third sector

Social Enterprise: A-LEAF

/ dmh83 / Leave a comment

Society is structured to grow the gross domestic product (GDP). However, allocating available resources to grow GPD results in the most vulnerable citizens becoming an afterthought. The social enterprise/ framework Iain and I designed after completing our MSc in social innovation empowers citizens and communities by focusing on the diversity, inclusion, and belonging model.      

It is of utmost urgency that we address the critical issue of empowering disadvantaged citizens in Scotland. The evidence is stark: Disabled individuals confront substantial inequalities and are at a higher risk of living in poverty. This is a policy concern and a societal crisis that demands immediate action. I am deeply concerned that the Scottish Government may lack the capacity and resources to enact the required changes. The time for action is now.

While I acknowledge that the A-LEAF framework may not be a panacea for all the Scottish government’s challenges, I am confident it could be a significant step towards a more inclusive and equitable society for disabled people. This is not just a proposal. It’s a beacon of hope, a potential catalyst for positive change. Given the opportunity, this framework could not only enhance the well-being of countless disabled citizens in Scotland, but it could also transform their lives, offering them a brighter future. Let’s unite to envision this potential, understanding the profound impact it could have on the lives of our fellow citizens.

The A-LEAF framework I propose is more than just an abstract idea. It is a practical solution rooted in my personal experiences and the expertise of my graduate colleague, Iain. With over thirty years of collective experience, A-LEAF is based on the belief that citizens’ well-being is enhanced when they have a personal and professional identity, when social policy supports their right to live in the community, and when social norms allow them to do so. This is not just a theoretical concept but a tangible framework that can be implemented to bring about real change, instilling confidence in its practicality and effectiveness.

The A-LEAF framework is essentially the Iron Triangle on Sustainable Steroids. It aligns seamlessly with the Scottish Government’s well-being/ circular economy policy and advocates for a new fourth social enterprise sector. This framework is designed to bolster green growth and foster co-production in the three existing sectors – third, private, and public. Its implementation could significantly enhance the Scottish Government’s initiatives and policies, leading to a more inclusive and equitable society.  

Network theory is the idea that organisations within society collaborate to make society function. Each node does its job or the job it has a competitive advantage in—it can complete the job better and generate more profit than any other node/organisation. The A-LEAF framework enhances the network for the common good by placing it in a strategic action field. Every action field network node works towards the well-being/circular economy.        

In academic social enterprise theory, there are three typologies of social entrepreneurship. Schumpeter inspires social engineering thinkers to believe that a newer, more effective social system is designed to replace existing systems when systems are ill-suited to address significant social needs. As a social innovation graduate, a citizen of Scotland and someone disabled by the medical model, I have sympathy for this thought pattern. However, such political philosophy/ social enterprise typology needs to be revised. Such philosophy has no place in contemporary society.

The typology operating in society presently is social bricoleur. Social bricoleurs perceive and act upon opportunities to address local social needs. They are motivated by lived experiences and know how to address social problems. However, while Social bricoleurs have the lived experiences and knowledge to address social issues, the barriers consist of capacity and resources. Social bricoleurs are typically charities requiring financial capital and rely on top-down government support. Providing resources and capacity exists in the state. I have zero quarrels about this social policy/typology. Fundamentally, the resources and capacity do not exist. Levels of poverty and SCOPE’s call to action show evidence enough. Additionally, I would suggest two things. One. The current political framework of the Scottish political system is based on the Social bricoleur typology. Therefore, funding is allocated to charities/social enterprises that can mitigate social problems over the short term—providing the Scottish government with outcomes that support the national performance framework. Two. Social bricoleur thinking resulted in A-LEAF not receiving funding from the Scottish government’s social enterprise funding body.  The Scottish Government’s refusal to fund A-LEAF lowers my subjective well-being as funding refusal has resulted in my continuing quest for a professional identity.

For readers unaware, the Scottish national performance framework is effectively the United Nations sustainable development goals (UN SDGs) as applied to Scotland.  The nugatory differentials between the UN SDGs and the Scottish national performance framework are significant enough to propel A-LEAF into the typology of social constructionists – social constructionists build and operate alternative structures to provide goods and services addressing social needs that governments, agencies, and businesses cannot.  

Iain and I had not advocated for a dramatic system change with the A-LEAF framework. Our request was merely to empower citizens and support the Scottish government’s social policy. The chapter has attempted to inform the readers of my subjective understanding of the operation of the Scottish political system, how the political system results in disabled people facing vast inequalities, and how Social bricoleur thinking provides possible barriers to necessary required system changes. The remainder of the chapter will spotlight the A-LEAF framework.      

The fundamental theory of the A-LEAF framework is that a community’s collective well-being is empowered when citizens have a personal and professional identity that provides subjective well-being and simultaneously provides the person/self with good mental health. However, there is a direct correlation between personal and professional identity, social policy, and social norms. The workplace, the community, and government policy act as a tripod that supports citizens’ subjective well-being and provides good mental health. Absences of employment, paid or unpaid, reduces subjective well-being. Prohibition of the right to live in the community lowers subjective well-being. The perception that the government is not listening reduces citizens’ hope. As a society, we must ensure that citizens in our communities are provided opportunities to live well.

In the third sector, there is a focus on ‘self-management’. Self-management is an elongation that prolongs the required change. It is a mitigation method used to mitigate the effects of an ill-run society. I recognise that communities within communities can also empower citizens and foster the idea of citizenship. The problem, however, is that “a rising tide lifts all the boats” only when the focus is on the little boats.

Part one of the A-LEAF framework shows that citizens’ well-being correlates with each side of the tripod. The second part discusses what unites every citizen: waste. Rich, poor, disabled, and non-disabled, every citizen, every household, every institution, and every state produces waste.  How do you turn waste into a monetisation opportunity which empowers citizens? Run the four Rs of the circular economy in reverse. Instead of reducing, reuse, recycle, and remove. Society should focus on recycling, reusing, reducing, and removing. Waste has a value that can be monetised. Plastic, glass, metals, and fabrics can all be recycled. The fantastic part of recycling is that a community recycling project has the potential to unite and empower every citizen. Within every action field/network within a society, an organisation will have a competitive advantage in recycling. Providing people and the planet are prioritised over profits. The organisation offers the strategic action field/community with a common good.

