Unemployment: whose problem?

Quote
“A man willing to work, and unable to find work, is perhaps the saddest sight that fortune's inequality exhibits under this sun.”  Thomas Carlyle

News

Public sector job cuts in Britain reached a new record, as 111,000 people were laid off between April and June.  Decisions to make people redundant are taken primarily on economic grounds, but the experience and impact of unemployment goes far beyond the economic realm.  Being out of work carries huge relational costs.  It puts stress on family and couple relationships through the loss of household income, uncertainty about the future, and in some cases from enforced role changes (e.g. when the woman works longer hours and the man has to carry more of the domestic and childcare work). 

The stigma of unemployment brings psychological pressure, causing to a loss of self-esteem, depression and even suicide.  In the long term it can lead to welfare dependency – particularly damaging for young people who are unable to build up their skills, or begin and provide for a family.  Unemployment is isolating, leaving people with neither work colleagues nor the funds to socialise with salaried friends.

At the community level, the gap between those in work and those out of work often creates social and political tensions.  When a major employer in a town goes out of business, it can decimate the whole community – which happened in many British mining towns in the 1980s.

Unemployment is generally viewed as a political and economic issue.  So governments ensure people receive financial help, and use fiscal measures to create jobs.  But from a relational perspective, what might be done differently? 

Arguably, the locus of responsibility and initiative could be shifted down to a more local level.  The less unemployment is treated as a problem for central government, the more responsive and adaptive the help can be to local conditions and personal circumstances.  City councils could develop initiatives to encourage people and businesses in the local community to share in the challenge of keeping people in work. Such relational responses to unemployment have the potential to reduce the gaps between those in and out of work, and build stronger community relationships as well.

Read on...

15 years ago, the Relationships Foundation set up Citylife (now renamed Allia) to pioneer Employment Bonds – a mechanism for people to invest in creating jobs in local communities.  An article in the Guardian tells the story; read it here.

Walk the talk

Unemployment is a nationwide problem, but is there some way that you can make a difference to just one unemployed person?  You may not be able to offer a job, but could you visit and encourage someone you know who is out of work, or volunteer with a local charity that teaches job skills to young people? 

The last word
From the Bible, Ecclesiastes 2:24 “A man can do nothing better than to eat and drink and find satisfaction in his work. This too, I see, is from the hand of God”.

Response and relationships since 9/11

Quote
“Revenge is the easy way out, but it doesn’t do the vengeful person any good.  Revenge just perpetuates a cycle. I don’t want revenge, I want healing.”  Rachel North, survivor of the 7/7 bombings in London

News

The 10^th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks has filled much column space and air time in the media this week.  These range from personal recollections of people caught up in the horrific events of that cloudless morning, to debates on the outcomes of military intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The invasions and regime change in these two countries were part of what George Bush dubbed the “war on terror”.  The 9/11 attacks were seen as security issues; only a military response could guarantee the safety of America and its Western allies.  This set the tone for the decade ahead.

How effective has that response been?  It has succeeded in preventing any further attacks on American soil, which was its foremost objective; however, Al Qaeda bombs have taken many more civilian lives in Bali, Madrid, London, Amman and other cities across the Middle East and Asia, especially in Iraq.

Major investments in security and surveillance technology at airports and borders have caught a number of would-be terrorists, but the average American or European does not feel much more secure than ten years ago.  In part this is due to the rise in fear and suspicion of Muslims in general, compounded by the way that military, religious and political issues have been conflated over the decade. 

What of the cost?  The post 9/11 wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq have cost 225,000 lives (of which 31,000 were military personnel and their contractors), and $4 trillion has been spent by America alone.  This is 100 times more than the $43.4 billion spent by the US on official development assistance to those three countries over the same period.

Every country has a right to defend itself, by force if necessary.  But the use of force over the long term to tackle underlying tension usually ends up exchanging one set of problems for another, and is hugely expensive in economic and relational terms.

Looking ahead, the threat of terrorism can be viewed as a security issue or a relational issue.  If the resources spent on trying to make the post 9/11 world safer could lean more on the relational side of the equation (e.g. educating people on the difference between moderate and radical Islam, promoting Christian-Muslim dialogue, or investing more in the development of some of the poorest Muslim countries), then a more sustainable peace could be built – between nations and between ordinary people alike.

Read on...

A panel discussion at Harvard on Tuesday agreed that the 10^th anniversary of 9/11 is an opportunity for the US to move away from a military-driven response to a policy built on “diplomacy, outreach and persuasion”.  Read a report on the discussion here.

Walk the talk

Using threats and even force at home or work can sometimes bring about compliance in the short term, but at the lasting expense of trust, respect and understanding.  Are there any on-going tensions that would benefit from patience and careful listening on your part?

The last word
From the Bible, Proverbs 15, verse 1: “A gentle answer turns away wrath, but a harsh word stirs up anger.”

