Examination of Witnesses (Questions 160
- 179)
THURSDAY 9 SEPTEMBER 2004
MR NICHOLAS
RUSSELL, MR
TONY BURTON,
MR RAY
COWELL AND
MR JULIAN
SIMPSON
Q160 Mr Mole: Who pays for VONNE
now?
Mr Cowell: We get our money from
three sources at the moment: firstly, the Home Office, through
the Active Communities Unit. Secondly, we get a grant from the
Big Lottery Fund, as it is called, although that comes to an end
next year. Thirdly, we have just achieved a grant from Northern
Rock Foundation. You will notice the Regional Development Agency
is not on that list.
Q161 Mr Cummings: It is accepted
by many that the voluntary and community sector are well placed
to assist in the delivery of the general purposes of an assembly.
Do you think the draft bill goes far enough to ensure a sturdy
system for voluntary and community sector involvement?
Mr Cowell: I think provided the
act itself tightens up on the suggestions in the bill. For example,
it talks about some form of statutory requirement in order to
consult the sector and so forth, and if we can harden that up
a bit for specific requirements, both for the civic forum type
arrangement, where all stakeholders would have a facilitating
mechanism in order to input into the assembly, but also from our
point of view we do see the need for sector-specific schemes written
into legislation which will be required. We know from all our
experience in the North East that, if there is not a requirement
there, it will not happen.
Mr Russell: If I may offer a few
thoughts based on our experience in London. Firstly, is there
a possibility that the voluntary sector can be represented directly
on the functional bodies? For example, the Transport for London
board has benefited a lot from the fact that two disabled people
sit on it. There is talk in the draft bill of having a requirement
to have a people's question time. That already exists within the
GLA Act, and indeed happens, but it is very difficult to get called:
hundreds and hundreds of people turn up and, as it is only held
twice a year, six months is certainly a long time in politics.
However, we had a very effective engagement with the Metropolitan
Police Authority, which is one of the GLA's functional bodies,
where any member of the public has a right to table a question,
I think twice a year, and get that answered. That led them to
backing our eventually successful campaign to get the Criminal
Justice Act 2003 amended to introduce additional penalties for
disability hate crime.
Q162 Mr Cummings: Are you invited
to go along, or do you go along as of right?
Mr Russell: In the case of the
Metropolitan Police Authority, they do not hugely publicise the
right but anyone can table a question twice a year. I also wanted
to touch on one thing that must happen, however, if whatever rights
are introduced through the eventual act of parliament are to be
effective, which is to make sure that the whole processes are
accessible. The GLA has an absolutely wonderful policy on paper
about production of materials in accessible format for blind and
partially sighted people but the reality is sadly lacking. We
have had cases where I have asked, "Could you just send the
material in email to visually impaired colleagues going along
to their consultation events?" and they have failed to do
that. I mean, really, how many GLA staff members does it take
to send an email?
Q163 Mr Cummings: That is dealing
with the GLA, for all of its problems—and I fully accept
what you say—but here I am hoping that the new regional
assemblies will perhaps learn from what has gone wrong. Is there
anything you believe could be embodied in legislation to protect
the public from such problems? Should each assembly have a member
who is responsible for the voluntary and community sector?
Mr Burton: I think there is always
danger for any individual seeking to represent any sector—and
I think there are particular difficulties in trying to represent
the voluntary and community sector. It is such a diverse and complex—
Q164 Mr Cummings: So you would not
like to see that.
Mr Burton: I think that is one
mechanism but I do not think it is a total solution. It is a necessary
but not a sufficient solution to the challenge.
Q165 Mr Cummings: I am going to try
to tease this out of you: what should be done to create a more
durable system for voluntary and community sector involvement?
Mr Simpson: I think it would be
important to have a statutory requirement for an assembly to engage
with the voluntary sector and other stakeholders, and also an
obligation to explain what involvement there was, how that has
influenced decisions and to account for that. I think it is very
important to have a distinction between simple consultation, where
people might be able to come into a room and speak, and actual
discussion/involvement in policy. I think if that could be hardened
up in the bill that would be very helpful.