Part one: step two envisioned the possible collaboration opportunities that could empower citizens with subjective well-being. To prevent repetition, I will forgo the literary details. The graphic is provided in the chapter notes.

The final framework Iain and I designed before dropping the idea of A-LEAF as a social enterprise in 2023 was the House of Well-being. The House of Well-being is based on the Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland’s House of Care. The graphic I used, however, looks more like the US House of Representatives. That was either due to studying American-Russian international relations or watching too many American political TV shows.     The House of Well-being/ A-LEAF framework for the well-being circular economy is as follows: The stairs metaphorically represent the circular economy but in reverse. The framework focuses on recycling as a monetary policy for community wealth building. From left to right, the four pillars are: (1) Build an online platform for keeping goods in the community longer, preventing goods within their life cycle from ending in landfills. (2) Within the community, there should be a focus on reducing polyester clothing for gym wear. Polyester, when washed, produces microplastics. The effects microplastics have on the environment are well known. The impact of microplastics on human life requires further investigation. (3)  The action field/network should prioritise action research with all stakeholders in the field/community. This would reduce the requirement for lived experience boards, which, from my experience, reduces well-being. (4) Network for the UN SDGs goals.  Every node/organisation with a network operating within the field should focus on achieving one or more of the seventeen sustainable development goals. The field the framework proposes is more robust than anything currently in place in Scotland. The nodes within the fields work towards the same strategy on a page (SOAP). Each field, of which there could be numerous in a geographical location, could adapt its SOAP to achieve the outcome of the field while working towards meeting the UN SDGs. The SOAP’s key performance and business growth indicators, designed to achieve the SDGs, can then be linked to the National Performance Framework. Directly connecting the strategic action fields back to the Scottish Government’s social policy agenda and simultaneously creating a database of community assets.  Implementing the A-LEAF framework would create a person-centred well-being economy.

societal triangle

A-LEAF started with the idea that citizenship well-being is dependent on three areas. 1. Professional identity—without a sense of belonging and meaningful employment, well-being will remain low. 2. legislation. Government policy must support citizens in working on their own well-being. 3. Social norms of the community must support collaboration between citizens to develop a strong community.

Well-being circular economy.

To achieve the societal triangle, it was clear that the projects’ funding must be commercial. Removing community waste, upscaling, reusing, or recycling the community would generate a community wealth fund. Other commercial social enterprises could use the funds to develop projects that would empower citizen in their local community.

The circular image of well-being represents what Ian and I thought provided the best opportunities. Other projects are encouraged.

House of well-being

The House of Well-being was our last attempt to convince the funding bodies that A-LEAF, along with our Scottish government colleagues, had a solid plan for developing a well-being circular economy.

Emplyment: paid and unpaid

/ dmh83 / Leave a comment

The definition of employment I am applying in this chapter is any work-related activity requested on behalf of an organisation. For example, I am including paid employment – Woolworths PLC and Sainsbury’s PLC. I also include unpaid employment – Macmillan Cancer Support, support worker, People Powered Health and Wellbeing reference group member and board, Scottish Government community eye care review, and the Scottish Government Human Rights lived experience board.

I commenced employment at seventeen while still attending Whitehill Secondary School. I have a confession: I initially worked for Big W – a retail chain owned by King Fisher Group. Multiple years after King-Fisher was liquidated, I wrote a paper on how dysfunctional King-Fisher’s board was. The paper was written for ‘Ethics, Governance, and Responsible Leadership – a module required for my MSc. Knowing in 2024 what I know about the King Fisher board, my only surprise is that my employment lasted nine years, not nine days.   

For readers unaware, Big W retail stores were the idea that customers could purchase products ranging from pick-n-mix to alcohol and from DVDs/ CDs to 40-inch LCD TVs. As a concept, Big W was an exciting idea. In the early 2000s, before video on demand – Amazon Prime, Netflix, and others- the idea of purchasing your weekend movie entertainment, alcoholic beverages, and perhaps even an LCD TV, even today, sounded convenient. The business idea for Big W, even today, sounds viable. Tesco, Sainsbury’s, and Walmart-Asda still apply framework variations in 2024. Big W’s problem was not that it was ahead of its time. Big W’s problem was that no one had ever completed a risk assessment. Or perhaps the risk assessment completed by Big W’s board put profit before people and the planet. In this case, liquidation should have been foreseen.  

The locality of the Big W store I had paid employment in was Glasgow Forge Retail Park. Glasgow Forge Retail Park and my birth area of Haghill have something in common. They both have public and private transport access routes. However, more worrying, according to the Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation, Camlachie – an area of Glasgow in Scotland located in the East End of the city, between Dennistoun to the north and Bridgeton to the south – and Haghill are deprived of health, education, employment, and housing. Readers should not be surprised that Multiple Deprivation equals high crime. Here is why I believe no risk assessment was ever completed- the geographical size of Big W was too large, and the security personnel too slim to prevent mass shrinkage. For unaware readers, shrinkage is the loss of units/products via shoplifting internally or by the general public. The second reason I believe there was never a risk assessment completed was that most employees – at least weekends and evenings were directly hired from Whitehill and Bannerman High Schools. The UK army cannot recruit in Schools. Why could the Kingfisher Group? Even the recruitment process sounds unethical. My point, however, is this. School, college, and university students are not the correct employees to prevent mass shrinkage. Even a UK army regiment could not have prevented shrinkage in Big W.  

The collapse of Big W and, eventually, Woolworths was, in hindsight, foreseen.  From an egotistical – selfish viewpoint, I am glad the store remained operating until I completed my BSc in Multimedia. This chapter is titled employment: paid and unpaid. Therefore, the remainder of the chapter focuses on how employment affects my professional identity. Professional identity, or the lack of one, affects my well-being. If the reader thinks about it, I am sure it is the same for every reader. However, before getting to professional identity, I have to say something about personal identity. After completing my BSc in multimedia, two colleagues from Woolworths asked if I could help promote their band promotion company, GnG Promotions.

