By Dylan McCormack-Woo (Dylan is a volunteer journalist with the Focus Media Arts Centre)

The Regent Park Social Development Plan, also known as the SDP, is a community wide initiative aimed at fostering unity and togetherness among all the different residents and stakeholder groups in the community. The Social Development Plan is built around four areas of priorities of the SDP. Each priority is represented by a different working group. The SDP Working Groups are Safety, Communications, Employment and Economic Development, and Community Building. In addition to the four working groups, there is a SDP Planning Committee that meets weekly to help guide the activities of the SDP.

This week's meeting was chaired by Greg Gary, The Executive Director of the Kiwanis Club and the SDP Agency Co-Chair. The primary agenda of today's meeting was a report by the Culture Task Group on their progress in developing a conflict resolution policy.

The task group was led by Joel Klassen from YSM, who presented a draft document of the policy. According to Joel, the SDP Conflict Resolution Policy is to be used as a guide for SDP members who find themselves in conflict with each other. It is not intended to be used as a complaint process. The document aims to support people to understand each other better and come to agreements. Joel summarized the key principles and the values underlying the conflict resolution process.

According to Joel, "In the Social Development Plan Community, we understand that conflict will arise among our members as a natural part of working together. We want to build a culture among us where we all agree that it is not wrong to be in conflict with others. When managed well, it is possible for conflict to lead to groups working better together. When conflicts become stuck, we as a group recognize that conflicts can have repercussions both for individuals involved, and for the wider network. Collectively, it is our responsibility to work through conflict to effectively address and resolve issues". Joel presented three essential principles that members should consider when working through conflict: Self-accountability: When you have an issue with another person or when another person has an issue with you, consider whether you may have contributed to the issue. Are there any changes you can make within yourself? Mutual accountability: If a person brings a concern to you, be open to hearing it and responding from an open stance. Trust Building: In situations where trust is low, look for ways to build it. One way to build trust is to address conflicts with as few people present as necessary. Engaging in conflict with a large number of people present can make addressing the conflict more challenging.

Following the introduction, Joel presented a chart describing a variety of ways that members can move through conflict. The chart was based on three scenarios:

1. Both/all parties are willing to talk to each other, in which case members set aside time to listen and speak to each other one or more time/s, out of a mutual willingness to come to an understanding.
2.Not all parties are willing to talk to each other, in which case those that wish to speak turn to another member of the network/community as a neutral person to seek ways to engage the other.
3. No parties wish to talk to each other and in the case the conflict continues to hinder the group, the group leads or offers a formal process with a neutral third party, or the group leads offer to bring together a larger circle, with an agreed on facilitator, to hear concerns of both parties, and create space for all members of the circle to speak about how the conflict is affecting them.

Lastly, if no resolution to the conflict can be agreed upon and the work of the group continues to be hindered, the situation will be addressed through the code of conduct (currently in process of development). Following Joel's presentation, one of the recommendations offered was to structure an ombudsperson or conflict facilitators that can help conflicted parties work through the policy. The task group will continue to work on the policy and present the final draft at a future meeting.