It's not the government really...it's some native agency that doesn't have a clue imho.
The PR campaign was to try and dispell the notion that they aren't doing their job and things are going wrong. What's just transpired clearly shows that it is true.
All i'm saying on this point is that instead of government funding you fully and asking you to implement systems that have nothing to do with the reason you exist, they simply fund you and let them take care of the "business side '. You may be surprised you have more money when you get rid of the CFO, CEO, CIO and supporting staff.
<blockquote><cite>Posted By: Mr. Nobody</cite>And whats that got to do with anyhting ?
All i'm saying on this point is that instead of government funding you fully and asking you to implement systems that have nothing to do with the reason you exist, they simply fund you and let them take care of the "business side '. You may be surprised you have more money when you get rid of the CFO, CEO, CIO and supporting staff.</blockquote>
So, who provides direction for the agency and the staff, who accounts for the money that is provided and how it is spent, who ensures that staff are performing the functions that are critical to the success of the agency, who maintains the facilities that house the staff and clients, who ensure that the legal mandate of the organization is maintained. This is all part of the "business" of the organization. Without it, you have nothing. I hope your point is to merely provoke discussion, otherwise, your notion is outrageous. If anything, the lack of good business practices is exactly the cause of some of the problems we are hearing about.
The number one reason why we fund CFS is because "the best interests of children are a fundamental responsibility of society". And as such we are responsible for the life, health or emotional well-being of children. If parents, can't, won't or are deemed unfit to raise their children, then we (society) are responsible.
We can criticize CFS and focus on its failings, as LIndor likes to do to, to the amusement of Mr. N, but we also need to recognize no government department is perfect and mistakes will be made - even tragic mistakes.
But for my money, I would like CFS to do much more to communicate its successes, so children in care, or destined for care, can have positive role models to look up to. There has been way too much emphasis on the negative and it shows. Why should it be up to volunteers and community centres/other community organizations to build the self-esteem of children in care. This is everyone's responsibility. I want to see a campaign that profiles the lives of positive young role models who have been through the system. Kids in care need to see this, especially since, IMO, the demand for CFS services is only going to climb.
If you don't think this is the responsibilty of a goverment department, funded for the purpose of caring for the health and emotional well being of children, then say who exactly should be responsible for meeting society's responsibility. (Dead or dead-beat parents aren't acceptable answers.)
I believe everyone here knows what role the CFS plays in our society. But I read today that one such agency spent $30k on a van for its director. While another wants to spend $140k on a PR campaign. This is good management? Where we seem to disconnect N is the purpose of that campaign. You seem to imply the campaign is intended to promote positive role models. It is not. It is to battle the perception it is doing a shitty job. Surely that is obvious and very wrong-minded.
I will also not forgive any government agency its failings just because "no government department is perfect". That is ludicrous.
I don't pretend to have all the answers. Let's just agree to disagree. K?
For sure we disagree. You think CFS is telling stories and I wish to give the department the benefit of the doubt and trust it will do what it says and develop a PSA campaign that focuses on meeting the needs of children in care.
And I hope Mr N. learns something from you. Just because people don't agree, doesn't mean they wish to censor their right to disagree.
Thats exactly what you proposed to do with lindor....censor her, or how did you put it.... LIndor should NOT be allowed to set the agenda ..... I think you also wanted her sued for slander or reprimanded the last time she did a piece on CFS. heck if it was up to you, she'd be in prison right now.
I am pretty sure a a seasoned journalist of her calibre can take some criticism from people who oppose her view without such a tantrum. So what's your problem? Is she your wife or something?
The number one reason why we fund CFS is because "the best interests of children are a fundamental responsibility of society". And as such we are responsible for the life, health or emotional well-being of children. If parents, can't, won't or are deemed unfit to raise their children, then we (society) are responsible
RIGHT! This is why natives will never get out of the ditch, my responsability, I DON"T THINK SO have you ever heard of condums! give me a break please.
It was more about how they're one of the only ones to do the fire-paramedic thing. So they provide better service as they can respond to harm more quickly. So just your general rah rah ad...like the nurses.
If there's a social worker union, maybe they should be the ones advertising, as that seems to be the precedence.
So Lindor was right. CFS's communication manager has resigned, presumably because the motives behind the campaign were more about discrediting Lindor than building the confidence of children in care. That is a real disgrace, but motives aside, the stated objectives of the campaign are still valid and worthwhile.