Reflections from conversations with people in communities on the role of democracy, accountabiltiy, stigma and shame.
A call for more attention to be paid to the fluffy stuff — because this is the starting point of social change.
It’s been a tumultuous week politically for the poverty situation in the UK. A week of horrendously weak responses from the political elite to a tsunami of issues that are ploughing the country further into destitution. We’ve had arguments over statistics and whether the proposed policy responses are effective — clearly they’re not, but I doubt we will convince anyone with making our analysis a wee bit cleverer. It’s very difficult to stay engaged in a debate which ultimately seems quite futile and by that I mean politically futile. We shout into our echo chambers about evidence and lots of people agree with each other but it feels like we are talking at cross purposes with those who are implementing the policies. It’s a battle of ideologies not evidence. Politics, frankly feels draining, demotivating and I’m all but ready to give up. I’ve been having an existential crisis moment where I’m wondering — where does the perspective of the humans on the receiving end of this fit in? Where does humanity fit in all the debates about numbers? Is poverty about numbers? Or is it about people, families and communities?
I’ve spent the last week talking to people who are in those communities, staring into the face of this tsunami that has already started to hit. Those community leaders with experience of the issues we have been debating about, tenaciously working with communities to encourage people to speak out about decisions made that will impact on them.
Through my conversations I’ve been reflecting on why these decisions seem to be so easy to make, going upstream looking at what is enabling this.
The role of stigma and shame
One issue I’m grappling with is how policies are shaped and enabled by stigma and shame. We have a system that is based on distrust. It’s why we argue that there are no evidence to suggest that sanctions work in getting people into work. But I don’t think sanctions are a policy trying to do that. They are a way of reducing spend on out of work benefits. And this is driven by ideology and stigma. People are impacted not only by how this affects them materially but also — and less talked about — mentally. Stigma and mental health are issues that are repeatedly prioritised by groups affected by poverty . It’s systemic and upstream, it impacts on policy design but also on uptake of the inadequate services that do exist. This is systemic — discrimination built into the system…more thought needs to be put to how we might address it. If we don’t we will continue to be downstream battling against the current. If anyone is intersted in chatting about this and have been having similar thoughts, do get in touch.
Democracy and accountability
I have also been thinking a lot about democracy and how it requires accountability to make it meaningful/effective. People on low incomes are much less politically engaged — for very good reason (and this is about to get worse with new proposed legislation). That means accountability tends to come from professional civil society organisations. This is simply untenable and in my view is a failing of the system. Especially when lots of organisations don’t feel they are accountable to those they serve. That’s what the community groups we are working with are trying to address — they are upstream — working on systemic change to try and prevent more and more of these decisions to be so easily taken. They are trying to hold government to account, trying to support government to take better decisions, design better policies by listening to the people who are affected by them. But these groups don’t have the luxury of a large platform, ample funding and the luxury of only focusing on policy solution development or campaigning.
Accountability starts with community building
‘Unless we’re working to help improve people’s lives on the ground — you’re not going to get community or collective action’ Tracey Herrington, Thrive
There’s a lot of apathy and hopelessness because it is too overwhelming… We need to hold people and communities and lift them so they can engage’. Sarah Whitehead, Community Pride
This work starts with supporting people through crisis, then on to building community, then on to activism. Most people who are involved in this start from a position of being supported through crisis, developing a relationship with the organisation who have helped them do that and then slowly building confidence to take part and have their voice heard. Mostly people decide to speak out to ‘try make sure this doesn’t happen to me’. It’s simultaneously an act of reciprocity and kindness to others whom they may never get to meet. This is long, slow, exhausting work for those doing the leg work. It’s not easy convincing someone it’s worth speaking out — especially where we are at now politically.
Yet when it comes to defining impact, we often jump to the very end point of this and judge whether a small under funded group have managed to get into the media or met with a key decision maker. The hard graft of filling in the gaping gaps of community and building a more effective democratic system — where those affected can hold government to account themselves is un-recognised, un-counted and therefore often not valued.
Community building starts with care, then nourishes reciprocity
“What if we responded to poverty like we responded to COVID — neighbour to neighbour acts of kindness?” Maff Potts, Camerados
The starting point is one of care. Often, care for those who we have had no prior contact with — those who are not family members. This is the starting point for solving poverty — human acts of kindness. It starts with social capital. This is what we see day in day out with the groups that we work with in communities but is rarely factored into analysis. It’s rare that these invisible undervalued things that enable that economy to function get any airtime in the poverty debate. Social capital cannot be provided by the state, it needs something more. But the State can play more of an enabling role.
What drives economic insecurity/ destitution?
‘I’ve housed thousands of homeless people and most of those who are isolated, are not tied into networks of family or community support, end up back homeless again. It needs more then a bed and a roof’ Maff Potts, Camerados
Will we fix it simply by providing more homes? Or an increase in benefits? Is this the one answer? What happens when like above it doesn’t work? I can tell you right now that those who lack those invisible, taken for granted networks are at much higher risk of destitution. All too often this element is thought of as fluffy and heart warming — but it’s not, it often makes or breaks whether people live or die. How are people going to manage the onslaught of price rises amidst a regime of sanctions? They’re scuppered if they’re not connected into networks of support. It’s what people tell us all the time but still…the debate is dominated by material countable things. We’ve had a tsunami of inadequate policy responses this week, the only thing we have left are these networks. What if they’re not there…?
Mutual aid (different to the food bank kind)
One more reflection — on something more internal but that has lessons for wider approaches is the need to put reciprocity at the heart of interactions and approaches. As Maff Potts eloquently explains— ‘it’s shit being on the receiving end of help, much better to be able to help one another ‘ — be the giver of help as well as the receiver. One of the worst thing about being in poverty is always being on the receiving end, not having the ability to give back — it’s undignified, it takes away the inbuilt human desire to reciprocate. It’s about approaching things knowing that both parties will get something from it. I’m indebted to Hugh Douglas one of our valued partners with lots of different experiences — including participatory approaches, who I am continually reflecting with and who is helping us design a better offer of partnership with people that we work with. He consistently encourages us to think much more deeply and robustly about this.
So in a week of political despair, the one thing that continues to give me hope and that has this week, dragged me out of my slump is the conversations with people in the communities, doing the graft, having the courage to take on real systemic change; trying to build community where it struggles to exist, trying to rebuild accountability for a better functioning democracy whilst at the same time supporting people through crisis. All incredible insight and evidence, too rarely drawn upon, too rarely respected.
We saw this week how Jack Monroe managed to cut through the to-ing and fro-ing over numbers on the rate of inflation — that could have raged on and on, neither side convincing the other. What you can’t argue with is what this rise in prices feels like as a person on the receiving end — how it is quite simply not possible to live like this. You can argue until the cows come home about statistics but you can not argue with that. This is in no way a call for more pitiful and patronising case studies in an attempt to ‘involve’ people. This is exactly what Jack did not do. What she did was combine deft monitoring and recording of numbers and combined that with the core of what this is all about — how this impacts on people, children, families, communities. A powerful and stunningly effective example of holding government to account — by one of the many who have the most stake in it.
The one thing I continue to wish and hope is that we — the public, the sector, society, treat people with the respect they deserve, involve people on the ground doing the graft in our analysis and reflections. We have the privilege of reflecting from a distance on these issues every day. People living on the sharp end don’t — and that’s simply not right.
Huge thanks to all those who have reflected with me this week and over the years.