GnG Promotion was shorthand for Grant and Garry Promotions – much thought went into the name. Garry dropped from the promotion early on. Grant and I did go on to promote some successful nights in the Soundhaus, 13th Note, and Classic Grand in Glasgow. As part of GnG promotions, I worked alongside bands such as the Black Arrows, The Toi, and Day Break, to name a few. A memorable time was had thanks to Woolworths. Thank you for that. The good times did roll in those short three years. I want to thank all the bands and venues I had the opportunity to work with. Band promoting for me was a hobby – an expensive one at that. My personal identity and social capital were increased due to it. However, I never saw it as anything more.  Therefore, I could let it go without any loss of well-being.        

I was employed with Big W – Woolworths between 28 September 2000 and 9 Jan 2009. I received the equivalent of a year’s wages when Woolworths closed. Therefore, I was happy to be sent from position to position by the job centre-plus, as   I was using my existing skills and learning new skills.

Subjectively, the UK HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) has its priorities discombobulated. Twelve months after no paid employment, I had two unpaid employments, one with Macmillan Cancer Support and another as an administrative assistant at Cross-Reach. Despite my economic contributions – travelling and saving Cross-Reach capital, I worked for free. Remploy, in 2010, partnered with Job Centre Plus, took the decision that I was required to contribute to the gross domestic product by paying taxes. Objectively, I understand – what gets measured gets done. Despite having a BSc in multimedia and working as an events coordinator for three years. Paid employment with Sainsbury’s loomed. In 2010, I had no intention of remaining in paid employment with Sainsbury’s longer than necessary. Somehow, the necessity has developed into thirteen years.      

I have the same employment in 2024 as in 2000—twenty-four years serving the public, replenishing shelves, and operating hot food counters. The repetitiveness itself lowers well-being.

Removing myself from the shackles of the repetitiveness after four years, without a doubt, prevented a mental breakdown. In 2014, returning to higher education to study politics, philosophy, and economics was my best move and simultaneously the worst. As the reader knows, I received my BA (Hons) PPE in 2019. My lack of personal and professional identity has nothing and everything to do with that degree. All be it, indirectly.

What has transpired between 2014 and 2024 has my well-being swinging on a pendulum.  2014, I joined The Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland (The Alliance). Knowing that I required lived experience – work experience and academic experience – to find paid work after completing my BA (Hons) membership at The Alliance was the logical choice. Membership of The Alliance as someone with long-term conditions costs me nothing but opportunity cost – time. Could my time have been better spent? Today, would my well-being be greater without The Alliance membership?

If you work hard, you will become successful, and once you become successful, you’ll be happy – Says Shawn Achor in The Happiness Advantage. I have worked hard for ten years but have not felt successful. I feel unpropitious. Unpropitious or perhaps Inauspicious: I believe society prevents my happiness/well-being by refusing to accept the system change required for a well-being/ circular economy. The social norms of society are not designed with childhood medulloblastoma survivors with a BA (Hons) and MSc in mind.

Childhood medulloblastoma survivors with a BA (Hons) and MSc are not supposed to have an interest in social policy. Challenging the top-down approach to governance is forbidding. Ironically, without membership in The Alliance, I wouldn’t feel so strongly that a system change is required.  

I interviewed numerous Alliance staff members for my MSc dissertation. A staff member who now works for the Scottish Government told me The Alliance’s remit is to strengthen the Scottish Government’s social policy, not contest the social policy. What is ironic is that by default, The Alliance is part of the system of governance, and The Alliance staff are civil servants by proxy.   

My first unpaid role with The Alliance was on the People Power Health and Well-being reference group. The Alliance set up the reference group. However, the reference group was funded directly by the Scottish Government. The remit of the reference group was to advise on the framework for the Public Bodies (Joint Working) (Scotland) Act 2014. My role as a person with lived experience or a person with long-term conditions was to attend meetings and provide professionals with insight into the daily lives of someone with lived experience.

As part of The People Powered Health and Well-being reference group, I did my first non-academic research, asking: Does engagement and inclusion promote well-being and recovery, and if so, how? The rousing thing was that that research was not part of the original plan. The original plan was for professionals to observe the reference group members and produce a subjective qualitative report. I could not be prouder that The People Powered Health and Well-being reference group members rejected that idea outright.

People with long-term conditions can do research, too. The reference group showed it. Now, society needs to acknowledge it.

Thank you to Lisa Curtice, the project lead on the People Power Health and Well-being project. I am not sure that without Lisa’s contacts at Strathclyde University, I would have had the opportunity to complete my first non-academic research. Readers can still watch the People Power Health and Well-being project’s Vimeo videos. Vimeo.com/pphw.

Interestingly, while I was in the process of being guided in research methodology by Dr Ailsa Stewart, a lecturer in social work and social policy at Strathclyde University, my Open University tutor worked in the same department. I cannot remember the name of the tutor I had for ‘Introducing the Social Sciences’. I cross-referenced Dr Ailsa Stewart’s published papers to see if I recognised any co-authors.  The name of the tutor still evades me. However, I recognised one name. Gillian Macintyre – Gillian also added to guide my knowledge of research methodology. It is fitting Gillian also receives a mention.   

I only mention my Open University tutor because, by the time I was given the opportunity to collaborate with the Scottish Government again, I was either studying DD203 Power, Dissent, and Equality or A222 Exploring Philosophy. The project I had the opportunity to be part of was the Scottish Government’s community eye care review. I have a mention in the Annex A of the community eye service review report. To date, that mention is my claim to fame.

As for my role, my fellow stakeholders and I met monthly to discuss current services and hear from various partners on potential developments in the community eye care services.

In 2017, my well-being was at a high point. I studied topics I enjoyed and collaborated with fellow stakeholders on social policy. However, I have not replicated the feelings of personal and professional identity that I had in 2017. I was a PPE student working in collaboration with fellow stakeholders. A career in research and policy is still my preferred area of employment today.  Given that my job in 2024 is so divergent from my personal and professional life in 2017, my well-being is low.

My final Open University module was DD313, International Relations: Continuity and Change in Global Politics. The module is not so important; what is essential is the date—2019. I did not mention my four weeks volunteering with Global Vision International in Cape Town, South Africa when I commenced this chapter. South Africa was a personal development, not a professional development. Also, I don’t see my time in Cape Town as unpaid employment in the same way as I view the People Powered Health and Well-being reference group or the community eye care review. My time in Cape Town shaped me and profoundly affected my vision, values, and principles; more on that in the next chapter – Social Enterprises: A-LEAF.

