Select Committee on Office of the Deputy Prime Minister: Housing, Planning, Local Government and the Regions Written Evidence


Memorandum by Luton Borough Council (SOC 75)

1.  INTRODUCTION

1.1  Definitions

  The Council has developed its own definition of community cohesion as follows:

    —  The "glue" that holds society together.

    —  What prevents dissent and disagreement descending into conflict and violence.

    —  What makes us work together for the common good.

1.2  The Council's approach

  The Council's overall approach to social cohesion can be summarised as:

    —  Celebrating diversity.

    —  Open and honest.

    —  Listening and learning—gathering intelligence.

    —  Targeting resources based on objective measures of need.

    —  Optimistic but not complacent.

    —  Recognising that much still remains to be done.

    —  Working with partners.

    —  Providing effective leadership.

    —  Watchful and alert—ready to respond.

2.  LUTON IN CONTEXT

  This is an attempt to provide a summary of key statistics about Luton relevant to the topic.

2.1  Population

  Luton is a compact and densely populated urban area. The 2001 census registered a resident population of 184,371 people (June 2002 estimate 186,200). Those from ethnic minority heritages comprise 28.1% of the population; 18.3% of south Asian heritages and 6.3% of black heritages.

2.2  Schools

  Within Luton there are six nursery schools, 58 primary phase schools, 12 secondary schools, three special schools and two pupil referral units.

2.3  Pupils

  Luton as a local education authority is responsible for the education of 32,325 children up to the age of 16. The January 2003 schools survey revealed that 43.1% of the pupils in Luton schools were from ethnic minority heritages. The pupils in a few primary phase schools are almost entirely from ethnic minority heritages.

2.4  Deprivation

  Two Luton wards are amongst the 10% most deprived wards in England. These two wards have the highest rates of unemployment and contain significantly the highest proportions of ethnic minority residents.

2.5  Unemployment

  The census indicated that the rate of unemployment in June 2001 was 3.8% (3.1% for white groups, 5.7% for Asian groups and 7% for black groups). In November 2003 the unemployment rate for Luton was reported as being 2.9% however, because of changes in definitions these statistics are not on the same basis and are therefore not strictly comparable.

2.6  The conurbation

  Luton is part of a conurbation that includes the towns of Dunstable and Houghton Regis which, although adjacent to Luton, have markedly different characteristics. Nevertheless the towns are interdependent in terms of employment, housing, health services, shopping and transport.

3.  SOME SPECIFIC INITIATIVES

3.1  BME Housing Needs Survey

  In 1998 the Council commissioned Salford University to undertake a survey of the Housing needs of the BME communities. The research was commissioned to complement a general Housing Needs survey that was carried out at the same time.

3.2  Lord Ouseley's report on Bradford and the decision to utilise "scrutiny" to undertake a study of community cohesion in Luton

  Following the publication in 2001 of the report of the group chaired by Lord Ouseley a scrutiny panel was set up at Luton with a remit to examine the report to see whether the issues identified in Bradford also pertained in Luton and, if so, whether the interventions proposed in Bradford might be helpful to Luton. The remit of the panel was extended at a very early stage to cover all aspects of race and community relations in the town. The study was completed in 2002 and the report of the study was published at a launch event in January 2003 at which Ted Cantle was the keynote speaker.

3.3  Decision to encourage OfSTED to use Luton to pilot a themed inspection of the LEA focussed on community cohesion

  Guidance developed at national level by a working party led by Ted Cantle and on which Luton's Chief Executive, Darra Singh, served raised issues about mono-cultural schools and how they should be addressed. At that time the inspectorates were being encouraged to reflect considerations around community cohesion in their inspections of local authority services. For these reasons OfSTED was invited to use Luton as a test bed and to undertake an inspection of the LEA based around the theme of community cohesion.

4.  RESULTS OF REVIEWS

4.1  BME Housing Needs survey

  Respondent and Household Characteristics

    —  Household sizes varied considerably by ethnic group eg African Caribbean households tended to be smaller, with up to four people, and along with Indian households were least likely to include children. On the other hand, four out of ten Pakistani households had six or more members, which were likely to include two or more children.

