Communities for local Government

To participate in this forum you must Sign in

• 327

  05/03/2008, 12:04 PM :: Posted by Anne Wilkins (Posts 23)

  How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers? (Read only)

  Locked

  In this discussion forum, we would really like to hear your views on how people can get involved to improve local services.

  We need services to become more personalised; better tailored to the needs of individuals and areas. This requires considerable change over the next decade, and the direct involvement of consumers in the design and delivery. They also need to be more accountable and transparent.

  We would therefore like to know:

  • How can the power of consumers be better used to improve local services?

  Housing is a critical service and therefore central to giving people more power over their lives. Decent homes are important but not enough. Those who rent in social housing should have just as much say over their housing as those who own their properties.

  Specifically, we would like to ask;

  • How can social housing tenants be given more choice and voice?

  • Report abuse
• 332 in reply to 327

  06/03/2008, 7:17 PM :: Posted by croydonboy (Posts 4)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  Many tenants in local authority housing have a lot of opportunities to get involved in running their services. Except of course that the Government decided they should no longer have a say in the level of rent they pay as big Government knows best and will take they rent from good authorities to bail out those who can't manage their stock properly. Surely the Government can't talk about local accountability for housing and at the same time centrally set rent increases and redistribute rent levels. Where is the local accountability in that?

  Is the Government planning to steal rent from the rest of the social housing sector as well?

  Where is the local accountability in other public services - policing, skills, health, education, getting people back to work? Everybody is running around chasing national Government approval and have no flexibility to target local priorities. Even local area agreements are being dictated by the Government Offices to remove any sense of localness.

  The only way to encourage more local involvement in decision making is to release power to local areas to get on with what is important to them and stop Whithall trying to micro-manage everything.

  • Report abuse
• 355 in reply to 327

  08/04/2008, 10:37 AM :: Posted by Alex Brown (Posts 3)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  Social housing tenants in theory have quite a reasonable say in the running of their landlords, sadly theory and practice tend to be complete strangers.  A range of opportunities for involvement are supposedly in place from working in a tenants and residents group to being a board member.  However most groups are badly underfunded, an annual allowance of £50.00 to cover costs is often seen as sufficient by landlords.  Many do offer to fund or provide training sessions for tenants, in house there must be questions as to quality (not in all cases I hasten to add) external training is too expensive for groups to access direct, CLG funded organisations still charge £115.00 + VAT for one day courses which limits attendance, in many to those chosen few who don't rock the boat and are funded by the landlord.  In addition these courses tend to be of value only to new members as they are only a basic look at say the repairs service and how it should work, nobody appears willing to lay on advanced courses for tenants to help them develop to a level where they  can have a real input into housing policy and strategy.

  Regional tenants and residents bodies are starting to address some of these issues, but are again hampered by cost, there is currently no core funding for such organisations so they have to spend more time looking for money to carry out their role than would be desirable and this eats into the time they can spend doing the real work they were set up to do.  Regional bodies realised  quite some time ago that involvement went beyond just housing but had to include all areas that impact on the lives of their members.  In my own region we are currently looking at the participatory budgetting consultation and doing workshops around the regions to let members have an input direct to government, recent other activities have been looking at the climate change with the regional developmemnt agency and the impact we can have as householders and looking at involvement in the democratic process with the Ministry of Justice.

  OfTenant which was almost universally condemned as a proposal when tenants were consulted on the issue, is coming into being soon.  We must wait with bated breath to see whether the government actually lets tenants get really involved with the running of this quango or just pays lip service by having a couple of tame yes men on the board.  This will be a completely toothless tiger unless the board has the power to levy real fines on none compliant landlords.  A maximum fine of £5,000.00 looks ridiculous when you hears of water companies being fined £35 million.  No one could realistically expect an RSL to pay a fine of such magnitude but to have a maximum fine that an unscrupulous landlord could say is cheaper than proper funding of tenant involvement is plainly nonsense.

