Skip to main content

Too Early, Too Far - again!

Norfolk LINk has announced it is to launch its new website this coming Thursday 14th. At the same time there is to be a “Public Meeting” to celebrate the 1st anniversary of the LINk on that day “...a chance to meet the newly elected members” they say.

Sick joke! For members of the public to attend that meeting from here they would have to travel in a good car for more than an hour to reach Swaffham which is about 60 miles away. And it is more for other ordinary people (the “public”) from Norfolk.

This effectively means this forthcoming meeting in Swaffham socially excludes and discriminates against disabled people.

The government paper “Planning your Local Involvement Network” said:

3.0 The primary role of a LINk is to provide a stronger voice for local people in the planning, design or redesign, commissioning, and provision of health and social care services.

3.1 Although LINks have flexibility about how they undertake their roles, there are a number of principles that should be common to all. These include: being accessible to all, including those with full-time jobs, those who feel excluded and those who might need support to participate

What generates pained laughter about Norfolk LINk is that the “public” label attached to this Swaffam meeting is empty - all this meeting can be is a cosy gathering of the Norfolk LINk Star Chamber with what ‘members’ remain - paid for by the scarce funds of the Host - money that could have been better used to reach out to service users, carers and the genuine public across Norfolk AS IS SUPPOSED TO BE THEIR FIRST PRIORITY.

In stark contrast I came across another good example (see my entry for 13th April below) of how it should be done today: At the side of the entrance to Beccles Tesco’s was an attractive and colourfully presented small (12ft x 12ft) marquee (which would not be expensive to buy) promoting World Breastfeeding Week. I asked the three personable people staffing the marquee if getting permission to set it up there had been difficult. “We just came here and asked inside and there was no hesitation.” They said.

Shame on this Norfolk LINk which is fast becoming more and more inward looking and self-congratulatory.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

SURVIVOR HISTORY NEWSLETTER

>From Andrew Roberts Secretary Survivors History Group http://studymore.org.uk/ studymore@studymore.org.uk telephone: 020 8 986 5251 home address: 177 Glenarm Road, London, E5 ONB Survivor History Group Summer 2012 Newsletter The July London meeting of the Survivors History Group will be held on Wednesday 25.7.2012 from 1pm to 5pm at Together, 12 Old Street, London. Everybody is welcome and refreshments will be provided. The September meeting has had to be moved from a Wednesday to Thursday 27.9.2012 (subject to approval by this Wednesday's meeting) because of the availability of a room at Together.   -------------------------------------------------------------------- The agenda for the July meeting will be drawn up at the beginning of the meeting, but it will include Peter Campbell's regular report back on the research he is leading on the history of Survivors Speak Out and discussion of material received from other people about Survivors Speak Out.  Rick Hennelly has se...

The DLA and Workfare Scandals.

This ConDem Coalition is exploiting the apparent helplessness of disabled people by taking essential money away from them and forcing vulnerable people, for example, people with mental health difficulties. I remember, when I was a practising social worker, the horror experienced by service users when they received a letter summoning them to undergo a medical examination (25 miles away in Norwich). Some became absolutely terrified at the prospect and the stress of having to get to and face the appointment led to one or two relapses and hospital admissions. Against local authority policy, I always took them to the appointment, went in with them and supported them through the interview acting as advocate. The doctors at these reviews were employed by the Benefits Agency and usually retired from practice. They were also usually empathic with the service user and mostly helped to reduce the terror of the interview. The new 'Workfare' reviews which every DLA claimant will have to und...

Mental Health Labels?

I read this valuable little report yesterday. It presents issues and dichotomies around disability labels, models of disability and rejections of the disability label by mental health service users/survivors. The report makes positive recommendations about furthering the debate but, in my opinion, the user contributions muddy rather than clarify matters. The subjects are seminal to the work being carried out to integrate physically, sensory, mental health and intellectual disabilities - essential if we are to progress further in our strivings for human and statutory rights. For me, the report is enormously helpful in providing a foundation for discussions of what are important questions and perhaps, if properly distributed, it could bring a better focus towards some resolution. Heddwch. Mike.