Q166 Mr Cummings: Would you agree
with that?
Mr Burton: We need obligations
in the bill. Perhaps the need for a scheme to demonstrate in advance
rather than retrospectively how the voluntary community sector
is going to be involved. Whether this requires legislation or
not I am less sure, but there is a need for a learning network
so we can learn not only from experience that has happened elsewhere
but also if we see elected regional assemblies being rolled out
we can actually learn the good and the bad between them.
Mr Russell: Clause 53 requires
assemblies to couch and facilitate participation and draw up a
scheme to promote that. There is UK Government's guidance on that,
and it is very important that the voluntary sector is fully consulted
in drawing that up, to make sure that it is effective but also
to make sure there is a requirement for adequate consultation
with the full range of the voluntary sector before those strategies
are finalised at each individual regional assembly level as well.
Q167 Mr Sanders: Many voluntary organisations
are involved in regional assemblies at the moment as presently
constituted and operating. What do you see the difference being
between that involvement with a regional assembly and involvement
into an elected regional assembly?
Mr Cowell: It of course is determined
by whatever the act is going to say.
Q168 Mr Sanders: That is what you
are here to help influence.
Mr Cowell: At present we are there
not quite on sufferance but almost as an afterthought. We are
there when it is obvious that communities have to be consulted
in some way and the normal channels are not working. We want to
see far more proactive activity from an assembly, seeking out
the views of the sector there. It does not have a responsibility
or a requirement to do that. Certainly the way our assembly is
organised at the moment, it is one and the same thing as the Association
of North East Councils: they share the same staff, the same budget,
and when somebody is talking on behalf of the Association of North
East Councils and when they are talking on behalf of the regional
assembly is very variable and depends on the circumstances. I
think in those circumstances they are inevitably a local authority
tool, in a sense, and that does not always reflect the feelings
and views of the voluntary and community sector.
Q169 Chris Mole: The bill would give
assemblies general powers in economic and social development as
well as environmental protection. Do you think the bill needs
to contain anything specifically to try to ensure that the assemblies
address those strands in which all your organisations are interested
in a balanced way?
Mr Burton: I think it is disappointing
that it is repeating the mistakes that we believe were made in
relation to the Local Government Act; that it is putting in purposes
which are separate—economic, environmental and social purposes—rather
than looking at the challenge of integration and putting sustainable
development up front, ideally at clause 1, if it is left at clause
43—
Q170 Mr Sanders: Which is what the
RDAs' bill did.
Mr Burton: Yes, but the RDAs still
had it down as a fourth purpose and subject to the other three
being implemented. We really see the elected regional assemblies
as providing the place where, instead of having lots of people
who have responsibilities to further or to contribute to or to
do their bit for sustainable development, they can shape the real
leadership and provide the performance management framework. They
should establish the targets, establish the framework, ensure
that those bodies and agencies for which it is responsible, notably
RDAs, properly contribute to sustainable development, lobby those
which it is not directly responsible for, and bend the ear of
government when government needs to intervene. That is the opportunity
that the ERAs provide, to provide leadership on sustainable development,
rather than just a rather hotchpotch set of contributors to sustainable
development. But we do not think that will come through the bill,
we do not think it is sufficiently far up the order of hierarchy,
and an oblique reference to it as part of the scheme, as sort
of the means to do it, is not going to be sufficient.
Q171 Chris Mole: You do not think
that will be a political judgment for the ERA to make for itself
in due course?
Mr Burton: We would rather that
the judgment about the priorities we attach to integration through
sustainable development was on the face of the Bill, so that was
the starting point rather than the judgment.
Q172 Chairman: You do not want that
to be a devolved power?
Mr Burton: We want sustainable
development rather than the rather vague set of purposes to be
the overarching objective and role of the ERA.
