Print
this page
Email
this page Enrolling to a Vision - Interview
Kevin Osborne – the POLICY Project manager, Washington
I’m involved in the Anglican Church’s HIV/AIDS programme on two levels. Firstly, I play an ongoing role as the POLICY Project/Washington manager of the CORE (Communities Responding to the HIV/AIDS Epidemic) Initiative; and secondly I helped develop the content for the All Africa Anglican Conference on HIV/AIDS and facilitated Track Two – Partner Organisation representatives.
The process of planning that the Anglican Church embarked upon was incredibly healthy because it required a great deal of introspection and an honest appraisal of where the church was in relation to HIV/AIDS two decades into the epidemic. The fact that the Anglican Church had been so outspoken against apartheid and had worked so hard to end the injustices it caused, obviously raised the question of why it had been so slow to speak out about HIV/AIDS.
The planning process didn’t just involve the Anglican leadership, however. Instead, the church looked externally too and made sure it included people from the broader Anglican Communion, which made up one of the tracks at the All Africa Anglican Conference. It was also quite strategic to include another track made up of funders, broader stakeholders and partner organisations. It was really important to involve stakeholders and funders from inception because it gave them a sense of ownership. This inclusive approach resulted in broad buy-in and it’s this that has allowed the project to move forward so quickly.
The Church of the Province of Southern Africa’s HIV/AIDS Ministries strategic planning process was started under the USAID (United States Agency for International Development) CORE Initiative which funded a number of similar demonstration projects such as the Muslim Leaders’ Consultation and the Women’s Initiative. Of all these programmes, the Anglican strategic planning process has achieved far greater heights and social mobilisation than any of the others. Part of the project’s success lies in the fact that it went through an intense process of introspection before taking action. And the All Africa Anglican Conference wasn’t just a meeting for a meeting’s sake, but rather was carefully structured to ensure mobilisation around HIV/AIDS. I also think that part of the reason why this process worked so well was a subtle acknowledgement that, because the Anglican Church had come to HIV/AIDS very late in the day, there was a huge commitment to make this initiative work.
But, while acknowledging that the Anglican Church has taken steps to address its inaction, I believe it still needs to examine why it took so long. This isn’t intended to serve as a slap on the wrists, but rather to provide a close look at its internal processes and what governs them. The apology that it made stating that it was indirectly responsible for the spread of HIV/AIDS through its silence is incredibly powerful. But what is it about human rights that it didn’t pick up on? Why did it wait for so long and for the epidemic to become so serious before responding? These would be important things to look at in more detail.
The reason why this process was so successful had a lot to do with the
facilitation team. The POLICY Project said from the beginning that if this
undertaking was to work, the Anglicans had to be prepared to include other
sectors and role-players. POLICY firmly maintained that it couldn’t
just be one sector trying to transform for all other sectors. This commitment
to broad inclusivity is reflected in who made up the teams. It wasn’t
just Anglican theologians coming together, but was very much community
owned and included other stakeholders and, very importantly, the involvement
of people living with HIV/AIDS (PLHAs) from inception.
The two tracks at the conference also ensured that real progress was made.
I facilitated Track Two – Partner Organisation representatives
and, although initially they were a bit put out at having to work separately
from the track involving church representatives, by the end of the workshop
they could see the value of working apart. Apart from the church, they
had to think reflectively about what they could really contribute, rather
than just mouthing nice words and paying lip service to the importance
of HIV/AIDS organisations.
I also think the fact that there was a huge amount of leadership was a good thing as the political commitment to the planning process extended to all levels. The fact that the Archbishop was intimately involved in all of this spoke volumes. The initiative wouldn’t have been as successful if it wasn’t for leadership’s involvement.
Top
