Local government and the local voluntary and community sector (VCS) seek to promote the interests of the same communities and citizens, and often they provide services to the same communities and citizens. So it seems obvious that they should seek to find a common cause.
However, over the past three years, as local authorities have been forced to make difficult expenditure decisions, relations with the local VCS have often become strained and sometimes completely broken down. This is deeply regrettable. It is not in the interests of local communities or citizens, and worse, has the potential to create an unhelpful souring of the relationship between local government and the voluntary sector, both nationally and locally.
Thankfully, there are also many places where trust and collaboration have been sustained in spite of the pressures under which both the VCS and local government are struggling. Some local authorities have chosen to increase financial support to the VCS; and others have ensured that the VCS is involved in strategic decision-making and budget decisions.
Charities, including many local VCS organisations, expect to continue to experience falls in their income from local government, the wider public sector and from voluntary fundraising. Yet demand for their services is growing because of demographic change and the impact of wider economic and social conditions, such as unemployment, the social security changes and public service cuts. In some ways the pressures under which they are operating have much resonance with those being faced in local government.
Progressive and far-sighted local authorities and their leaders have recognised both the challenges faced by the VCS sector and its potential. They have recognised that, if they cut funding too quickly, they could damage a critical element of their local civil society, diminish community resilience, reduce services for communities and individuals, and create further unintended pressures on their own scarce resources.
Of course, it is not always possible or appropriate to protect every voluntary sector contract or grant. Local government has to act in the wider public interest and ensure that it is securing value for money and social value for communities. However, the perception – and, in some cases, the reality – of disproportionate cuts to the VCS funding is creating serious and worrying tensions between two sectors that should be working together, not falling out.
On the other hand, the VCS also has to understand the pressures and responsibilities felt by local government. There is a mutual benefit in the two sectors working together as long as they recognise and respect their differences. Yes, there will be tensions and challenges between them – but this is a vital element of democracy. It should not prevent greater collaboration but promote it.
Locally and nationally, it is imperative that the sectors:
• have open and frank dialogue;
• agree to lobby central government and political parties jointly on issues such as local government funding cuts, social security cuts and harmful changes, “welfare to work” programmes and the transfer of this responsibility to local government, and the growth agenda in which the VCS has a role to play;
• develop and promote good collaborative practice between the sectors.
And, specifically at the local level, local authorities must:
• sustain some grant support to the VCS, and involve the VCS in strategic planning, resource and budget decisions and strategic commissioning – of course with ultimate decisions being taken by accountable councillors;
• explore new and innovative ways of delivering public services;
• use public procurement to drive social value, and adopt commissioning and procurement practices that enable local VCS to participate in service delivery with realistic contract terms;
• help build the capacity of the VCS and the quality of its services;
• not expect the VCS to pick up services that are deemed to be the responsibility of the state without adequate funding and then only on a voluntary basis – and respect those VCS organisations that do not wish to deliver public services;
• recognise and respect the voice and independence of the VCS, even when and if in receipt of public money;
• seek to ensure that the wider public sector adopts similar behaviours and practices.
It would be a tragic loss and mistake if current austerity and central government policies were to be allowed to drive a wedge between the voluntary and community sector and local government. Building strong relationships between the two will require bold leadership in both sectors – locally and nationally.