Agenda item

To receive an update report from the Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance on working with the city’s Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) to support engagement with communities.  The Commission is recommended to note the update and are invited to feed in their views to the further consultation activity.

The Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance submitted a report updating the Commission on working with the city’s Voluntary and Community Sector to support engagement with communities.

The Director reminded the Commission that the Council had contracts or agreements with a number of organisations to support the representation of, and strengthen engagement with, communities in Leicester.  A review of existing contracts / agreements had been started in 2013 and tenders had been awarded for work being undertaken on some of the specific services identified under the review. 

During that process, a challenge to the lawfulness of the decision-making process for strands two and four had been received.  It therefore was decided that further consultation on these elements would be undertaken and the contracts / agreements of the organisations impacted would be further extended.  This consultation would start on 10 March 2015 and would last for 12 weeks.

The continued provision of advice and guidance type support by the Somali Development Service and The Race Equality Council was welcomed, as it was felt by Commission members that the Citizens Advice Bureau could not meet all needs for advice.

It was noted that the legal challenge to the original process had identified that explicit reference to the work of these organisations needed to be made, so the type of specialist advice they provided should be offered as a separate tender.

It was noted that the legal challenge to the original process had identified that explicit reference to the work of these organisations needed to be made and considered further in the review.  In conclusion it was decided that this specific activity should be separated out and considered alongside other advice and guidance services commissioned by the Council in due course, when those existing services were up for renewal.  The Council’s auditors therefore had been asked to estimate how much was spent on advice work, so that what could be received for the cost of the contract could be assessed.

A further basis for the legal challenge had been that the tender being offered needed to state more explicitly that it was unlikely that commissioned services could help people of every protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.  Therefore, a way needed to be sought to reflect the protected characteristics that had the most impact, while accepting that the risk that not all would be accommodated was an accepted part of the approach being taken.

A further basis for the legal challenge had been that the tender being offered needed to state more explicitly that it was unlikely that commissioned services could represent all residents in relation to the protected characteristics being considered, those being race, faith and Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT).  Therefore, a way was needed to best achieve representations whilst recognising and acknowledging the limitations there could be as part of the approach being taken.

An absolute amount to be spent on the contracts for this work had not been specified, in order to retain flexibility if it was decided that more funding needed to be provided.  However, an indicative amount was needed, which was why the figure of £150,000 – 200,000 for strand two had been used.  However, concern was expressed that the reduction in funding of £86,000 was a large amount for the organisations concerned, as they had limited resources.

It was noted that Voluntary Action LeicesterShire had been awarded the contracts for services included in strands 1 and 3 at a saving of just over £71,000. 

Councillor Russell, (Assistant Mayor with responsibility for Neighbourhood Services), stressed that the review of advice services did not include a review of the Citizens Advice Bureau contract.  That contract had at least another year to run, with the possibility of extending it by a further two years.

The Commission queried why an organisation with a general remit did not provide support services, possibly using specialist teams, as this would remove much of the demarcation between types of service.  In reply, the Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance explained that the Council wanted to establish a model that built good relationships with communities representing characteristics such as faith, race and LGBT people and that a centralised model would not necessarily achieve the trust and engagement of individual communities.  Other delivery models could be suggested through the forthcoming consultation, which the Council would be happy to consider.

In response to a query from Members, the Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance confirmed that the city had been included in the government’s Prevent programme.  A Prevent Co-ordinator had been employed and was based at St Philips Centre.  The Home Office approved projects and the allocation of funding for the Programme, but the Council had a representative on the steering group. 

Members of the Commission noted that there had been no choice about participating in the programme, as it was a statutory responsibility for lead authorities, but concerns remained that the impact of previous work could be diminished and some communities alienated.  The Assistant Mayor reminded the Commission that, when it had started, the Prevent programme had been discussed extensively by the Executive and through the scrutiny process.

It was recognised that in the past some groups and organisations had felt that they were excluded from discussions, but were still required to follow a set of criteria.  These organisations often had done significant work in building community solidarity and should be respected and involved in future work.

RESOLVED:

That the Director of Delivery, Communications and Political Governance be asked to submit a report to the Commission in the new municipal year explaining why St Philip’s Centre has been chosen to host the local Prevent programme.