The way forward for Communities First
Posted on Saturday, July 18, 2009 at 12:34pm
10 responses
I’ve just read Victoria Winckler’s post on the new Bevan Foundation blog, “This is my Truth’ about Communities First. She is writing in reaction to the Wales Audit Office report on Communities First (CF), which highlights many failings in how CF is monitored across the board, how programmes are implemented, and how one of the flagship programmes of the Labour Government at the birth of devolution may not be successful in the future due to lack of ‘programme bending’( this means essentially tailoring local authority run or WAG run programmes to specifically apply to those in Communities First areas)
The One Wales document commits to the ongoing work of Communities First, which has now morphed in to ‘Communities Next’. We took evidence from the Auditor General on this at our last Audit committee meeting of the term, and he stated his concern about why a change in direction of the delivery of the programme has come about, when the Welsh Assembly Government does not appear to have clear evidence as to the success of past schemes and projects to date.
There’s no doubting the fact that Communities First has helped develop communities in many areas of Wales. Nonetheless,its success is very patchy, especially given that the concept conflicts with how Local Authorities seek to deliver services on the basis of treating all areas equally. My concern is that although programmes were set up to build confidence in many of the most deprived areas of Wales- establishing well -being groups, youth groups and so forth, it has failed in one of its core aims of increasing economic activity.
The Auditor General recognised that such goals could not be achieved by Communities First coordinators alone, but if this was the case, then the Welsh Assembly Government should have been honest about this from the outset. It seems to me that the WAG should also have prioritised this agenda across every Government department. This was clearly not the case from 2000 onwards, and reminds me of the way in which the child poverty agenda has suffered due to this lack of cross departmental work.
When will Communities First as a concept end if it cannot address issues such as economic inactivity and social deprivation? Without the financial levers in Wales to vary taxation or to change the benefits system, it is clear that if CF is to be retained, then its goal posts must change to reflect what is actually possible for the Welsh Assembly Government to achieve. Concentrating on setting up social enterprise is one way forward, to be sure.
Another area of note in the Auditor General’s report was how Communities First areas are decided upon. There are many differing definitions across Britain and the EU of ‘deprivation’, and I know from experience that tensions have arisen when one area has been designated a Communities First area, and when an equally deprived village nearby has been left outside the programme. We heard that in Caerphilly, there are local officers in every locality so as not to differentiate between non CF and CF areas, but we need to understand if this is successful in alleviating tensions between communities?
The one controversial thing I would like to say, which members of the Labour party will not appreciate, is that many Communities First programmes are run by Labour party members, and it is very difficult for anyone outside the Labour Party to get involved. This is not the case everywhere in Wales I hasten to add, but I have heard on an anecdotal basis how Plaid members for instance have been blocked from working with teams on numerous occasions, and do not find out about events run by Communities First in their area. Yes, the programme is a Labour baby, born out of devolution, but I genuinely hope that this type of local parochialism is changing. We can’t succeed in rebuilding communities if some people are excluded from trying to make that a reality- whether they represent Labour, Plaid or the Tories.
The Audit Committee has committed to carrying out an inquiry in to Communities First next term. It is questionable why it has taken so long for a committee inquiry to be initiated on this topic, but I have my own views on that.
As a committee we can look at how the programme is being delivered, question whether it is value for money, and so forth. What we can’t say is whether strategically, or in relation to policy, this is the right way forward for Wales. That is for the Welsh Assembly Government to decide….
Nice of you to accept that C/F are not working well and that WAG have been poor in measuring their performance and outcomes. I have written several times to WAG and the only response you get is that they are meeting their aims and objectives…I can’t see it myself…child poverty levels are not improving and neither are child protection and the looked after population. All the data shows deterioration. Frankly WAG have wasted £214 million on C/F since 2001 creating jobs for those with local political connections.
I don’t know if I say they are not working well, but that there are many questions that need to be asked about its direction, what it wants to deliver, and how. Its a very ambitious programme, and I think we need to be realistic in what it can achieve in Wales.