    —  Just over half the people surveyed were in full time employment, and just less than one in 10 were unemployed.

    —  Just less than one in 20 households included someone who had a long-term sickness or was disabled.

    —  Over one third had no income except that received from welfare benefits.

  Current Tenure and Housing History

    —  The majority were owner-occupiers, the largest number of the remaining group were council tenants.

    —  There were differences in tenure according to ethnicity e.g while more Pakistani and Indian households were owner occupiers, African Caribbean and Bangladeshi people tended to be council tenants.

  Future Housing Requirements

    —  The majority of households would not want to move home.

    —  Of those households wanting to move, the majority would prefer to stay in Luton.

    —  Over half of the potential movers would want to buy their own homes, with one third stating a preference for council rented accommodation.

    —  Decisions on where to move to were generally influenced by access to shops, health facilities and schools.

    —  Just over one quarter of households (27.6%) included someone who would require separate accommodation within the next five years. The largest group of these hidden households would want to set up home within the same ward as their host household.

    —  Nearly half (46.4%) of these hidden households want to buy their own homes, 28.3% would rent privately, and over one fifth preferred council accommodation.

    —  It was anticipated that nearly half of the hidden households would be unable to afford suitable private accommodation in Luton (rented or purchased), without some form of assistance. Very few of these households was registered with the Council or a housing association in the area.

  Awareness of Services and Provision

    —  None of the respondents would consider sheltered housing for themselves and only six would look to this form to cater for the needs of a family member.

    —  Knowledge of the range of local authority grants available was generally low.

    —  Only four out of 10 respondents were aware of housing association activity within the Borough.

        Interestingly on this final point a more recent BME survey for the other authorities in Bedfordshire identified a similar issue about a lack of awareness. This issue of access was also touched on in one of the recommendations that came from the crosscutting Ofsted inspection:

      —  The Council should develop improved ways of assisting minority ethnic households through information and systems to access housing, enforce their rights as tenants and improve the condition and energy efficiency of their homes.

        The other two "Housing" recommendations from Ofsted were:

      —  The Council should develop further its policy and provision for housing, by adopting an approved landlord list, a deposit guarantee scheme, support systems for tenants whose first language is not English and by improving liaison between all Council officers who may visit local communities and individual households.

      —  The Council should examine the implications of its allocations policy in relation to educational choice and availability.

4.2  Scrutiny Study

  The findings of the scrutiny study were published in the report of the panel entitled "Sticking Together—embracing diversity in Luton". The report set out the approach and methodologies that had been used in the study and the conclusions reached by the panel of Members based on the evidence and information collected. The main finding was that, by and large, people in Luton get on reasonably well together and that the tensions and fractures that were the cause of violent disorder in some places in the summer of 2001 were either not present in Luton or not to the same degree. The panel was keen to focus on a relatively small number of key issues and they made ten main recommendations to the Council and its partners. These centred around:

    —  the way in which decisions are made about the allocation of resources and the way in which those decisions are then communicated;

    —  communications generally and the need to be more pro-active about correcting mistakes and misrepresentations in the media;

    —  the need to promote best practice in recruitment and employment amongst local employers;

    —  the need to identify and fill the gap in provision of opportunities to learn English;

    —  services for young people;

    —  broadening cultural experiences for pupils at school; and

    —  and the need to examine the case for an equalities agency to provide advice, guidance and advocacy support to victims of any unlawful discrimination.

4.3  OfSTED Inspection

  The Council was inspected in its role as local education authority during April 2002. This inspection, at the Council's invitation, included a thematic inspection of the Council's overall approach to community cohesion, broadening the educational focus of the inspection to look in more detail than usual at issues of social inclusion, particularly those relevant to ethnicity, and also to consider the contribution made by Housing, Services to Children and families and by the Council's work on community regeneration. The inspection team was enhanced to include Her Majesty's Inspectors (HMI) with particular specialisms in ethnic and cultural issues, a member of the Social Services inspectorate and two additional members of the Audit Commission Inspection Service.This joint inspection report commented on the successes of the Council in dealing with the challenge of promoting community cohesion in an ethnically diverse town. It examined how effectively the LEA's support to schools assisted the Council in carrying forward its policy to support community cohesion and, reciprocally, what benefit accrued to the schools and their pupils from the Council's co-ordination of services to achieve the desired contribution to the cohesion of the community. The inspection report was published in November 2002.