After the riots, back to school

Quote
“The poor suffer twice at the rioter's hands. First, his destructive fury scars their neighbourhood; second, the atmosphere of accommodation and consent is changed to one of hostility and resentment.” President Lyndon B Johnson

News

As children and teenagers return from their school holidays in Britain, the riots in August will be a major topic of conversation.  The scenes of chaos and looting bring home the truth that a society which aspires to both freedom and security depends on ample amounts of both trust and self-restraint.  We commented on the relational aspects of trust in an earlier Friday Five; the flip side of trust is self-restraint.  This involves accepting that right and wrong exist in an absolute sense – it’s not just about getting caught – and choosing the right when the opportunity presents to do otherwise (such as a walking past the smashed window of a mobile phone shop, when others are helping themselves). 

Basic moral standards are formed for better or worse in children through parenting at home and the socialisation process in the community – especially at school, and in faith groups.  Values are both taught and caught, and good relationships are both the method by which those values are transmitted and the fruit which they produce.

This reinforces our conviction at Relationships Global that working to improve relationships in public and private life is not a ‘bolt-on extra’ – they are a fundamental part of any healthy society.  Good relationships, or at least functional ones, are taken for granted when all is well; but when decades of broken families and disrespect for authority erupt into scenes of looting and arson, then knee-jerk reactions about being harder on criminals are woefully inadequate.

On the BBC this morning, the Prime Minister spoke about the need for ‘tough love’ in dealing with those involved in the riots.  The government cannot legislate morality, however; their power is limited to indirect influences on attitudes and behaviour.  What is needed is a broad, grassroots movement committed, over the long haul, to recovering moral standards (here faith communities should take the lead) and rebuilding family and local community relationships in the real world. 

Read on...

The Chief Rabbi, Jonathan Sacks, has written a deeply reflective comment on the riots and points towards how social capital can be rebuilt, so as to ‘Reverse the decay of London undone’.  Read this excellent article here.

Walk the talk

Many of the youths convicted following the UK riots have grown up with absent fathers, and are gang members.  One of the greatest needs that all young people have is for real conversations with adults they respect.   Might you help meet that need for any children (perhaps your own!) who lack quality time with an adult? 

The last word
From the Bible, Proverbs 22:6 “Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old he will not depart from it.”

Aid, Africa and relational distance

Quote
“Don’t only give your care, but give your heart as well.” Mother Teresa

News
Drought in the horn of Africa is causing a mass exodus of families and communities from their homes and lands in a desperate attempt to avoid starvation. The response to East Africa’s worst drought in 60 years has been generous; the World Food Programme reported a surge in donations this week, and the Disasters Emergency Committee appeal in UK has just passed £30 million in private donations.
 

Against this backdrop, there has been controversy in Britain over the size of the government’s aid budget. Since 1997 successive Labour and Conservative governments have been pursuing the UN target of giving 0.7% of GDP in aid. David Cameron is under fire for increasing the aid budget at a time when almost every other government department is required to make the largest spending cuts in decades.

Detractors argue that much official aid is badly spent, and since the cold war ended, there has been a growing commitment to overcome the corruption, waste and excessive bureaucracy that have blighted aid programmes. The new concept of ‘smart aid’ focuses on transparency and delivering results for the poor, demanding better accountability to both taxpayers in rich countries and to the poor in low income countries.

Western aid is deeply rooted in the Judeo-Christian tradition of compassion and solidarity with the poor. This kind of giving increases the wellbeing of donors as well as recipients – but it hinges on the degree of connection between the giver and receiver. Citing statistics such as 12 million people being threatened by drought in East Africa may get our attention, but personal stories, of families with names, are far more likely to create a sense of connection across the thousands of miles between readers and drought victims.

Reducing the ‘relational distance’ or gap between donors and recipients is one strategy for making aid more effective; it can motivate donors and also hold aid agencies more accountable. How might this principle be applied to official development assistance?

First, the number of intermediary institutions could be reduced to ensure more money ends up with the final beneficiaries; secondly, taxpayers might be allowed to nominate an NGO from a list to receive that part of their income tax which goes to the aid budget and thirdly, perhaps some of the bilateral aid (government to government) could be decentralised to the level of city to city; ‘twinning for aid’ could open up many new avenues for people to engage meaningfully in helping the 1 billion people who live in absolute poverty today.

Read on...
Jamie Drummond of the campaign organisation ONE argues in favour of Britain’s aid programme and suggests how it could be ‘smarter’. Read the article here.

Walk the talk
We give to charity appeals as a response of compassion or perhaps to relieve our consciences; might you narrow the relational gap with your giving and make it more personalised? Sponsoring a child, a family, a school or a community are all options for using your money not just to meet a need but to build a lasting relationship, which though remote, is still real.

The last word
From the Bible, 2 Corinthians 9:7 “Each of you must give what you have decided in your heart, not with regret or under compulsion, since God loves a cheerful giver.”