To finish this chapter, I must finish at a low point. As of March 2024, my well-being is low; I am frustrated and annoyed that I spent a year between 2022 and 2023 doing unpaid work on the Scottish Government’s Human Rights lived experience board. My well-being is at the time of writing low because I don’t have the professional identity I had in 2017. The launch of the social enterprise – A-LEAF and a grounded understanding of Human Rights issues in Scotland was intended to recreate the subjective well-being that my perceived personal and professional identity provided me in 2017.

2014, I gave up my full-time position with Sainsbury’s because my well-being was low. I needed something more than a job in retail. Everything I did between 2014 and 2024 was designed to improve myself and the community. The outcome was not what I envisioned. Despite my frustration and annoyance, I don’t regret the past ten years. However, I am low on hope for a better tomorrow for myself and the wider community.                   

My education: P1 to MSc graduate.

/ dmh83 / Leave a comment

Given that Nature and Nurture are equal components of the Scottish government’s curriculum for excellence, it is essential not to forget my pre-medulloblastoma diagnosis years. Of which there were four. I was born on Saturday, May 7, 1983, at 23:00 in Glasgow Royal Maternity Hospital. Unknowing to me then, I would spend the majority of my childhood and most of my teen/early adulthood in a hospital, mainly as a day patient. By now, the reader should understand my medical history from reading chapter two. I did not say I buy from third parties regarding contemporary sensory issues in Chapter Two. That is, I purchase hearing aids and glasses from retail stores. My contact with the NHS is an annual phone call.

My parents and I lived on Walter Street in Glasgow. Walter Street is located in Glasgow’s East end in Haghill. The Scottish Index for Multiple Deprivation (SIMD) shows that Haghill is deprived of health, education, income, employment, and housing and is a high-crime area. What Haghill has got is access to public transport. At least citizens of Haghill have public transport to Merchant City East – known to locals as Dennistoun. My parents and I did not stay in Haghill long; we moved to Ballindalloch Drive, just off Alexandra Parade, when the local housing association offered to buy my parents and my first home.

Despite what the SIMD show about Haghill. It cannot remove the nurture of the community. My parents’ nature and the community’s nurture created the confident, outgoing child I was. The new flat at 28 Ballindalloch Drive was a top flat. It had a kitchen, bathroom, and separate bedrooms, unlike Walter Street at the time. However, there was no lift. I propose a motion. Every newly built multi-story flat above two floors must have an elevator (for my USA readers). The lack of a lift was why the family moved to 22 Ballindalloch Drive some years later. I’ll discuss that in chapter seven. The story about that can be found in the UK Parliament Library.

Despite resistance from the local school headteacher, I attended Alexandra Parade Primary School only months after the removal of the medulloblastoma, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, and stroke. Even as a four/five-year-old, I refused to take NO for an answer. From TikTok, I’ve learned that is a characteristic of people with Brain Tumours. No does not mean no—no means YES, but in my way. As expressed above, I was a bright child. The academic curriculum of primary 1 to 3 was not challenging. I strolled into primary four without difficulty. Well, there was one issue, not academic but physical. I could not tie my laces. I don’t know when I learned to tie my laces, but it was later than most of my classmates. In hindsight, this was when my primary school education was about to take a few bumps in the road.

Chapter six is titled “Do I consider myself disabled today?” I provide details on the nature of my physical limitations in that chapter. Those physical limitations contributed to my learning disabilities problems. At the time of writing, my education issues are not defined as learning disabilities. Hopefully, the learning disabilities, autism, and neurodiversity (Scotland) Act 2026 will correct a wrong and help support citizens with brain tumours.

As I reminisce back to my primary 4-7 years equipped with a BA (Hons) and an MSc as of 2024, blaming Chemo brain – as discussed in chapter two, would be too convenient to explain my poor academic performance. I propose that the educational system between 1992-95 was unequipped to educate a child recovering from a medulloblastoma. Is the educational system equipped to deal with an equivalent conundrum in 2024? I am not too sure in which primary I was tested for Dyslexia – difficulty reading due to problems identifying speech sounds and learning how they relate to letters and words. The outcome of the Dyslexia test was negative, as I could verbally spell the word. However, I could not write the word on paper.

Primary school is a blur. I have no vivid memory of those years. I remember silly things like finding a hedgehog while construction of the M8 Junction at Alexandra Park Street was in place. Or I was getting attacked by random cats for wearing a shell suit. It was the late 80s and early 90s. I still believed the World Wrestling Federation (WWF/WWE) was a combat sport. Apparently, I also let Sharon and Searha let me believe stray cats should be cradled like newborn babies. No judgments. That was the Nurture of my childhood.

I commenced secondary school in 1995 – Whitehill Secondary. Even then, I preferred my company to that of my classmates. It would not be inappropriate to say I prefer the company of animals over humans—even hedgehogs and cats.

Whitehill was more equipped to attend to my educational needs. I was provided with a laptop to help with spelling and grammar. I achieved acceptable standard grade results—grades 3 and 4 in all classes except French.  I struggled with English. What chance did I have with French?  

Above, I said I was tested for Dyslexia at primary school. There must have been a misconception from Whitehill’s English department that the results of the Dyslexia test were positive. I was discouraged from reading long books when writing a book review. Even at Whitehill, I was written off. I was written off not because teachers wanted me to fail but because there was no framework for teaching childhood medulloblastoma survivors. In 2024, I am not convinced Getting it Right for Every Child – the Scottish Government’s approach to supporting children and young people would have provided the support I required.

At Whitehill’s awards ceremony in 1998, I was awarded the leaps and bounds prize – for the student who had made the most progress. Take a second to process the date. I was diagnosed with a medulloblastoma in 1987. Either It took ten years for the brain to develop after the removal of the brain tumour, or the introduction of the internet into Scottish society provided the opportunity to learn in a way my brain required, i.e. for words to be verbally repeated back to me and corrected in real-time. Possibly both.

The following year, I had an attendance rate of 97 per cent. Perhaps there is something in peer-to-peer support and social capital, after all.   