  The report concluded that "overall, Luton Council, and the LEA within it, has much to do, but is making progress, under effective political and professional leadership, in all of the above respects. Its influence is markedly on the positive side, and it is rapidly improving both its capacity to convince all concerned of its good faith, and its effectiveness. The inspection found clear evidence of a strategy, which consisted fundamentally of the following strands:

    —  the desire to act more cohesively as a Council;

    —  a strong commitment to social inclusion;

    —  a drive for the improvement of services; and

    —  a commitment to the implementation of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

5.  SUBSEQUENT PLANS AND ACTIONS

5.1  Action plans

  The report on the scrutiny study was submitted to the Council early in 2003 and accepted without demur. The implementation of the recommendations was referred to the local strategic partnership and a themed sub group was set up to steer and monitor progress by partners. To assist in this an action plan was drawn up based on the 10 key recommendations and setting our agreed responsibilities, timescales etc. Significant progress has been made on most of the recommendations.

  The LEA developed an action plan in response to the themed inspection and progress against the plan has been good.

  Ten recommendations were made in the report. In response the Council's action plan identified 36 actions which have been incorporated in to service and team plans and the objectives set for individual members of staff.

  Senior managers in Lifelong Learning Department and other relevant parts of the Council have regularly monitored progress against the plan.

  The majority of actions have been completed or are ongoing matters that have been initiated.

6.  PRACTICAL RESULTS

6.1  Examples of good practice

  6.1.1  The scrutiny study was a major piece of work to which significant resources were dedicated. It involved some risk in that the work was publicised whilst it was going on in order to promote a debate. The conclusion has been that the very fact that the Council undertook this study and was prepared to sponsor and promote a debate in the local media was seen as positive and has been beneficial in enabling people to talk about sensitive issues. In a sense it provided a "safety valve". An important finding was the extent to which people's perceptions were different from reality as a result of lack of knowledge, misinformation or prejudice. The Council won a national award from the Institute of Public Relations for the publicity material developed and used during and after the study to publicise the topic and gain public involvement. (The Council also won an award for the quality of the civic newspaper.) Examples from the action plan are as follows:

    —  A communications strategy that sets out for the Council and its partners a framework for informing local people about key decisions and the basis on which they have been taken and provides guidance on addressing issues around misinformation and bias in media reporting. (Appendix A).

    —  Use of the curriculum (particularly sport, music and other arts) to give pupils experience of a wider range of cultures.

    —  Employment code of best practice—the local Chamber business has agreed to take the lead in developing and promulgating a code of best practice to local employers.

    —  English as a second language—the Learning Skills Council is assessing the scale and nature of unmet need.

    —  An officer steering group is working on developing a case for an equalities agency for Luton.

  6.1.2  The LEA inspection themed around community cohesion was a challenging but positive experience and provided evidence about the way things were and pointers to develop improved approaches. The latest report on progress is attached as Appendix B.

  6.1.3  Recruitment by the Council—the Council aspires to have a workforce that is broadly reflective of the economically active resident population. The Council's recruitment processes have been developed to eliminate unlawful and inappropriate discrimination and to help candidates to overcome disadvantage whilst still applying the principle of appointing the best candidate for the job. Targets set by the Council have been exceeded and there is anecdotal evidence that perceptions of local people have been changed.

  6.1.4  Schools use of curriculum to provide pupils with experience of a range of cultures.

  6.1.5  Community safety—strategy development in partnership with the Police and other partners through the Safer Luton Partnership involving focus group meetings with "hard-to-reach" groups, including the ethnic minority and gay and lesbian communities.