I’m sure that if the £214 million had been shared between the 22 Local Authorities we would have seen some measurable outcomes and improvements by now. Empowerment and betterment is fine but can we really afford to do this in a public spending squeeze? Local authorities will struggle to maintain statutory services not to mention discretionary.
may be the committee should revisit why CF was set up
It followed a pilot scheme People in Communities, that actually worked.The recommendations from the evaluation of PIC were discarded as the then Minister wanted quick wins
The way it is set up CF will never deliver to communities as a value for money scheme.
Get rid of the partnerships
Base the initiative in the community, not in town halls
Trust the community to know what’s needed
Put in an overarching admin that gives equality of and quality
Get rid of the support network and let community buy in what and who it wants
That’s the way to empower and include and all the other buzz words
But bottom line it will produce more outcome than what u have now , mind that wouldn’t be hard.
The trouble with C/F is if its lead by the authority it is not working. if lead by communitys it thrives. i have on a number of issues spoken to WAG, and local authority only to be told by Wag its not our responsability to monitor C/F, so please tell me who monitors its progress or lack of it.
Bethan – I have some experience of C/F, having volunteered as a memberabout 18 months ago.
I have never been involved with such a chaotic organisation. When I became a member, there was no induction pac – Mission statement, Temrs of reference, articles of association, member’s responsibilites, list of officers and staff members and all the ther things you would mormally expect.
I took on certain responsibilities, but found that I was unable to proceed because contact key members of staff. E-mails and phone messages not being responded to. I was only asking for permission to proceed before spending ( a very small amount) of the C/F money.
I also found tha t what were called ‘Board meetings (temporary)’, whatever that means, were attended by all the members of staff. Very democratic, but not a board meeting! And the meetings were scheduled to be convenient to the Staff rather than the board meembers, which meant that I was often unable to attend.
I also found that the staff were being paid directly by the Council, and therefore subject to the careerist concerns of civil servants rather than the independent enterprising ethos that underlined the original concept. What a shame! I don’t seek to denigrate anyone here, but if C/F is to succeed, its structural and administrative foundations need radical re-thinking.
There is a WAG office in Merthyr that supposedly monitors CF. The two CF Partnerships I am aware of are both based in the community with little or no linkages to the local authorities, they don’t thrive, they fail. It would be interesting to get a list of all CF employees and we would probably see a lot of connections to the Labour Party and of course nepotism.
While the idea of CF is great for giving local communities a sense of direction, the way it is managed is not helpful in empowering the very people it was designed to encourage in the first place.
I agree with Angela that we need to let the people themselves decide what should be done and for them to take responsibility for the various projects.
There can be no better drag anchor on freedom and empowerment than for CF staff to be “directing” and “doing things for” people in local communities.
A culture of social entrepreneurship and risk taking is urgently needed as this will be the only way that Wales can truly transform its areas of low economic activity and deprivation.
And the best people to carry that out are the very people whom CF had identified as target groups. But how can we expect our communities to aspire to make the big necessary changes if the “organisers” don’t empower and allow individuals to follow their own ambitions and goals?
An estate receiving 500k a year should see some serious improvements in the lifetime of CF. That is not the case in my area. Instead that money is squandered on wages and badly thought out projects. The community is not put first because the usual suspects who corner all the local grants are in there first. They’re limited companies so not accountable to the community, the assembly or the charities commission. They produce endless glossy reports that nobody reads to say what a great job theyre doing but when it all comes to an end what will be left? A Food Coop distributing fruit and veg to a few dozen people and that’s about it. It’s been a shocking waste of money and the minister responsible should be ashamed of himself.
I also think youre right Bethan to say that it’s been dominated by Labour cliques. In my area that’s certainly the case. Does anyone have an overview of the general situation – is it true of every project? It would be good if Bethan and other AMs would focus on this v important project before any more money is wasted.
Hello Bethan.
We met last week when I came to visit Steffan. I attend a local CF partnership. My impression is that it can work well but it dpends on the personalities involved. If the local authority attendees take the mantle then they drive matters, if strong local community members take it seriously (as in our case) the the partnership becomes a vehicle for inprovements in the area. My group is very active and does not allow CF, Gavo etc personnel to just do their own thing. We drive priorities, monitor progress, make decisions and take the lead. As a result the partnership is well attended and popular. If you would be interested in attending one of our meetings then you would be most welcome.