The 2000/01 year was a wasted year. I was accepted into Glasgow College of Building and Printing for my HND in March of 2001. I did not want to be a Whitehill in the last few months. Graduation on June 14, 2001, could not come quickly enough.

I enjoyed my time at the Glasgow building and printing. It is a shame to see that in 2024, the building is a shell of its former self. Hopefully, by the time this book is published, the building will operate as new flats and office space. I was in the building on September 11, 2001 – for Dugs Data Analysis and Database Design class. I remember Grant- a fellow student. Grant was one of the older guys, a grungy rocker who should have been studying music technology, not information and media technology. He must have been watching a news stream. Grant’s words evade me; I remember Dug running to the monitor to view images of the Twin Towers being hit.

I was in New York, attending Hole in the Wall Gang Camp – a children’s camp for seriously ill children and their families when I was 14 years old in 1997. I was only in Manhattan for three days. However, I must have walked past the Twin Towers. I am also sure our party of four or five seriously ill children and two adult social workers were admitted to Hard Rock café – in New York, with the only other customers being Michael Lee Aday, his wife, and their daughter.  

Years later, in 2018, I was in South Africa, volunteering with Global Vision International. On one weekend off, I visited the District Six Museum. On the wall is this quote

“It struck me that our history is contained in the homes we live in, that we are shaped by the ability of these simple structures to resist being defiled.”

Achmat Dangor  

Our history is not only contained in the homes we live in. It is also contained in the educational establishments we attend. That is why I get chills every time I walk past the Building and Printing structure where I once bought my first zip drive. Yes, I am that old.   

After completing my HND, I attended Glasgow Caledonian University for a BSc in Multimedia Technology. I dropped out after one year, gaining a BSc in Multimedia Technology. At the time, I was more interested in hardware, or so I thought. Looking back, I was just a bad coder. I graduated in 2005 and did not return to higher education until 2014.       

The return to higher education in 2014 was strategic. I joined the SNP in 2007, and as of 2014, I was still an active member. More about that in Chapter 3 – employment. The Open University (OU) allowed me to work and learn simultaneously. Politics, Philosophy, and Economics. What else would I have chosen to study? Reminiscing the OU provides students with the foundation to proceed in the higher educational journey. Each level and each course is designed to enable students to develop the skills required for incremental progression. For example, “Making Social Lives” and “Exploring Social Lives” were simplistic content for a ten-year experienced political campaigner and not academically challenging. With hindsight, the point of those modules was to instruct students in the academic writing process—a skill I was required to learn years later. The lesson learned was to learn to walk before you run. 

I graduated from the OU in 2019 with a BA (Hons) PPE. Back to GCU, this time to study Social Innovation. Remember I said I had not learned to write academically in 2014? In 2021, I still had much to learn about academic writing. On reflection, I was accepted into the class because of my unpaid experience in Scotland’s third sector, not my academic achievements. After a resit or two, I was allowed to complete my dissertation.   My dissertation question answered, “Why is there a subjective well-being premium in voluntary sector employment?”  

I completed my dissertation thanks to my supervisor, Dr Tom Montgomery. I graduated from GCU in 2021 with an MSc in Social Innovation.

Social Innovation is business ethics. At least, that is how I view it.  

Note that this is NOT a blog post. Like the other writings, it is a rough draft of the book I want to write.

Featured

Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026: Not workable without a social contract?

/ dmh83 / Leave a comment

Disclaimer. This blog post you are about to read is subjectively motivated. However, the intent is not to criticise the integration of the United Unitions Convention into Scottish Law. The blog intends to empower the reader with the knowledge required to understand why I believe the Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026 will be dead on arrival.

For clarity, I have no desire to see the Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026 fail. Upon completing my master’s in social Innovation, I attempted to set up a social enterprise to empower local communities and citizens by supporting and recommending improvements to the Scottish government’s social policy. I joined the Scottish government’s Human Rights Integration Lived Experience board to achieve my social enterprise’s outcome. The objective was to learn from citizens how best to empower citizens in local communities. On reflection, that objective was achieved. Why do I believe the Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026 will be dead on arrival? Firstly, I think the framework I designed to achieve A-LEAF’s outcome supports the Scottish government’s Human Rights Agenda. To be denied funding by the Scottish government’s social enterprise funders indicates departments are not communicating on a Human Rights agenda. To successfully implement the Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026, the Scottish government departments require a Human Rights inclusive communication policy; this policy must recognise the Scottish government lacks the capacity and resources to empower every citizen in Scotland with dignity. To provide dignity to every citizen in Scotland, there is a requirement to shift the Human Rights agenda from top-down to bottom-up- There is a requirement to support social enterprises that aim to be commercially sustainable whilst supporting the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals and the Scottish National Performance Framework.

The National Performance Framework states:

We [Scotland] have a thriving and innovative business, with quality jobs and fair work for everyone.

Scotland’s Natonal Perforance Framwork

As a Social Innovation graduate, I strongly suggest to the Scottish government that extensive work is required to achieve the standards for said performance.      

The Second reason I believe the Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026 will be dead on arrival is basic economics. Before completing my MSc in Social Innovation, I completed my second undergraduate degree in Politics, Philosophy, and economics. Therefore, I believe I have some legitimacy regarding my economic claims. The backlash to Scotland’s First Minsters Humza Yousaf’s announcement that council tax in Scotland will be frozen in Scotland in 2024 has been intensive. However, by applying a Human Rights approach, the question becomes, can Scotland afford not to have a council tax freeze? Not can Scotland’s councils afford a council tax freeze.

The limitations of Devolution, as it relates to short-run capitalism, dictate that a freeze in council tax results in a cut in public services. While this holds in the short term, it is my opinion that moving towards a well-being/circular economy which supports the principles of a shared economy could mitigate the cost-of-living crisis. In the long run, this could result in lower council tax as social enterprises could provide crucial services.      

For example, instead of charging Glasgow city residents £50 to pick up garden waste. Social Enterprises could pick up the waste for free and sell the biomass to companies looking into sustainable and renewable energy sources.

Sustainability is a goal for the national performance framework:

We [Scotland] have a globally competitive, entrepreneurial, inclusive, and sustainable economy.