  6.1.6  LSP—Forum, Assembly, themed CC groupThe Council has established the Luton Forum as the local strategic partnership for the area. The Forum consists of representatives of all of the statutory agencies working in the town plus significant representation from the local communities. This has been achieved through the Luton Assembly which is an inclusive group open to representatives of all bona fide established community groups, clubs and associations. The assembly elects the community representatives on the Forum. The Forum has established a number of sub groups to work on the key themes set out in Luton's community plan. One of the themed groups is focussed on Community Cohesion and its initial task was to consider and advise on the guidance issued by the Home Office, to guide, monitor and report on progress in implementing the recommendations of the "Sticking Together" report of the scrutiny panel and to consider and advise on the community cohesion implications of the other themes in the community plan.

  6.1.7  An officer working group has been established to support the themed sub group of the Luton Forum. The group's remit encompasses equalities, diversity and social inclusion as well as community cohesion. The group is working on a clear framework to define and connect the four strands. The group also provides the resources to take forward the work of the themed group.

  6.1.8  The Luton CarnivalThe spring bank holiday Monday is an important day in Luton because that's when we host the UK's largest one day carnival. The 2003 event was the 28th and the parade consisted of over 1,000 people representing 45 groups. The carnival is a celebration in art and music of the diversity of culture in Luton.

  6.1.9  Regeneration Initiatives:

    —  The Council involved local communities in preparing submissions for neighbourhood renewal funding the result of which was the award of £50 million over 10 years to fund an area based regeneration programme.

    —  The Council facilitated the formation of a local community based group to raise funding for a new local community centre which the group, now established as a trust, is responsible for managing and running.

    —  In order to develop project proposals for incorporation into a bid for Single Regeneration Fund resources (round 6) the Council helped to facilitate a forum of community representatives who themselves determined the shape and content of the bid.

  6.1.10  As a response to under representation of black and ethnic minority tenants on tenants and residents associations the Council set up a BME TARA.

  6.1.11  Service provision:

    —  The Council provides "women only" sessions at the swimming pools to meet the needs of Moslem women.

    —  A day centre for African/Caribbean elders has been set up to provide access to day care services for that group.

    —  The governing principle underpinning the Council's provision of leisure facilities is inclusion.

  6.1.12  LMARIG—the Council participates with partners in the Luton Multi Racial Incident Group which has developed, implemented and publicised a scheme for reporting, recording and responding to racial incidents in the town.

7.  DILEMMAS AND UNRESOLVED ISSUES

7.1  Culturally specific services

  7.1.1  Where the Council has become aware that a minority group is not accessing a service it has made specific provision for the excluded group. Examples referred to above are the BME TARA and the African/Caribbean elders day centre. These have been successful in that they are accesses by groups who were not previously accessing the mainstream service; however, in the absence of a clear exit strategy, such an approach can be a solution to a short term problem at the expense of long-term segregation. It is arguable that such an approach is a means of avoiding tackling the underlying problem.

7.2  Monocultural schools—conflict between the conclusion from the scrutiny study and the themed Ofsted inspection

  The themed Ofsted inspection report threw down the challenge of addressing the issue of schools where all or nearly all of the puils are from one cultural heritage and suggested that the make up of pupils in schools should be more balanced; however it did not put forward a method to achieve this. The conclusion of the scrutiny study was that artificial social engineering such as changing admission criteria, redrawing school catchment area boundaries and bussing children to schools away from the area where they live was to be avoided and that what mattered was that all pupils had the opportunity to learn about and experience the cultures of others. The Council has followed the latter approach through imaginative use of the curriculum and school twinning arrangements. It is hoped that the achievement of specialist status by more of our secondary schools will also make a contribution to this objective.

7.3  Regeneration funding

  Many of the funding regimes supporting regeneration initiatives have a competitive element within the bidding process. This can have the effect of encouraging communities to emphasise their needs and their deprivation in order to compete to be worst. The rules of many of the funding regimes and the requirement of bidding processes can be so complex and technical as to be disempowering to community groups.

8.  CONCLUSION

  Luton did not experience the violent conflicts suffered by some other towns in the summer of 2001 or the level of tension within and between communities that was seen in some other places following 11 September 2001 and subsequent events in Afghanistan and Iraq. The scrutiny study indicated that this was because, generally speaking, people in Luton get on pretty well together and because there are effective networks in place to provide early warning when trouble threatens and respected community leaders able and prepared to intervene promptly. However the study did identify some issues that needed to be addressed and the Council and its partners are working on these. There is however an awareness that circumstances are constantly changing and that the price of peace is eternal vigilance. Arrangements have been made through the community survey to try to establish a baseline measure of community cohesion but it is recognised that we are trying to measure something that is largely intangible. Political and community leaders are probably the best barometer of the feelings of local people and the informal networks that have served us well in the past need to be fostered and nurtured.