  In summary tenants and residents can only be truly involved if there is sufficient funding in place, be this through landlords or statutory agencies.  The rider to this is that due to various government policies over the years there are very few single tenure estates any more, so should landlords invest in residents or should local government have a role to play.

  • Report abuse
• 357 in reply to 327

  08/04/2008, 2:26 PM :: Posted by SaveTheWorld (Posts 13)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  This is a big question.  But the answer is simple and can be illustrated by an example which probably comes to the main conclusion that people have to want to be a part of the change. 

  Imagine you like cereals for breakfast.  In year 1900 they invented the WeaterBics, a new cereal food. You found it cheap, easy to eat and it kept you nourished. Because you live on an island you kept on eating the same thing for 40 years.  Then you had children and they were given the cereal. Growing up in a changing world, with TV showing exotic places awashed with sun, the young ones decided to try fruit with their cereal –  they liked it.  They coated the cereal with chocolate and liked it.

  Next came crunchy nut and and honey corn-o-flakes. New tastes, fun with gimmicks. Confused their  parents decided they would try the new stuff. Soon everyone stopped looking at that box of WeaterBics in the supermarket, walking straight on by to the sugar coated options. 

  Politics is the old cereal, people walk past and instead buy into a gym that they might never use, get on line to social networks for new friends, buy on-line to avoid shops, ease into a disconnected world.

  Public and Local Services have to be revived for the consumer. They are not exciting products. What has to happen is for local services to come into the new age, many people are still their waiting. 

  Let us consider the three examples above.

  The Gym – modern but nothing new – they even had one on the deck of Titanic. Decades ago people would use the public facilities (gyms, swimming pools, football fields). Many consumers now do not want the old community clubs, they want something they see as more them, special, reflective of how they see their independent character. This is actually a signal to modernise and become inclusive. 

  Social Networks – have to face it - the internet is a world of young people. They like it because most parents have not got much of a clue and it means the young citizens can be better and different to the older generation.  This is great news because it means young people want change and choice. 

  Buy-On-Line – here is something older consumers understand, shopping.  It is the one thing where they can keep a link with the youth who want nice things. The parent keeps some control by having the purse strings to influence the shopping and in effect becomes engaged with the technology age.

  Now think of Public and Local Services. They are like the Titanic Gym, old wooden structures – including Town Halls, clinical hospitals, schools with enforced topics and local councillors with who that aspirational, innovative and creative people do not easily connect.

  Barriers are being created because those who should be representing citizens are seen to be in authority and one thing consumer do not like is that. They will walk away and find something welcoming. The time has come to introduce new ideas where local people want to connnect. 

  But we are not at a starting point. We have some excellent examples of voluntary and community groups and this is where new creativity has to be fostered. Looking at the national spend on public services we can assign some to invest in people. Most active citizens want to see their volunteering or community group grow, if not to become the best, in the land. Leading by example needs government to put in place new ways to connect with people. Bigger and better websites – social networks – every one of our community diverstiy needs provided for and with the councils and government understanding this is consumers focused – needing added value for money. 

  Traditional public services are seen set in their ways, bad attitudes still often prevail. The public is left in the cold and has gone to find their comfort zone. The big task of winning citizens back will get harder the longer the barriers are left in place. The simple one answer is to be bold enough to invest in considerable change. It could take a decade but it must start before any evil faction of extremism gets into power and changes the very fabric of society that even the disconnected deep down in their spirit knows is Good Britishness. The government has a duty to seek out supportive connections with those individuals in society that can lead with empowerment ways that will attract direct involvement of consumers. The government must be skilled leaders in explaining transparancy. This includes finding new ways to give responses to the concerns of the public and better communicate actions.   

  The can do solution will takes time to implement because the consumers need skills, understanding (on both sides), and empowerment to be a part of  design and delivery. This is the talk of an active citizenship and it is for sure the governments role to put active citizenship into all communities, each schools and in partnership with big businesses that have courage to be part of solving the problem. 

  Citizens are the consumers and this is why government, local councils, PCTs, schools, hospitals and other services have to become more public minded in how the power of consumers is better used to improve local services. Telling does not work – inform, ask and involve will be the best solution.