SNPF

While the national performance framework provides keywords, it offers no hope. Scotland’s economy is not inclusive. Only 49.6 per cent of disabled people living in Scotland are in work. I am willing to bet it is not full-time work, which allows for the highest attainable standard of living. Scotland’s economy is not sustainable. Paying £50 for garden waste pick up when there is a cost-of-living crisis is anything but sustainable.

Scotland’s economy may be entrepreneurial. Scotland’s economy is not social entrepreneurial-friendly. If it was, the cost-of-living crises could be mitigated. Furthermore, because business tax is reserved for Westminster, the benefits from tax from any profit before people and planet business goes down south and does not stay in Scotland.

Given that Scotland’s economy is not social entrepreneurial-friendly, inclusive, or sustainable, can Scotland’s economy be competitive?  

The third reason why the Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026 will be dead on arrival is Scotland’s social enterprises are charities, not social enterprises. At least not the academic definition of a social enterprise. That is a significant issue that cannot be underestimated. I have volunteered in Scotland’s third sector since 2010. I fully support Scotland’s third sector. I am on record saying parts of Scotland’s third sector act as a second chamber to the Scottish government. Scotland has a strong third sector. Scotland does not need a more extensive state supporting more third-sector organisations. Scotland needs a robust social enterprise sector that reports to, answers and monitors the Scottish parliament. That is how we achieve a Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026 that is fit for purpose.

This brings me to the second part of the blog post. The social enterprise I tried to set up challenges the top-down social norm that exists in Scotland. There is too much of what the state can do for me and not enough of what I can do for my state. Or to put it another way.

Ask not what your country can do for you- ask what you can do for your country.

JFK, 1961

Scotland is not the USA. Scotland is, however, part of the UK, for worse or for better. In implementing the Human Rights Integration (Scotland) Act 2026, the Scottish government should remember the teachings of John Loke and Thomas Hobbes. Yes, citizens may need a government to run the state. Society in Scotland has come a long way since the English Civil War. Scotland requires a new social contract. Scotland requires a social contract that empowers social entrepreneurship. And social entrepreneurs must empower local communities.

Watch the attached video to learn more about A-LEAF and stay updated on my views on Scottish and UK politics.   

A-LEAF: should it say or go?

This video is not public on YouTube. If you do like this content, let me know, and I’ll see about updating my video and recording equipment.

Featured

Human Rights (Scotland) Act [2026?]

/ dmh83 / Leave a comment

The human rights lived-experience board meeting, taking place on Monday 21 November, shall focus on what key performance indicators to measure, to inform that the human rights act is achieving the desired outcome. This blog post will ask the readers three questions, question one will ask the reader how well you feel human rights are protected in Scotland right now. Question two will ask the reader what you think is the most important human rights issue in Scotland today. Question three will ask the reader how hopeful they are feeling that the new human rights bill will be successful in realising human rights for people in Scotland. After each question, there shall be a short discussion about the contemporary issues directly impacting the question.

What is the Human Rights (Scotland) act?

For international readers and national readers that do keep up to date with politics or the third sector, Human Rights (Scotland) Bill/Act is an act of the Scottish Parliament that will incorporate the UN Human Rights conventions into Scots law. Wait, it gets more interesting, the Scottish Government only has responsibility for devolved matters. Reserved matters are still the responsibility of the UK Government. What then does the devolved/reserved conflict as it relates to the power of Governments/Parliaments mean for the human rights of people living in Scotland? that is the question this blog will look to answer.       

How well do you feel human rights are protected in Scotland right now?

For international readers, this question and the two questions that follow will be hard or impossible to answer. While you- the international readers may have difficulties answering the questions, I would suggest that you continue reading. From an international relations lens, the Human Rights (Scotland) Bill/Act speaks volumes about the character of the Scottish Government/Parliament.

Turning attention to the question of how well you feel human rights are protected in Scotland right now. As a citizen of Scotland, I would conclude there is room for improvement. Poverty in Scotland 2021: Towards 2030 without poverty, tells you all you need to know about human rights violations in Scotland. While the case of Awaab Ishak, see here, is in England. Scotland’s housing situation is not much better. In Scotland today (2018)

2 per cent (51,000) of all households are overcrowded

19 per cent of homes have some level of urgent disrepair to a critical element and just 1 per cent had extensive disrepair

2 per cent (40,000) of homes (at the time of writing) do not meet the ‘Tolerable Standard  

0.7 per cent (18,000) have both condensation and some level of penetrating or rising dampness

(Cain, 2021, p. 212)

As the data above shows Scotland has to do much more to improve housing if the goal of the Scottish Government is to protect people living in Scotland from human rights violations.

What do you think is the most important human rights issue in Scotland today?

These questions that am putting to the readers are the questions the human rights lived experience board will answer on Monday. Therefore it is only fair to the reader, that the choices are made clear. Which options from the list are the most important human rights issue(s) in Scotland today?

  • Access to justice
  • Poverty
  • Disabled people’s rights
  • Women’s rights
  • Refugee and asylum seekers’ rights
  • Environmental rights
  • Older people’s rights
  • Children and young people’s rights
  • Something else
  • They’re all important- I can’t separate them all!

Readers may think, that because I referenced Poverty in Scotland 2021: towards 2030 without poverty. That I would say poverty is the most important human rights issue in Scotland today. If this is your thinking, I can inform you, you are completely incorrect. All choices above are equally important. To try to focus on one or two of the choices above without seeing the holistic picture is, hazardous to health.  

I have a seat on the Human Rights (Scotland) Bill lived-experience board because I am a member of the Health and Social Care Alliance Scotland. The third-sector organisations in Scotland know that a holistic co-produced model is required to achieve human rights in Scotland for all citizens.

What would human rights for all citizens look like? Given the political structure of Scottish society, only the Scottish Government and parliament can answer that question. In the decision section, I try and help the Scottish Government make the correct choice.     

How hopeful are you feeling that the new human rights bill will be successful in realising human rights for people in Scotland?

