I Can’t Wait for the Listening Phase to Kick In
Norman E. Taylor
Editor-in-Chief, Journal of Community Safety and Well-Being
I read on the morning of August 17th that a settlement has finally been reached in response to a class action suit against the Toronto Police Services Board. The action was brought by over a thousand individuals whose rights were trampled and whose dignities were unquestionably denied as they were caught up in a Keystone Kops display of crowd control during the G20 Summit … in June of 2010. I can still recall the shock and anger my wife and I shared that night, watching and gasping as the scenes of Moms and Dads, ‘kettled’ by an armed force and trapped under a hard rain, unfolded before our eyes on Canadian television news. No real matter to us, some might say, as we weren’t there. But, for those who were, one can only wonder how far a paltry settlement cheque will go, fully ten years after the fact, to restoring their broken faith and trust.
Thankfully, the full scale and consequence of that isolated but troubling weekend also remained relatively contained. Certainly so, by comparison to what we have witnessed since the brutal slaying of George Floyd in late May of this year, and by an ensuing montage of conflict between policing as an institution and a whole range of broken faith and trust being felt and expressed by many, rising in the USA, and extending into Canada and elsewhere around the world.
There is an early phase in almost every new or newly sparked conflict, whether small or large in scale, that begins with the yelling, the testifying, the blaming, and the often unrealistic and inflexible demands for redress. Lines are drawn as rigid positions form. Positions are then defended, just as loudly and vehemently, hurled about by growing factions, self-affirming in their solidarity, expressed in tones vivid enough to confirm their self-justified absoluteness. Any experienced dispute resolution professional can tell you that good, lasting, quality solutions will never come out from such a phase. And, if not stopped soon enough, a lot of damage will be done.
It seems it is still the more commonplace reflex for both allegedly aggrieved parties and their alleged ‘aggrievers’ to jump toward such power-based, beat-down negotiating tactics, where winning seems to be the only goal worth pursuing. But we know that in most cases, some degree of losing is an inevitable cost-of-conflict for everyone concerned.
The aims and promises of alternative dispute resolution models, on the other hand, are quite simple to express, albeit often very hard to attain. Through mediation, or simply through more mature and skilled forms of interaction, it is possible to turn disputes, even the long historical ones, into a shared quest for the best achievable and lasting quality of outcomes for all parties to the dispute; and, for relationships to become stronger in the process, not weaker than before.
For this ever to occur, the yelling must stop, the honest storytelling must be allowed to begin, and the parties must somehow yield to listening. Really listening.