  Filed under: Unlocking the talent, Future Leaders, success, opportunities, diversity

  • Report abuse
• 360 in reply to 327

  09/04/2008, 12:36 PM :: Posted by Brian Craven (Posts 1)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  Community Anchors?

  Local sub post offices closing. Local pharmacies threatened with closure. Local hospitals closing down with services transfered to remote, anonymous sites. Primary Care services combined in distant centralised blocks ...... in the 1970s these were called "Health Centres" and they didn't work then, so what's new?!

  Local schools rationalised & closed. Housing Associations merged and now so huge and remote that they can do anything they want, then demand service charges to pay for it without any recourse (eg: up 50% in 3 years).

  Alcohol so cheap & accessible that pubs have to close. Public sector consultations routinely conducted when decisions are already made.

  Community Anchors?

  Successful, enduring community groups wound up because public sector organisations (eg: RSLs) are stealing their grants.

  Local residents facing excessive charges to visit a hospital, phone a patient, ring a GP, access a Dentist.

  Minibus-loads of Police to deal with the town's weekend clubs, but just 1 Bobby to covering everything else

  Community Anchors? The answer? Simple! Get real! Stop cutting the chord!

  Filed under: Unlocking the talent

  • Report abuse
• 364 in reply to 360

  09/04/2008, 5:44 PM :: Posted by Anne Wilkins (Posts 23)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  Thank you for your comments. It has been interesting to understand your views on these topics. You have highlighted the significant steps that have already been taken to put housing high on the agenda. You have also expressed your views on how local accountability could be improved. The points you have raised have been fed back to the policy teams.

  We have not received responses to all the questions posed on the forum so please keep sharing your views with us. We will keep all those who have responded up to date with the progress of The White Paper.

  During the run up to the local elections (10^th April 2008 - 1^st May 2008) we are not able to respond to your questions or comments but please keep them coming in and you will hear from us in early May.

  In particular we are interested in your examples of how the actions of community groups have been maximised to involve more people in local issues, especially with under-represented groups as this is something we are focussing on in the EWP.

  Please post your comments here or email us at unlockingtalent@communities.gsi.gov.uk

  The first edition of our stakeholder newsletter Unlocking Talent is now available. To view the newsletter register at http://haveyoursay.communities.gov.uk/user/CreateUser.aspx?ReturnUrl=/content/HaveYourSay.aspx. Once registered please select newsletters and subscribe to future editions.

  You can also use this link www.communities.gov.uk/publications/communities/powerpack to find out more about our Community Power Packs. These packs have been designed to help local groups to contribute to the empowerment debate by running a discussion group.

  Anne (moderator)

  • Report abuse
• 370 in reply to 327

  11/04/2008, 3:55 PM :: Posted by ianj (Posts 6)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  Firstly I think it is great that a White Paper is being proposed with a focus on local people and not public departments. All the issues in the proposal are interlinked and part of the same complex system, but I will try and comment on the individual areas identified.
  One of the first things is to think about is the terminology that government uses. I expect you are very conscious of the terms used and therefore you are developing an erroneous position that is backward looking to a world of ‘Game Play’ and consumerism while thinking it is progressive and ‘modern’; these concepts will be derided in the future.

  Public Service: the first word states ‘public’, owned by the people or citizen. The services people need are not a mixture of disposable consumer products as described above in ‘SaveTheWorlds’ post they are activities and functions which underpin an individual’s and community’s wellbeing.  We are not talking about cornflakes but about an interactive system where provider and recipient have reciprocal relationships. 

  As I have posted in the past to CLG the services in communities are the citizen’s services not the providers or the states.  Over the centuries the public sector has lost sight of the reality that the ownership of the service has to be with the community.  It is not just a case of ‘allowing’ them some empowerment to make them feel actively engaged.  There has to be cultural shift in the public sector which on many occasions believes it is their service that they are delivering.  This transformation also has to take place in community where the customer concept has caused a fracturing of responsibility. It is about real co-production where the user and provider boundaries blur. I often say there is a paradox here between the creation of fuzzy boundaries where collaboration and innovation occurs and the need to have clarity of responsibility.  The perceived provider and recipient both have responsibilities for what happens in communities and have to work together in a dynamic way, not a relationship through a narrow based consumer focused lens.

