Every Voice Counts: Border group rural voices 1 2 ppt

384 views
317 views

Published on

Project to involve residents and find and engage active citizens in the Border area of Herefordshire

Published in: Education
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
384
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Every Voice Counts: Border group rural voices 1 2 ppt

  1. 1. Border Group Rural Voices Speakers’ Corner Trust (SCT) nef (new economics foundation)
  2. 2. Timetable up to project start <ul><li>January – March 2009 : Scoping by SCT </li></ul><ul><li>April 2009 : SCT proposal to RAWM </li></ul><ul><li>August 2009 : revised SCT/nef proposal to RAWM after CLG changed programme criteria </li></ul><ul><li>October 2009 : project commissioned </li></ul><ul><li>Effect: 12 month project compressed into 6 months </li></ul>
  3. 3. Objectives of the project <ul><li>To involve 50 residents </li></ul><ul><li>15 – 20 of these to become more active citizens </li></ul><ul><li>(e.g. gain confidence to engage with local authority decision making processes) </li></ul><ul><li>Achieve this by identifying and tackling one or two local issues </li></ul>
  4. 4. Timetable of the project <ul><li>12 November 2009 : meet chair, vice-chair and clerk of Border Group parish council </li></ul><ul><li>15 December : present to parish council + selected public </li></ul><ul><li>15 January 2010 : first public meeting </li></ul><ul><li>1 February : second public meeting agrees to tackle flooding </li></ul><ul><li>23 March : parish council hold closed meeting on flooding </li></ul>Issue Desirable Feasible 1. Lack of broadband 9 votes 10 votes 2. Flooding 9 5 3. Provision for children and young people 4 2
  5. 5. The parish council and flooding <ul><li>Initial stance: not able to go it alone – could not attract key decision-makers </li></ul><ul><li>Some people affected outside the area covered by the Border Group parish council </li></ul><ul><li>Closed meeting on March 23 rd appeared to be a change of tack </li></ul><ul><li>Deterred volunteers </li></ul>
  6. 6. What we learned <ul><li>Complexity and unpredictability of small rural communities </li></ul><ul><li>Gap between even the lowest tier of local government and the community </li></ul><ul><li>Community frustrated with a lack of opportunities to work through issues </li></ul><ul><li>Community forums would enhance the democratic process by complementing parish council meetings </li></ul>
  7. 7. What we achieved <ul><li>Created welcome opportunities for dialogue </li></ul><ul><li>Began to bridge government/community gap – in a replicable way </li></ul><ul><li>Produced a guide to organising a community forum </li></ul><ul><li>Reached the whole community by summarising/publicising the guide in the parish newsletter. </li></ul>

×