This is my personal view of the meeting, offered to open up the discussion on the Opportunity and Fairness Commission in Croydon.
The first public meeting of the Opportunity and Fairness Commission was held tonight.
The Timebridge Centre offered the Centre for the public meeting at no cost to the Commission, which the Bishop of Croydon, who chairs the commission, acknowledged.
The meeting was promoted as an opportunity for the community to tell the commission what they thought but little time was devoted to this on the evening as those attending sat through presentation after presentation.
The publicity for the event
Although this was interesting and highlighted the work of local groups and individuals such as New Addington Pathfinders, the Salvation Army, the work of Imagine – a mental health charity and others, it did not seem to fulfil the aims of the meeting, as it was promoted.
The success of the Fairness Commission in Islington was also presented by another speaker. It would be useful to get the resident view on this to see if this accords with the success of this project portrayed tonight.
The findings reported by the Commission in the main presentation opening the meeting were as a result of conversations with 50 – 60 individuals in New Addington and these were used to demonstrate the priorities for the area.
Schools featured nowhere in the hierarchy of the support network offered in this survey, which a headteacher and school governor both remarked on as odd.
Anyone with insight into the role played by the school today – whether it be the headteacher or senior leaders, classroom teachers, SENCo and support staff – will know that the role extends way beyond that of merely educating students, dealing with the ever changing Education agendas and the challenges of satisfying Ofsted!
Staff spend many hours offering support and guidance, not only to the students but to their families and, at times, the community beyond. They deal with not only the emotional and social issues associated with behaviour issues, family breakups, illness and bereavements, but often provide practical support and advice when families need help with housing, legal and financial issues. Schools even provide for the basic needs of students, such as ensuring children who need a meal are fed, or a child who needs clothes or support to keep themselves healthy, receives this.
If this were an exercise conducted in a more affluent area then the oversight might, almost, be excusable. To me, and to others, it indicates that this ‘research’ is superficial at best, but potentially extremely damaging and probably unrepresentative if it is used to inform communities or decision makers.
The lack of attendance and engagement of councillors and the Commissioners themselves was evident at the meeting and not a happy start to the public meetings. Local Councillors were present though, including Cllr Bonner and Cllr Woodley, as well as Cllr Ali who sits on both the Commission and the Stronger Communities Partnership board.
There was just one person representing communities, involved in the Stronger Communities Partnerships board present, but she spoke passionately of her desire to see this initiative have impact, referring to her ‘been there, done that, got the t-shirt’ experience of so many previous initiatives. This, to me, is someone who takes their role seriously and she left the audience and the Commission in no doubt that she would be attending all meetings to hold the Commission to account!
As a representative of a community group, excluded from having a voice in this forum, I applaud people like this who are permitted a voice and who make real efforts to keep informed and have their voice heard.
The discussion part of the meeting involved just 15 minutes (originally intended to be 30 minutes apparently, according to the unseen agenda). This was well short of the proper engagement promised.
Quite what the £200K is being spent on is still a mystery.
CCC have actively promoted the Commission and its work, as have the police in Croydon and others.
There is a poor social media presence, with few tweets about activities. Promotion of the event by other parties is not being acknowledged. Even the tweets of commissioners during the course of their work on the commission are not promoted.
Surely a social media strategy to ensure real public engagement was a key point as part of the commissioning process. As the tendering process is no longer viewable, nobody knows. The link no longer exist, but anyone who has lived in Croydon for any period will find this not unusual.
There was no agenda offered, at a meeting that referred to keeping to the agenda on many occasions. There were no handouts of the presentations – difficult to view from the back of the hall.
There were no DIY toolkit materials for anyone to view or to take away on the night, just a flyer, with scant reference to this in the meeting, omitting the detail of what this involved.
The flyer offered has been uploaded to our site as not available yet via Opportunity Croydon website.
What will come of the discussions was not announced. I’d hope there would be a report on each meeting with a list of attendees and points arising to inform the Croydon community. It is hoped that the presentations will be uploaded. And handouts will be made available in a simple format that allows easy sharing and printing.
I was disappointed by the response given on the lack of youth engagement; an excuse already made and accepted that youth will not engage. What has been done to engage youth already to lead to this defeatist attitude? If adults within Croydon communities doubt the motives and power of such a commission it is reasonable to assume that youth will be even more sceptical and disengaged. There was little in the publicity that sought to engage youth views.
The setting up of a Youth Commission certainly ticks the ‘has engaged’ box, but does it genuinely engage communities? Let’s see.
The overriding concern for me was that the Commission appears intent on dividing communities up into ward, area and group ‘silos’, where everything works in a vacuum. Whilst this might suit politicians and local authorities, and it seems this Commission, it rarely meets the wider needs of the community.
I was delighted tonight to meet with other like minded people who see the bigger picture. Division of communities within Croydon is just that – divisive. So many groups work across the borough or support other groups outside of their own area. We need more of this, not less.
Written in haste, in order to opening up access to an insight and the debate on this….
What did you think?
Elizabeth Ash
I currently chair CCC – an apolitical group, working across the borough of Croydon.
CCC are keen to engage communities in Croydon on matters that are important to them.
CCC 