  The fundamental aspect of involving local users in the design, planning and delivery of services has to be organic and not mechanistic, from the ground up not from the top down through pre-conceived toolkits. The first thing one has to do is to connect individuals from their own narrative perspectives and not from the structural perspectives of government or service providers.  People have to be engaged in their own time and sometimes small steps are required in order for them to progress into the higher levels of empowerment and co-production.  There can be no absolute prescriptive intervention. People do not live in silos of interest or need and have to be allowed to be involved in aspects that suit their particular circumstances.  This way of operating is generally anathema to public service as it can’t be controlled or managed from above. What matters is the long term outcome and not the short term output.  It is more like the Toyota lean system than the Fordist production line.  But most importantly of all it is not a customer/supplier transaction, this will warp the relationship, it is a joint endeavour.

  For too long the approach to service improvement has been reductionist and has not taken the whole complex system into consideration.  There are millions of people waiting to become involved but who over the decades have been separated from their service. This involvement can vary from supporting vulnerable adults and working with children and schools, engaging in health and wellbeing activities, community safety, waste minimisation and recycling to maintaining a quality built environment and improvements in local open spaces. 

  CLG talks about community hubs these have been eroded over the years; meeting points such as post offices, local shops, pubs and schools (the PFI initiative has been great for government’s short term financial benefits but disastrous for long term community development).  It is the linkages and networks that are established around these hubs not just the physical infrastructure t hat matters, these are the places where social capital building is instigated. Sir David Varney (2006) takes us in the right direction, he talks about service transformation but in fact it is still focused on improvements in the current system and not a fundamental reconfiguration of the relationship between the provider and recipient.

  We are talking about long term cultural changes in both our communities and in public service.  Lasting change will only happen if two things occur; firstly recognition that only local based solutions will work not regional or national ones, and secondly that national control is released further and that Government departments understand that individuals and communities do not care about a departments concerns but do care deeply about the interrelating aspects of community life.  Local Area Agreements are clearly a small step in the right direction. 

  One of the first things that needs to be done, particularly for those who are disengaged and under-represented is to support them to be involved in their communities and become active citizens through volunteering.  It seems to me that CLG does not quite appreciate the stages people go through to become active in their community in order to take on more responsibility.  People have to be supported to take these steps and be allowed to develop at their own pace taking on more action as their confidence grows and the system alters. People are not one dimensional there is a multivalence to their lives and an approach from a narrow service based method of engagement will not work.  We have a huge skilled, passionate but de-motivated population just waiting to work and support each other to address common challenges; we must release this energy but it has to be in a different way than the current instrumentalist method.

  Sometimes it is difficult for those who want well structured planning to understand how to develop active citizens to become engaged as Baroness Neuberger recently said about volunteering “Government policy, therefore, has been an odd mixture of enthusiasm for the perceived outputs of volunteering, made real by the testimonies of countless individuals and visits to volunteering projects, and distrust, because it does not work along lines that can be understood and controlled.”

  Filed under: Unlocking the talent, opportunities, innovatin, Engage

  • Report abuse
• 377 in reply to 327

  17/04/2008, 4:07 PM :: Posted by SaveTheWorld (Posts 13)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  How can social housing tenants be given more choice and voice ?

  Every social housing tenant deserves good quality accommodation and low maintenance costs and excellent service from the landlord, be it private let or council owned.   Sadly it is not always the case.  The result of not having a best provision means a wide variety of problems arise that would otherwise not.  It must be the government duty to ensure it is the landlords who become required to meet the reasonable needs of their tenants.  Doing this requires a minimum charter, where the tenant can claim compensation if minimum standards are not achieve. The compensation could be in free weeks or as rewards but it should be the norm that any lower than acceptable provision has a corrective action date and there should be an independent body, with residents panel, with court power to hear and apply remedies.

