Initial research hypothesis (English)
A quick search of the literature reveals that many Québec intellectuals writing about State reorganization[1] perceive that community based organizations play an important role of facilitating citizen participation. The emerging state model will be one built upon power sharing between, on the one hand, governments and, on the other hand territorial administrations (regions, cities, etc.) and the civil society. In this context, community organizations are seen as the voices of organized citizenry. Many Québec commentators see arrival of this new model as a necessary condition for the next wave of the «modèle québécois».
This vision of a possible role for Québec’s community organizations is historically well-founded. The community movement grew out of and is rooted in citizen initiatives of the 1960s and 1970s. Adult education – and much of the citizen movement of the early period was rooted in popular education experiences – was for a long time an important means of tooling citizens to participate in important social and public debates. At one point in its history, the community movement was indeed made up of, and existed for, citizens: citizens acting for social change.
Now, it’s the times that have changed.
In spite of an ideological discourse (neoliberal) which stresses the importance of making the State more accountable and physically closer to «the citizenry», it could (and will) be argued that, at least in terms of their implication in community organizations, citizens are less and less important. Citizens are being replaced by clients. Community organizations no longer have members to whom they are «accountable» - accountability is a concept reserved for funders. In many groups, the AGM is a necessary evil, not a democratic exercise. The Board is no longer a place for «learning together», a place for debate and discussion: it has become a place where staff quickly present complex files and real attention is given to funding issues…
Similarly, workers in community organizations are becoming more professional; the organizations themselves are becoming instrumentalized for ends which have everything to do with the funder’s priorities… Staff spend less time in their group working with people (whole people), because they are busy sharing their expertise in the many «partnerships» which are springing up «in the community».
Adult education, far from forming citizens, has been reduced to training… workers, potential workers, recycled workers…
· Is this an accurate picture of the state of the Québec community movement?
· Is there still a community movement or should we speak of community movements in Québec : if so, what are the lines of demarcation ?
· The Québec government has recently announced a new policy paper for Québec community organizations. It is expected in the Spring of 2010 and will probably reinforce the tendencies which this reflection has developed. Then the question will become: How to resist ? How may citizens reappropriate their own movement ? There are hopeful signs (environmental groups, students, ad hoc citizens groups…)
And who knows, maybe over the course of my year I may relearn how to write good English!
Vincent Greason
November 25, 2009
[1] One refers regularly to the «Québec State» in a way in which i do not believe that one ever refers to the «Ontario State» or the «Saskatchewan State». And this, for many reasons…