I recognise that this blog has not provided the reader with enough information to come to a balanced conclusion. I can, however, inform the reader that I am not hopeful, am probably more sceptical. Why sceptical you may ask. I said above that from an international relations lens, the human rights bill makes Scotland compliant with international policy. Therefore Scotland becomes viewed as open and outward-looking. Scotland should be viewed in this light. Scotland is a fantastic country with vast potential. With that said, If Scotland continues with the top-down approach to government, in which human rights are focused on access to justice and not on well-being and dignity then I see no outcome where the new human rights bill will be successful in realising human rights for people in Scotland.           

Discussion

Readers may or may not know of my background. If you do not, I was diagnosed with a brain tumour at the age of four. see the home page for more information. I have over ten years of experience in the third sector, I also have two undergraduate and one MSc degree. The reader must understand I conclude that the human rights (Scotland) bill will not have the outcome desired, based on 34 years of living with the side effects of a childhood brain tumour, 13 years as a member of the political party that governs Scotland, 10 years volunteering in the third sector- which includes Scottish government boards, and, three trimesters completing a masters degree in Social Innovation.

I would like to think my opinion carries some legitimacy. Yes am cynical, however, I hope am proven incorrect. I shall not hold my breath. The reason I am so pessimistic about the outcome is I believe the funding model for the third sector is unsustainable. Once the Human Rights (Scotland) Bill becomes the Human Rights (Scotland) Act [2026?] a lot of the burden is going to land on the table, not of civil servants but on the table of third-sector organisations. I have said this before the third sector in Scotland, at least third-sector organisations that are directly funded by the Scottish Government are civil servants by proxy. I believe these proxy civil servants act as a second chamber to the Scottish Parliament, and I would not change this framework. For the Human Rights (Scotland) Act [2026?] to have the desired outcome, there is a requirement to think outside the box. Bring forward the fourth sector.  

So there is no ambiguity, In Scottish policy farmwork and academia, there is no fourth sector.  Social Enterprise in practice and theory is defined as the third sector. Nicholls (2010) makes two observations about Social enterprises. (1) there is no definitive consensus about what the term means (2) the research agenda for the field is not yet clearly defined. Two points I want to make. The first point is academia and Scottish policy are wrong, Social enterprises are not operating in the third sector. The second point is Nicholls is also completely incorrect. Angela Constance when Cabinet Secretary for Communities, Social Security and Equalities has a foreword in Scotland’s Social Enterprise Strategy which makes direct reference to Robert Owen and New Lanark. My argument is simple New Lanark is the definitive consensus of what a social enterprise is. And, research agenda was set between 1785-1968. For readers that do not know the history of New Lanark click on the link here.  

I can hear the angry neo-liberal supporters, that’s in past. That is not how we do things in the contemporary UK, we like capitalism. Am sure Robert Owen would have considered himself a capitalist. It is said The Wealth Of Nations is simply the best book on political economy ever written (Butler, 2010, p.viii). The contemporary UK could have looked so different if Robert Owen had written The Wealth Of Citizens.

If readers require a more contemporary view of what a social enterprise is read The Social Entrepreneur: Making Communities work by Andrew Mawson. I’ll go on record and say Mawson is the only lord I would consider supporting based solely on the book. What though do Owen and Mawson have in common? They both understand the importance of stakeholdership. Ever since completing my MSc dissertation on the question: ‘why is there a subjective well-being premium in voluntary sector employment?’ I have become convinced that a stakeholdership model must Incorporate Rosabeth Moss Kanter’s thinking on power and powerlessness in the workplace. Figures 1 and 2 summaries Kanter’s thinking.

Figures 1 and 2 copied from my dissertation

Kanter’s argument is that when the factor is high employees have power or subjective well-being. My argument is when that when power is in the hand of employees that work for social enterprises. That power can be extended into the communities the social enterprise operates.  

Conclusion

The purpose of this blog is to inform the reader of the process of the Human Rights Bill/Act. This bill has not yet reached the parliamentary stage. Therefore it is impossible to know how members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) will react to the bill at the first reading. If MSPs react in the same way as me, then expect a lively debate and a lot of amendments. Note debate and a lot of amendments are not to be discouraged. Debate and amendments are a sign of power. As I said above we cannot afford the Human rights bill to be empowered from the top down. Yes, we have the human rights lived experience board. My concern is what happens to the people on the lived experience board after the Scottish government decides it no longer needs the board. I say to the reader, the Scottish Government, and, The Human Rights Consortium Scotland I effusively welcome lived experienced boards. I add, however, lived experienced boards must be more than short-term talking shops.

I said above that my dissertation answered the question ‘why is there a subjective well-being premium in third-sector employment?’. My conclusion to that question is important for how social policy transitions from the third sector to the fourth sector. My conclusion to my dissertation question was; yes, there is a subjective well-being premium in third-sector employment but only when employment is sustainable and achieves an external improvement. For example, employees of the Scottish Human Rights Consortium have a well-being premium/power because their employment provides citizens of Scotland with human rights. Here is the catch well-being premium/power is provided by the Scottish Government or the city council, as it is these institutions which enable change via innovative policy change. I fundamentally believe there is a need for third-sector organisations that act as the second chamber of the Scottish Parliament. Perhaps a sounding board for the Scottish Government is a better way to look at it. I take the view though that the third sector is not sustainable. Therefore society must move toward the social enterprise fourth sector model. The Fourth Sector model is the only model that will provide subjective well-being to every employee in the sector while providing business growth indicators (BGI’s) and Key performance indicators (KIPs) that will monitor human rights from a well-being dignity lens and not access to justice lens.

Recommendations

I was planning to go into some detail on my social enterprise’s business model. How it focuses on the well-being economy while encapsulating the well-being economy in side the circular economy.  My social enterprise will use BGI’s that are focused on corporate social responsibility and use KIPs that are directly linked to The UN Sustainable Development Goals. I feel, however, that splitting the more technical aspects into another blog or support document may be more useful to the reader.    

I am hoping to have a zoom meeting in February/March regarding my social enterprise. I do recommend reader join that meeting. Details to follow.  

Hope: the light in the darkness

/ dmh83 / Leave a comment

Hope is a strong emotion. Hope can guide you into the light, when on a dark path. Hope can provide strength when society demands weakness. Hope is your lighthouse. Hope, is what humans do when we can no longer dream. A dream is to believe. Hope is to believe in faith.