The third crisis of public trust

Quote
“Advertisements... contain the only truths to be relied on in a newspaper.”  Thomas Jefferson, 1819

News

Today’s Economist writes about the third great crisis of trust in British democracy in as many years: first the banks, then members of parliament, and now the news media.  Rupert Murdoch’s media empire has come under intense public scrutiny for its unacceptable journalistic practices, sparked by information that the phone of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowland was hacked for the News of the World.

This unravelling story reveals the power of the media over both police and politicians, leading to all three institutions being vulnerable to dishonesty and corruption.

Every society is built on trust, and every person needs to be trustworthy.  Yet greater integrity is expected from politicians, the police and the media, which is why their failure to meet the public’s ethical standards is so distressing.  Not that those standards are always clear or consistent; newspapers publish what their readers wish to see, reinforce their prejudices and titillate their curiosity about the private lives of public figures.  But when an invisible line is crossed, approval can turn quickly to indignation and outrage, which is causing the seismic cracks at the heart of Murdoch’s News Corporation.

Why is trust so important?  It is what prevents us from having to do everything ourselves.  Trust is believing someone else will act correctly, and so is inherently relational; trust enables us to hand our children over to teachers, give our vote to a politician, relax while the pilot flies the plane, put our money in a bank account, and share roads with other motorists.  We do these things without anxiety because we believe that the others involved share our values, will act responsibly and look after our interests.

With any loss of trust, relational capital diminishes. Society becomes poorer as more time is taken drawing up detailed contracts and regulations, more funds are spent on security, surveillance and policing, and health declines because people grow more anxious. 

Trust matters in a relational world; that is how ‘a little bit of phone hacking’ can ultimately bring a media empire to its knees.

Read on...

Mark Scholefield authored a report reviewing the value of trust in the world of work and business; it explains the benefits of trust, the influence of culture, and explores when trust is not an asset.  You can download “A Guide to Trust” from the Relationships Foundation website here.

Walk the talk

It is easy now to point the finger at unscrupulous journalists, but are we also reinforcing the gossip culture behind their deeds?  We may not read tabloid newspapers, but whenever we listen in to a conversation, or glance at someone else’s email or letter, that’s also an invasion of privacy.  Can we clean up journalism without addressing our own habits?

The last word
From the Bible, Luke chapter 16, verse 10: “Whoever can be trusted with very little can also be trusted with much, and whoever is dishonest with very little will also be dishonest with much.”

Covenants and crises: Greece and the Eurozone

Quote
“If a man owes the bank £1000 and cannot pay, it is his problem; if he owes them £100 million and cannot pay, it is their problem.”  Anonymous.

News

The prospect of Greece defaulting on its debt was postponed this week, as austerity measures intended to save €28 billion over 5 years were approved by the Greek parliament.  Attention has now shifted from the relationship between Greece and her main creditors to the tension between the Greek people and their own government.  Two days of rioting in Athens this week show their deep antipathy towards sweeping tax rises, job losses and spending cuts that lie ahead.

What makes this crisis so significant is the nature of political commitment that underlies monetary union.  Citizens of each country adopting the euro entered a covenant with the people of other Eurozone nations.  Covenants require a high level of trust and discipline, as they bind people’s lives and destinies together for better or worse.  Every country joining the euro pledged to keep their economy in alignment with the others – most importantly by ensuring government deficits stayed under 3% of GDP to ensure the stability of the whole Eurozone.  Yet Greece’s annual deficit averaged 5.4% of GDP between 2000 and 2007, even before the financial crisis began.

In a covenant, there will always be stronger and weaker parties, and the former will offer protection and support when necessary to the latter.  But that should never be taken for granted.  The Greek government has maintained a large, inefficient public sector, and cannot expect indefinite subsidies from other Eurozone countries; equally, the rest of the EU cannot lightly turn its back on covenant parties in need.

Notwithstanding who ends up paying for Greece’s present mountain of debt (or those of Ireland, Portugal and Spain), the future of European monetary union is clearly a relational issue.  As with marriage, being bound by a common currency means both richer and poorer nations must continuously choose solidarity over independence, discipline over profligacy, prudence over risk.  Each country must accept the costs of such a union if they are to share in its benefits, whether defined in economic or relational terms.  

Read on...

In 1998 the Jubilee Centre published a Cambridge Paper considering whether Britain should join the euro; it selects seven biblical principles pertinent to the issue of monetary union and considers the arguments in the light of them.  You can read the paper here.

Walk the talk

Although none of us has lent money directly to Greece, the financial institutions which hold our savings and pensions might have done so.  It is good to know what those we entrust with our money actually do with it, so why not make a request to your bank to see how exposed you are to Greek debt?

The last word
From the Bible, Proverbs 17, verse 18: “It's poor judgment to guarantee another person's debt or put up security for a friend.”