APPENDIX A

Supplementary Memorandum by Luton Borough Council (SOC 75(a))

COMMUNITY COHESION "STICKING TOGETHER: EMBRACING DIVERSITY IN LUTON" COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY

INTRODUCTION

  The top 10 Conclusions and Recommendations for Action of the Scrutiny Panel that prepared this report included one that was of a specific Communications nature, and others that in some form have communications implications.

  The following seeks to outline how these should be responded to.

  In doing so, it takes account of the "matrix" that has been developed to link the report with the Community Plan and National Guidance.

1.   Communication

  The report calls for the Council to take the lead in communicating key decisions, and the reasons for them, to local people.

1.1  The "How"

  With the creation of the new Communications division, the Council is able to respond to this requirement by means of the co-ordinated communication of information using established techniques/media.

EXTERNALLY

  ie to the local community by means of eg:

    —  Press releases and, possibly, feature articles.

    —  Lutonline newspaper—now a monthly 24 page publication.

    —  Internet website—being re-launched in Autumn 2003.

    —  Special publications—specifically addressing certain issues/services.

    —  Advertising.

INTERNALLY

  ie to the Council's 7,000+ employees (who are also, largely, local residents) by means of eg:

    —  Inline—the monthly corporate employee newsletter.

    —  Intranet website—being re-launched in Autumn 2003.

RECOMMENDATION

  The Council will seek to utilise the full range of techniques/media at its disposal to effectively communicate information about key decisions to relevant audiences.

1.2  The "What"

  The actual message to be communicated is a somewhat more complex issue.

  Traditionally, the Council communicates its decisions only. This is the most important information to convey. As the space/time available in independent media to report Council news is limited, it is vital to strip the message back to the most important facets.

  Expanding on this to include further detail on the reasons for decisions is possible, but does have implications:

    —  Additional information in press releases may not be picked-up by the independent media. Indeed, there is a degree of danger that providing too much information will result in the stories not being used at all.

Recommendation

  The Council will offer information about the reasons for decisions as footnotes to press releases so it may be utilised if the media has sufficient space/time to report it.

    —  As far as the media the Council controls are concerned, it is certainly possible to incorporate more detailed stories featuring the reasons for decisions. This would, however, reduce the number of stories that can appear given limitations on the space/budget available.

Recommendation

  The Council will seek to explain clearly, but succinctly, the reasons for decisions as part of its communications activity, and will point to sources of further information eg from Lutonline coverage to the website database of Council meeting reports.

2.   Proactive Communication

  The Council should, and does, adopt a pro-active stance on challenging bias, prejudice and stereotypes. In large part this involves Human Resources issues such as the way in which it recruits its employees. Communications activity plays a role in encouraging good practise by demonstrating Council initiatives.

Recommendation

  The Council will seek to continue challenging bias, prejudice and stereotypes through its communications where there is legitimate reason to do so.

3.   Misunderstandings and Misinformation

  The Report of the Scrutiny Panel also calls for mistakes and misinformation in media reporting to be followed-up with a view to correction. This too is appropriate and laudable, up to a point.

  Despite concerted effort to ensure reporting is accurate, fair, and unbiased it is inevitable that some coverage that is considered to be counter-productive will appear.

  In some instances it is essential or appropriate to seek correction. In others, this has been found from experience to become an opportunity for the original counterproductive messages to be repeated. Equally, there can be no guarantee that the same people who received the inaccurate message, also receive the correction.

Recommendation

  A pragmatic approach to responding to mistakes and misinformation is required. Where correction is deemed essential, approaches may involve published corrections in the offending media and/or use of media that the Council controls to present the true position.

APPENDIX B

Supplementary memorandum by Luton Borough Council (SOC 75(b))











 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2004
Prepared 14 May 2004