE to register in your electorate
    (there is no cost).

    On registering, participants will be connected
    to an online forum in their electorate, and will receive access to resources
    and guidelines for local activity.


   
CLICK HERE for more information. 


    Events       

    October 23 2009: Rediscovering Christian Social Thought
    Conference
 Centre for Theology and Ministry Melbourne

   
October 24 2009: Christians in Politics National Summit:
    A Christian Social Agenda for the 21st Century
    National Summit
 Centre for Theology and Ministry Melbourne

    October 28-29 2009: After Neo-Liberalism. After Managerialism.
    Participation, Ownership and Redistribution of Power: The New Policy
    Agenda
    National Policy Conference
Sydney
 

    March 22-23 2010
: Consumer-Centred Health
    Care: Policy, Innovation and Empowerment
    National Conference
Melbourne.

  

 
THE CENTRE FOR CIVIL SOCIETY

We are the only think tank
in Australia committed to a wide-ranging agenda of empowerment of ordinary people and strengthening
of civil society.
.
 

Visit our Website

NOTE THE DATE
After Neo-Liberalism:  Participation, Ownership and Redistribution of Power - The
New Policy Paradigm

National Policy Conference

OCTOBER 28-29 2009
Sydney
NOTE THE DATE

 

MAKING IT PERSONAL

Charles Leadbeater, Jamie Bartlett and Niamh Gallagher have authored this highly influential Demos Report on Self-Directed Services and Personal Budgets. This small publication is set have a lasting impact on social policy debate for many years to come.

Charlie Leadbeater

Click here
to read Making It Personal.

 
 
  NOW AVAILABLE:


Click here to purchase this book. $26.95
   
 
  NOW AVAILABLE:


For purchases, contact
Audra Kunciunas
Tel 03 9878 3477 Email
admin@cra.org.au
   
 

LEFT AND RIGHT?

"The Left and Right have been as bad as each other. The Left has allowed its distrust of markets and endless faith in government to obscure the importance of civil society. The Right has been so focused on replacing the state with markets that it has forgotten how to cultivate a trusting society.

This is the politics of the absurd. The Left identifies with the good society but rarely talks about the mutualism and trust between people. The Right recognises the importance of moral obligation but gives the impression of trusting market transactions more than civil society."

Mark Latham, Mutualism: A Third Way for Australia," 1999.

CLICK HERE to read more. 

   
 
  NOW AVAILABLE:


Click here to purchase this book. $29.95

   
 
  NOW AVAILABLE:


Click here to purchase this book.

 
 
SURVEYS
 
If you are the proprietor of a small business, please send us your thoughts on how we can support small businesses through our  SMALL BUSINESS SURVEY

If you are caring for a family member at home who has an illness or disability or aged frailty, please click here to participate in our  Family CarERS SURVEY
 
   
 
 


RESPECT
EMPOWER
INCLUDE

 brings together people in each federal electorate (150 electorates around Australia) to work locally in engaging our communities and our  representatives in an agenda of respect, empowerment and inclusion.


CLICK HERE to join us

   
 
 

FACTS & FIGURES:

MENTAL ILLNESS IN AUSTRALIA, 2007-08

THE number of Australians reporting long-term mental and behavioural problems has risen by 200,000 in the past three years.

Figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics yesterday show a 9 per cent jump in the prevalence of mental ill health between 2004-05 and 2007-08, to 2.3 million from 2.1million.

The number of Australians popping pills and potions for depression, anxiety and insomnia has skyrocketed over the same period. The proportion of people using prescription drugs, herbal supplements or vitamins for mental wellbeing almost doubled from 19per cent to 37 per cent.

Of those on medication, antidepressants (72 per cent), sleeping pills (27 per cent) and anti-anxiety medicines (23 per cent) were the most frequently used drugs among adults, the latest National Health Survey found.

Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics,4363.0.55.001 2009. CLICK HERE for the full report. 

   
 
 

NO CLUE ...        
"The Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet has developed all sorts of facsimiles of Downing Street-style "strategic policy", "joined-up government" capabilities. The Blairite social policy revolutions that largely failed are being regurgitated by a new generation of policy wonks who have no clue about
how social change happens in the real world."

Noel Pearson

Click here
to read more.

   
 
  CORPORATE WELFARE WATCH

Latest Handout Tally

$6.2b handout to car-makers
$2b Commercial property construction industry
$3.9b Free emission permits to coal-fired electricity generators
$2b Car dealer finance guarantee
$149m GMH 4 cylinder car

CLICK HERE for further information. 

   
 
 
 

RESPECT
EMPOWER
INCLUDE

 brings together people in each federal electorate (150 electorates around Australia) to work locally in engaging our communities and our  representatives in an agenda of empowerment of ordinary people.


CLICK HERE to join us

   

NOTE THE DATE
After Neo-Liberalism:  Participation, Ownership and Redistribution of Power - The
New Policy Paradigm

OCTOBER 28-29 2009
Sydney