  Reflecting back on the years when I was a boy, living in a village where the only housing was social, my parents’ thoughts of owning any house were just not on this planet.  Now look at us today.  I own my home, something my parents would have never have thought was possible of their little child.  A whole life story is set behind every one of us that has come to accept our homeownership rights.  But for others the problems of living in social housing remain.  I recall each repair had to be sanctioned, overdue rent meant a knock on the door (mother always sent to soft talk the council collector) and as for choice – take it or leave it – with outside loo, coal fires independently heating each of the rooms, ants in the summer, mice in winter, my social housing scares come back to me just too real.

  What changed when  folk like me took our increasing wealth and invested in our house.  Something to hand down to the children I remember being one mortgage selling point.  Why pay rent when you can buy was another.  You will be independent - no landlord to answer to, that was the one that did it for me.  Some of us did nicely, building up equity, but the world credit squeeze is now seeing thousands of fellow citizens worried, anxious and feeling hard up.  People are beginning to think again about the real benefits of social housing when all you have to do is pay the rent.  This makes it an essential time to get to grips with giving people more power over their lives.      

  Not as easy as it sounds.  There are still bad landlords and it would not take long to hunt through the council estates to find a family where repairs are not done or ants parade the kitchen table or they have a daily problem from noisy neighbours as their nightmare.

  It is astounding that we can compare like for like after 50 long years.  Honesty makes us say social housing has been neglected by local councils.  Let us now realise it is the local residents that really own their council and we should begin to feel very guilty.  Just for a brief moment think it could be you tomorrow that is made redundant, or inflation means you cannot pay the mortgage.  Options, choices, voices what can you expect to find.

  The best and fairest way to address the matter is to make sure that social housing tenants do have a voice and have the knowledge, resources and support to help them get good quality solutions.   This means putting into place something that has been neglected for over 50 years ago and is at times void today.  Social Housing Landlords that do put the tenants quality of life first.  Anyone working for landlords to provide a service must be fully trained and as a minimum has an NVQ in Customer Services.

  Tenants need to be able to be able to easily get better skilled in communications and presentation skills, in active citizenship, in governance and key skills.  It is an absolute disgrace after five decades of governments that there remain many local citizens in our communities who just have no idea how to vote, where to get care, what ways they can use to petition a council for improvements or when their rights are being abused.

  Social and affordable housing is going to become one of the biggest challenges and it needs real investment in citizen skills to help shape the new towns, repair the old ones and produce a rolling progressive programme of regeneration for all communities that are neither old or new – instead of council’s waiting until their problems become desperate.  The National Trust should be given lottery money to buy off Town Halls and City Halls and turn them into publicly partnered tourist attractions and the councils should use that generated money to provide easily assessable, better located, modern town offices well connected with their public. 

  Independent (people) panels should comprise of social tenants, private home owners, voluntary organisations and community groups to have the real say in how devolved budgets are allocated in the community.  The decisions should be endorsed, or referred back, by the councillors who need to then explain to the panels any changed decisions.   

  Councillors need to engage more with the social housing tenants and should be seen to take part in community events in the area.  To keep in touch councillors needs to have a limited term of elected office.  All councils should have elected Mayors, who should not be allowed by law to stand for more than three terms.  Mayors should have a “manifesto” that is compiled with the advice, and prioritised spending, from the people’s panel.  The Mayors should be required to be supportive of third sector and inward investment plans.

  Each councils should a have to provide information portals in the central shopping areas explaining what the good side of the community offers – including summer-play events, volunteering opportunities and charity garden parties.  Modern TVs split-screens would allow a part of the screen to display photos of the community support officers and health trainers with contact details and public interest features say like “the hero of the week” – celebrating someone in the local community who inspires good citizenship.

