[fvc-wat-disc] monthly meeting next Thursday

Peter Croves petercroves at gmail.com
Thu Jul 30 19:01:29 EDT 2020


is meeting on?. i go to the link and  nothing happens and i go to zoom,
there is no meeting listed

On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:19 PM Peter Croves <petercroves at gmail.com> wrote:

> noted, i should be on hand for meeting
>
> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:15 PM Jennifer Ross <2jennross at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Cathy.  Meeting sounds great!
>>
>> Unfortunately, there's a Green debate at that time and I already said I
>> was going to it.
>>
>> Jenn
>> Bookkeeping Services
>> 519-501-2736
>> No other Western democratic country concentrates as much political power in
>> the hands of one person as Canada does with her Prime Minister.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 23, 2020 at 10:11 PM Cathy Scott <cathy.scottfree at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi, All,
>>> Next Thursday, July 30 is our next regular meeting.  The link is below.
>>> Please note that the meeting will start at 7:00, which is our usual time.
>>> I scheduled the start time on Zoom for 6:30 so I can open the meeting a
>>> little early, so we don't miss anyone.
>>>
>>> The discussion topic on the agenda is:
>>> 'Selecting replacement candidates when an elected member cannot fulfil
>>> his/her term'
>>> *Please advise of any other content for the agenda.*
>>>
>>> *Also, here is my synopsis of  the Zoom presentation (July 15th), called
>>> 'Catching the Deliberative Wave'. (I think others of our group also
>>> attended this), *
>>> * This  was the launch of the OECD's report on 'Innovative Citizen
>>> Participation and New Democratic Institutions'.  The report was a study of
>>> the use of  deliberative processes (variously called, 'reference panels',
>>> 'citizens' assemblies', 'citizens' juries', 'planning cells') which have
>>> been used increasingly worldwide, since the 1980s, to engage citizens in
>>> developing informed recommendations on an issue, which governing
>>> authorities then use to develop policies.  *
>>>
>>> *Claudian Chwalisz, one of the authors of the report, presented a
>>> summary of the report:*
>>>
>>>    - *the deliberative process is commissioned by a public authority
>>>    and the deliberating group is randomly selected, and demographically
>>>    stratified by gender, age, geographic location, economic status, etc.,*
>>>    - *the study included 289 cases of deliberative process worldwide,
>>>    40 of which were in Canada, at all levels of government*
>>>    - *types of issues that were addressed included values-driven
>>>    dilemnas, long-term problems, etc.  See the graphic in the report, attached
>>>    below.*
>>>    - *criteria for a successful process included random/balanced
>>>    selection of members of the group, sufficient time for the process, clear
>>>    and specific definition of the issue,  provision of comprehensive
>>>    information to the group.  THe report has a graphic which shows the
>>>    complete criteria.*
>>>    - *benefits of a deliberative process:*
>>>       - *better policy outcomes*
>>>       - *greater legitimacy - politicians can say their policies are
>>>       based on citizens' informed judgements, rather than 'opinions' gathered
>>>       through conventional means of gathering citizens' feedback, such as
>>>       townhalls, surveys, etc.*
>>>       - *enhances public trust*
>>>       - *signals civic respect and empowers citizens*
>>>       - *strengthens integrity of governing bodies*
>>>       - *helps counteract polarization and disinformation*
>>>    - *discussion of reasons and methods of embedding public
>>>    deliberation as an institution, as has been done in some countries, such as
>>>    France.*
>>>    - *12 different models of deliberative processes are described in
>>>    the report*
>>>
>>> *Claudia's summary was followed by a panel discussion by *
>>>
>>>    - *Peter McLeod, from MASS LBP, an organization which designs and
>>>    conducts deliberative processes for governing authorities, corporations,
>>>    etc.  He pointed out that 1400 Canadians have been involved in
>>>    approximately 40 deliberative processes in Canada.  Participants gain a
>>>    better understanding of the complexity of an issue, and greater empathy for
>>>    other points of view.  Citizens have an opportunity to engage meaningfully
>>>    in decision-making, promoting 'inclusive governance', in democracy .  These
>>>    opportunities improve citizens' 'democratic fitness', by sharing in the
>>>    privilege to speak for others *
>>>    - *Leslie Woo, from Metrolinx, the corporation that is planning and
>>>    building transit expansion in the GTA and surrounding  areas.  Metrolinx
>>>    has worked with MASS LBP to gather information from citizens, in order to
>>>    plan for the transit needs in the GTA.  She pointed out that the
>>>    deliberative process concept needs champions who believe in that better
>>>    policies result, and who are not afraid of the outcome of  a deliberative
>>>    process, who can let go of control of the outcome.  *
>>>    - *Karen Fuller, who is on the 'Open Government Team', which is the
>>>    outreach and engagement team of the federal government.  SHe pointed out
>>>    that citizen deliberation is important to policy-makers who are looking for
>>>    tools to help make complex decisions;  that it is important
>>>    that people believe in what the government is doing.  Deliberative
>>>    processes have not been widely used in government - somewhat by Health
>>>    Canada.  Her team's challenges are to promote this concept within the
>>>    government, and to move the findings of the OECD report into government
>>>    practice, by  briefing senior management;  justifying the concept of
>>>    deliberative process,  to garner support for implementing it.  See chapter
>>>    3 of the report regarding increasing trends toward deliberative process,
>>>    and chapter 5 regarding principles.  She finds this information useful in
>>>    briefing public servants, since they are inclined to want to ground things
>>>    in tenets and principles.*
>>>
>>>
>>> *I am attaching the  'Highlights' of the OECD report - see below. (You
>>> can also see the whole report, by Googling 'United Nations Democracy Fund',
>>> but the whole report is 240 pages, or so, and the 'Highlights' document is
>>> about 48 pages, which is long enough for me!).*
>>>
>>>
>>> Here is the link to our meeting next Thursday.
>>>
>>> Topic: monthly discussion group meeting
>>> Time: Jul 30, 2020 06:30 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
>>>
>>> Join Zoom Meeting
>>>
>>>
>>> https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85093016919?pwd=S1JQcTVWYzZMMXVyS0xBaVlSbG5Bdz09
>>>
>>> Meeting ID: 850 9301 6919
>>> Passcode: 525312
>>> One tap mobile
>>> +13462487799,,85093016919#,,,,,,0#,,525312# US (Houston)
>>> +16468769923,,85093016919#,,,,,,0#,,525312# US (New York)
>>>
>>> Dial by your location
>>>         +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
>>>         +1 646 876 9923 US (New York)
>>>         +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
>>>         +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
>>>         +1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)
>>>         +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
>>> Meeting ID: 850 9301 6919
>>> Passcode: 525312
>>> Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kbn71Fgkc0
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
>>> Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This is the fvc-wat-disc mailing list
>> Post a message: fvc-wat-disc at listserv.thinkers.org
>> Unsubscribe:
>> http://listserv.thinkers.org/mailman/listinfo/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.thinkers.org/pipermail/fvc-wat-disc_listserv.thinkers.org/attachments/20200730/521c07f2/attachment-0002.htm>


More information about the fvc-wat-disc mailing list