 |
|
 David
David听is a member of our Reading Citizen Jury and is writing a blog for us whilst the jury meet and discuss the different issues with regards to "respect".
|
 |
|
|
This is part of a national conversation, but like any conversation it has to take place somewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
|
USEFUL LINKS |
|
|
|
|
|
听
The 大象传媒 is not responsible for the content of external websites
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thursday 6th October 2005
We finally finished our draft deliberations on Tuesday evening and then a few of us met the local oversight panel yesterday afternoon, as Connie said it was nice to talk without the 'lollipop' in our faces.
Our deliberations over Monday and Tuesday, as I indicated last week, our discussions on each topic were short and sweet, we had left too many issues open. We were in danger, as Tom said in his 'blog' of 29 th September, were in danger of not focussing on issues which, we could actually address and achieve something. However, in the end were able to refine the points reasonably well.
We still have issues where, we as a Jury feel we need more information before our final deliberations can be made. We have made a start!
This week along with some of the other jurors I felt that at times this week attempts were made, by some of the Jury, to re-engineer society. At one point we even discussed changing the Tax System, as a means of controlling 'Fat Cat's Salaries, where did that come from?
With regard to the Jury System itself, I feel it worked very well. There are some areas I personally feel it could be improved, but will raise these separately with the organisers and oversight panels for their consideration.
Although we, only committed to a short period of effort and time, the majority of Jurors not only proposed but, agreed to commit to a longer-term involvement to ensure that we can see our ideas, suggestions and recommendations are followed through to a successful conclusion.
Now that is "TRUE RESPECT", not only for each other but, for the community as a whole!
Our sessions over the next few weeks are with the Leader of Reading Council later this month and then with the National Oversight Panel in early November.
I look forward to this week's broadcast on Saturday and seeing all of my fellow jurors at our next meetings.
Until then best wishes and good luck.
David
Friday 30th September 2005
Yet more "Vitriol" for the Jury this week. In the Media section of the Grauniad this time! I responded, initially in a lengthy tome about how worthy my fellow jurors are etc., and that we are making our best efforts to find solutions to the problems and issues we are looking at.
Finally after comment from a good friend I left it to saying merely
'Madam
May I suggest that you come and meet the Jury before you judge us by your own Standards!'
Having heard our last witnesses on Monday we are starting our deliberations, reflections and the final honing of our questions for the 'great and good! '
Our witnesses this week were Richard, from Nottingham University Medical School , a statistician and Nick, from Reading Single Homeless Project, a charity based believe it or not in Reading .
Whilst Richard, explained and enunciated the facts and figures about the differences in life expectancy, general health and achievements between the 'have and have nots'; Nick, set out the goals and achievements of the charitable project he runs in terms of helping the homeless to find new accommodation and learning the life skills to enable them, to find a secure future in the longer term.
Our deliberations were to say the least short, on some of the issues we had identified, and we need now to drill down to the causes and remedial effort required by us all. Initially, our discussions pointed to attaching everything to an outside agency, requiring investment from Government, Local Council etc. rather than taking ownership of the problems ourselves.
Merely saying the Government must do more, does not address the causes of the problems or find solutions to them.
As one of my bosses, used to say, 'Don't come to me, with problems, come to me, with solutions!'
Still, onwards and upwards. See you next week.
David
Friday 23rd September 2005
Well, with week two of the Jury completed, the Jury are the target of the TODAY listeners with some vitriolic comments on the choice of Jurors in that we are 'Toadies' of the programme, there to exploit the perceived views of the presenters and editors.
I was tempted to respond, but then remembered that I am not 'Angry of Tunbridge Wells', have my own views and am not a puppet chosen by Mr Naughtie, Mr Humphry's or even from the old days Jack de Manio! No, I have my own views, will form my own opinions and judge the issues according to my own conscience.
I am prepared, willing and proud to listen to the witnesses, we have after all called them to give evidence. I will then, along with the other jurors, ask the questions - we wish to ask - No prompting from anyone. As far as I am concerned, and I am sure I share this with the other members of the jury, it is my question and I will ask it.
Anyway enough of my rantings, back to this week.
We had four sets of witnesses this week, variously from Dundee , Manchester , Oxford and Reading - our first local witnesses.
Gill, from Dundee , who has been involved for the last nine years with the 'Dundee Families Project'. The project, jointly funded by NCH and Dundee Council, supports anti-social families in the area. This includes help ranging from 24/7 support in an almost closed environment to gradually more occasional support for the family in the community.
Our second witnesses on Monday were Jan and Arlene who run 'Reading Safer Families' which aims at dealing with issues of family violence within the home. They use counselling on a regular basis with the families in attempting to resolve these issues.
Tuesday evening saw us looking at ASBOs from both sides of the fence. Bill from Manchester Council, who deals more with the obtaining of an ASBO, whilst Gary from Oxford Night Shelter Support opposes the use of these civil injunctions with many of his clients subject to them. However, despite their differing views, there was much agreement between them - surprisingly to many of the jurors.
We are getting ever closer to the issues we wish to discuss and our final deliberations become harder week-by-week. I know. I have copious pages of notes to decipher already and formulating ideas, opinions and then being able to define them sufficiently to come up with both challenges and - more importantly - cogent questions and problems for our 'Lord and Masters' to consider. It will be extremely hard work.
At this point (approximately half way through the process) I wonder whether we should all meet again in 12 months time to see whether we have been able to achieve anything.
Next week, in addition to our witness sessions, several of us will actually have a chance to visit the work, Darren, our first witness is undertaking with the East End Youth projects he is involved in.
Still, onward and upwards. See you all on Monday.
David
Friday 16th September 2005
Well the first week of the Jury is over and I have had time to reflect on our discussions and thoughts.
I am sure that like most of the others, I was unsure what was coming on Sunday morning when the Jury met for the first time. We were a diverse group with very differing views, ideas, ages and everything else that makes us what we are!
The first session on Sunday deciding what we should review highlighted the diversity of the group and even before the voting as to which subject, we should discuss, I had already learnt an awful lot!
Our decision meant that we would look at both 'Youth Culture' and the attendant problems but include discussions about 'Street Culture and the Homeless' within the problems seen by majority.
We reconvened on Monday evening to meet our first witness, Darren, a youth worker in East London who very ably described the way his groups had attempted to help and address the problems being encountered by all the generations in his area and shared his experiences from America which were all very apposite to our discussions. I felt we learnt a great deal from the evening and am sure that much will be carried forward in our final deliberations.
The second evening I, personally, felt disappointed about; whilst the witness had had to be booked before we decided where our discussions would go I felt that I was being lectured to, rather than questioning the witness. During some of the breaks when the jury broke into smaller groups several others voiced similar concerns, however, despite this they were all looking for the positive which I found very refreshing.
Finally, on a personal note may I say how very impressed I am by the contribution and "RESPECT" that all , my fellow Jurors have shown to each other regardless of age, ethnicity or gender - they can be proud of their contribution!
See you nest week
David
 Back to Reports Homepage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