  Choice!  Where a home swap is provided there should be an ethical compensation based on the number of years a person has lived at their home – just because their surrounding has been allowed to get run down it does not mean their street is not part of a life, where real citizens became trapped.  The decay is the fault of us all, as a collective.  We have to all hold our hands up and realise regeneration hurts people as properties become cleared. 

  This has been one BIG mistake – with stories of people being virtually forced out of their family birth place into a home-swap they never wanted.  Society has guilty hands and it should be the duty of our caring government to issue an apology to anyone who has been made to move in the name of regeneration.  The mental and spiritual cruelty that we have collectively caused cannot be warranted if we are serious about encouraging all people to begin reviving governance and to take part, empowered as citizens, becoming active and to build stronger and safer communities the we have to wipe the slate clean.  It is simply an absolute must for government to back track five years and compensate on errors in all those communities where regeneration was focusing on bricks and mortar.  Those high investment pots of money deployed tower over the damage done to individuals.  It must be a pure demand on government, and councils, to invest in people without delay. 

  The answer to the above paragraph is easy, people voices will make the decisions at the ballot box and in the social housing tenant communities it is more likely to see distaste resulting in voting apathy. The best solution would be a real commitment to investing in active citizenship – local people skilled, knowledgeable, engaging and able to improve the local community.  An important step change will be to put in ways to make the local councils more diversely representative and not driven by authority. Another step change will be to put MPs and MEPs into a fixed term election period, then everyone will know in advance when re-election will take place.  Just like elected Mayors there should be a maximum term for MPs and MEPs to remain in elected office of no more than 4 terms with an extra year for each term served added on for them to carry out the tidying up of outstanding constituency business while handing over to their elected replacement.

  The need for all homes to get better at energy conservation is on most peoples minds.  It should be an incentive for landlords to offset one tenth of their property tax for each year they spend an equivalent amount on the homes energy conservation and eco measures.

  Diversity has not been well reported in the press in terms of community cohesion.  The government should issue information leaflets to all schools about what diversity means and why cohesion is necessary.  The leaflets should be part of a series published for the schools in taking the Citizenship Curriculum into its next phase of Active Citizenship (the doing part of citizens becoming active).  This is extremely important as it needs to offer young people a voice on what choices need to be made in communities, including for meeting the needs of young people as social housing family members.

  There is also the WorldSkills 2011 contest in London (sponsored by City and  Guilds) and government should look at putting in a young people’s skills contest for groups in communities that take part in being citizenship active.  This could include young people competing by making their short video entry called “Choice and Voice” about how they view their communities, its priorities and what new ideas the future holds. 

  An Olympics 2012 regional legacy team should be formed in each region to begin now the task of looking at what communities of the future should become.  In addition there should be more encouragement for social housing tenants (family members) to become able to volunteer at the big events, like Olympics 2012, because by being involved they can think about what facilities and activities could benefit their community. 

  The Empowerment White Paper needs to make provision for plans to go beyond 2012.  Why not a major event each year planned in for subsequent years – the regions putting forward plans to capture the rights to stage the main event of the year and to celebrate differences by focusing on one of our diverse communities and include a health summit and neighbourhood conference.

  Life is for Living – Governement must be inspirational in putting good spirit into all our communities.

  Filed under: Unlocking the talent, education, success, jobs, opportunities

  • Report abuse
• 380 in reply to 327

  23/04/2008, 12:17 PM :: Posted by Community Champion (Posts 5)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  Reading Alex Brown here we see one of the problems, extremely low investment in training for tenants that want to get on and do a good job.  How can £50 pay for someone to get the skills to enable them to become ready for the many questions faced in being social housing tenants voice.  I think government needs to look at how to invest the right amount of money into skills training, including governance, citizenship, health and understanding other people.

   

  • Report abuse
• 390 in reply to 380

  29/04/2008, 12:18 PM :: Posted by Bjælkehuse (Posts 1)

  Re: How do we improve local public services by involving local users and consumers?

  Locked

  I Agree – education is the key, specific for the lower social ranks.

  Bjælkehuse

  • Report abuse