I support my legs, and, my legs support me.

nuknowing quote

the quote/saying above is my faith. No one is better than you to shape your future. In a past blog. I said something like:

Only you can self-manage your conditions, medical or not. I will reach out with open arms in the light but you must take the steps towards the light.

My light

Light, hope, faith. What? For the Open University module A2222 Exploring Philosophy, I was required to write a paper on the philosophy of Religion.

God: the supreme personal being existing beyond the world, creator and ruler of the universe

Religion: a system of belief in and worship of a supernatural, power or god.

Timothy Chappell, 2011, p.8

What is the link between God, Religion, hope, light, and, faith, and contemporary living? A lot. And, nothing. For that same A222 Exploring philosophy module I also had to write a paper on Political Philosophy. As it is political, party conference month I thought I should reflect on our obligation to respect the laws of the state.

Socrates: Leave me then, Crito, to fulfil the will of God, and to follow whither he leads

Our Obligation to Respect the Laws of the State: Plato Crito, Western Philosophy an anthology, 2015, p.626

Am I recommending the state be followed in the same way Socrates would have followed god? No. No, am not. What am recommending is the State should be followed until the point is reached where citizens of the state can no longer dream. What I am recommending to the reader. Is, find your light. and do all you can to hold on to it. Your light. Your principles, values, and, vision are the groundwork for your political philosophy. Remember though the light is not fixed in place.

Do what makes you happy. Not others

My last conference: date?

I become a member of the SNP on, 17 April 2007. To this date, I remain a member of the Glasgow Shettleston branch.

I do not, however, go to branch meetings. Or conferences.

Why? Because the “benefits of greater equality are very widespread” (Wilkinson and Pickett, 2009, p.177).

Am not saying there is, wealth inequality in membership income (most likely is). Am saying I liked the party when after a day of meetings you could have a drink with the cabinet minister in The Royal George Hotel bar.

I was asked not so long ago by a manager, of the charity Who Cares? Scotland. Is starting a social enterprise, something I really wish to do,

given my political/policy background. Am sure my answer was Yes am 100+10 per cent committed to A-LEAF (my social enterprise).

On reflection, I really should have said am want to start A-LEAF to push a political and policy agenda. A-LEAF is apolitical, it will always remain so. Ben Fredman & Craig Carey authors of 4Th Sector Entrepreneurship say a social enterprise’s principles, values, and, vision, are, shaped by the lived experience of their owners.

However, I take the view that the thinking and actions of the owner are shaped by the social enterprise. let me explain A-LEAF’s, vision is that every citizen in society should have dignity. My personal view and the view of the state on Assisted Dying. For the lack of a better word, is, it is wrong. However, dignity must also come in death. Therefore, I have no choice, I have to agree with Scottish Humanists, assisted Dying should be the choice of individual citizens.

As a member of a political party. Or a third-sector organisation I cannot change the parties/organisation’s policy as fast as I can change my mind or amend A-LEAF’s vision. A-LEAF’s vision, values, and, principles are our hopes for citizens and communities in Scotland. I wish to dream not only hope. By walking into the light with A-LEAF I can do just that.

Conclusion

As citizens of societies across the UK. We all need to have hope. Hope for a better tomorrow. We cannot only hope, we must dream. Political parties and political philosophy are not God. Have faith in yourself, in your ideas. Stand up, say and do what makes you happy. Join a community which has your vision, values, and, principles. When your values, and, principles change. Change your community(s).

For me, my vision, values, and, principles are in the fourth sector or social enterprise sector. If yours is in the third sector or political sector, fantastic. Do what makes you happy. please though, do not follow in blind faith.

A-LEAF: Is my personality?

/ dmh83

Ben Freedman & Craig Carey in the book 4th Sector Entrepreneurship. Suggest Social enterprises take on the values of their owner(s). Given I follow good social science procedures (not so much). And, according to Jennifer A Moon’s book Reflection: in Learning Professional Development. I now have to reflect on how my personality has shaped A-LEAF to date. As I said to David Lyon- jobs and Business Glasgow, last night I once considered that Third Sector organisations would step up and fill the void resulting from spending cuts. However, “understandings of the world [lived experience] that people bring to a learning situation” (Moon, 1999, p. 3) are immensely overlooked. For example, David still refers to Social Enterprise organisations as the third sector. As does Caledoinain Business School I should add. I, however, take the view that Social Enterprises are in a sector of their own.

Am I correct? Is David Lyon and Glasgow Caledonian Business School wrong? No, it is the other way around. According to social norms. Am wrong. If am wrong then Ben Freedman & Craig Carey are also wrong. Here is the perfect opportunity to remind the reader the name of the blog and podcast is ‘so wrong, it is write (right)’- meaning if it is written into law or has become a social norm. No matter how wrong it is or how unethical it is viewed to be right in the eyes of the beholder.    

What does all the talk about Third Sector/ Fourth Sector mean for the Social Enterprise A-LEAF? As Moon rightly points out lived experience is paramount. A-LEAF is shaped a lot by how I am. The values and the goals of the company are shaped by who I am both professionally and personally.

Here though is where I think Ben Freedman & Craig Carey are as far down the echo chamber as everyone that follows social norms. I am reminded of the book “that’s not how we do it here! By John Kotter. The world is neither black- all social enterprises must be in the fourth sector. And, the value systems of social enterprises must be shaped by their owner’s lived experiences. The world is also not white as the policy farmwork or social norms would have citizens believe. The world is grayscale. The world has many different voices. I believe the values and the mission goals A-LEAF will have moving forward will be shaped by listening and hearing all the voices in our grayscale world.          

What I originally wanted to do with this blog was to show how in part how A-LEAF is shaped by my lived experiences. Hopefully, the reader did not miss that point. My colleague Iain also played a significant part in shaping A-LEAF. As did Mairi Lowe and Liisa Lehtinen of Sustainable Fashion Scotland all be it indirectly. Here is the fundamental point, I hope the reader takes this away. If you do not do any reflection on it. at least think about it. A-LEAF’s tagline is:

A rising tide lifts all the boats; only when the original focus is on rising the little boats.  

If the only thing, you take away after reading this is anything. I want it to be this. In society there are many little boats, make sure you hear their voice.