Jan 9
New Year’s resolution: expose the incompetence which is failing our communities
In 1891 a young barrister named Frank Tillyard began offering free legal advice at the Mansfield House settlement in West Ham in East London. He became known as the Poor Man’s Lawyer, and within a few years similar services were running at Toynbee Hall in Whitechapel and in many other places.
Conditions were difficult. There was no funding for this work, and demand was so high that the lawyers were only able to spend ten minutes with each client.
Nevertheless, this was the beginning of the campaign for a nationwide legal and advice centres movement. As early as 1902 the annual gathering of the settlements movement called for a state funded legal aid scheme, and by 1939, when the first Citizens Advice Bureau was set up, there were 125 Poor Man’s Lawyer schemes across the country.
Settlements continued to play a prominent and pioneering role in this field, and in the 1970s the work of the Birmingham Settlement established the nationally accepted standards for Money Advice work.
I think we should be very proud of the growth of the advice movement, from its small beginnings in the East End, to becoming one of the great third sector success stories, achieving redress against injustice and poverty for hundreds of thousands of people each year.
So how tragic to see the systematic dismantling of this movement today! Legal Aid is no longer available for many cases. Advice and legal services were among the main victims of last year’s slash-and-burn local spending cuts. In Newham, the birthplace of this movement, the town hall bosses have declared that advice services foster dependency, and will no longer be funded.
And to cap it all, last week I heard that Birmingham Settlement lost its bid to retain its contract with the regional probation service for its famed and highly successful money advice service. It was undercut on price by a national charity, Nacro, which apparently has no track record locally in this specialist field.
Now, I’ve got nothing against competition, or change, or against Nacro for that matter. It’s not the large national charities which are the real problem. What I object to is the incompetence of procurement panels which have no local knowledge, nor interest for that matter, and which are seduced by the false ‘economy of scale’ argument. In their eagerness to drive down costs, they appear to ignore the most important point, that services of this nature have little value unless they are any good, and that to reject community-driven services with a first rate track record is most unlikely to be in the best interests of the community – or ultimately of the public purse.
My new year’s resolution for Locality is this: in 2012 we will need to redouble our efforts on several fronts. We will need to speak out more strongly about the value of high quality locally-determined and locally-delivered services. We will need to remind people why some things, like advice services, matter so much. And we will need to expose the wretchedness of so much mean-spirited short-sighted public procurement, which is failing our citizens and our communities so badly.
And my New Year’s message to Locality members is this: I think we should be very proud of what we can achieve individually and as a movement. There is work our members are undertaking today which will have as far-reaching benefits in a hundred years time as Frank Tillyard’s work at Mansfield House a hundred years ago. But all social gains require constant vigilance, otherwise they will be eroded and lost. So where you are achieving a pioneering breakthrough, where there are important services under threat, where there is rotten procurement practice, let me know, and let’s see if together, by collecting evidence and pressing for change, we can make this a happier new year for our communities across the country.
3 comments
Priya Thamotheram
Posted 09/01/12 at 6:34 pm | Permalink
Well done Steve and a Happy and Productive New Year to you too and we’ll certainly support your resolutions!
Given we haven’t as yet regained the movement’s connectivity as we’d developed in the pre-merger period, it’d be useful to challenge both the regions and the relevant Locality staff to actively gather the requisite information by a given date and to begin to supplement this with some ideas about how that information can be actively utilised in challenging the grossly damaging, ineffective and unproductive practices you’ve identified.
Best wishes,
Priya.
Martin Holcombe
Posted 10/01/12 at 12:58 pm | Permalink
Very well put Steve. I am sure there are similar cases up and down the country where the needs of the client group are at best secondary to cost; where the process and decision makers ‘subjectivity’ or understanding of the service is so weak that the so called ‘transparency’ of commissioning is so skewed to the ‘preferred’ provider that existing quality services have no chance – if one was a tadge cynical one might also suggest ‘jobs for the boys’ but of course that never happens!! If you have a similar case, let Locality know so we can challenge the broader issue – it’s not just about Birmingham Settlement – if we don’t challenge, who will?
West Midlands Advocacy Network
Posted 13/01/12 at 2:29 pm | Permalink
Well said. We had our Midlands Advocacy network meeting yesterday and almost word for work re-iterated what you have said about procurement, but in our own field of Independent Advocacy work. We have established our network to fight for locally based, locally accountable independent advocacy services for all those who need them. Our sector is facing extremely challenging times as big national advocacy businesses are undercutting local groups in the tendering process. People are losing out on the excellent advocacy services they have been receiving because public procurement does not understand that big is not necessarily beautiful, and local knowledge and understanding, with a value of the local community will achieve much more for the individual.
I whole heartedly agree with Martin that the needs of the the service user can only become secondary to corporate identity and money when it comes to big business.