Mr Cowell: I think what is missing
from our point of view in the objectives of the RDA are kind of
sufficient activity and work in civil renewal in that agenda that
is going on. We were involved in the development of the sustainability
criteria in the north-east and it had the three legs of the stool,
being economic, social and environmental, but whereas the targets
for the economic and environmental were very specific and based
on lots of research and regional economic strategy and so forth,
the set of social targets was rather vague, "Are you against
sin?" kind of targets that are there. I really think that
if we do believe in the concept of the three-legged stool, that
means all three and you have to give more attention through the
assembly to social development and find ways of strategically
involving them in that.
Q173 Chris Mole: Do you think they
are going to have sufficient powers to deal with all of those
legs equally?
Mr Cowell: I think that the driver
has got to come from somewhere and it is not really coming from
anywhere at the moment. As I say, there are these vague kind of
national aspirations from central government and you cannot argue
against them, but what we are missing is a kind of practical level
at a regional level and below where we can start kind of finding
targets within the region to work out collectively. Local authorities
do, but there is varying development within local authorities
in the north-east and we need to see a more strategic approach
throughout the region, I think.
Q174 Mr Cummings: This is a question
to the RNIB and the National Trust. In your evidence, you welcome
the requirement for elected regional assemblies to draw up health
improvement strategies. How do you believe that this can be effective
if the assemblies do not have the powers to implement them?
Mr Russell: Well, obviously with
very limited effect. Blind and partially sighted people are often
losing their sight because of a lack of early detection because
of a lack of effective eye tests and also not getting adequate
social services provision, so we would certainly support giving
increased powers in terms of the co-ordination of health. Indeed
when the White Paper came out, I really had a serious concern
that regional assemblies as a whole would be in a situation where
we had in that region a strategy IEIO and no real power actually
to deliver it, so we certainly welcome additional powers to turn
the health strategies, in particular, and the real requirement
to promote equality in terms of health provision into reality.
Q175 Mr Cummings: So accepting that
the assemblies should be given health powers, how extensive should
these powers be?
Mr Russell: As extensive as it
is necessary actually to make sure that we can make a dramatic
reduction in the number of people unnecessarily losing their sight.
Q176 Mr Cummings: Should there be
powers related to preventive medicine?
Mr Russell: Well, in the case
of health, it is both a matter of prevention and adequate support
for those where prevention has failed. What is often not happening
is that people are just failing to meet the eligibility criteria
for social services, particularly those where their presenting
need is just visual impairment, or especially if you lose your
sight later in life where you often have a real struggle, as is
often the case. Also it needs to make sure that regional authorities
can actually encourage and make sure that people are registered
when they do lose their sight because that is another way in which
a lot of people have fallen through the net.
Mr Burton: We are not wholly persuaded
that you need to have powers to deliver strategies. We live in
a world of partnership and there are an awful lot of other things
where in fact the leadership from the assemblies will then be
the mechanism for taking forward. We do think that they can provide
a context for health strategies which is perhaps more widely based,
more preventative, looking at the opportunities of recreation,
of access, of green gyms, the whole agenda around public health
and we believe this is one place where we can see these issues
get the push they need.
Q177 Chairman: One of the issues
is clearly that there are major disparities between the regions.
Now, if the regional assemblies do not start to tackle that, there
are health authorities in the north-east who get perhaps 80 per
cent of the national average expenditure. Now, how is a regional
assembly going to actually stand up to the Government and say
that there ought to be more money for some of those health authorities
in the north-east?
Mr Burton: How is it going to
stand up to the Government on a whole range of issues? That is
politics and that is the process. It will establish its case,
it will make its case, it will have a wider context and perhaps
if any of those individual health authorities can do it, it will
be an additional voice and an additional champion in those funding
decisions.
Mr Cummings: Do you do that now? The
Chairman has very kindly mentioned my particular community—
Chairman: I thought you were going to!
Q178 Mr Cummings:—in funding
it to 80 per cent, but we are knocking on doors down here, we
have voices crying in the wilderness, no one is taking a damn
bit of notice. Surely you are not suggesting that this assembly,
with the limited powers it has got, could make immense progress
in this direction, are you?
Mr Burton: Not in itself, but,
as an advocate, it would probably be speaking from—
Q179 Mr Cummings: Everyone is advocating,
but no one is taking a blind bit of notice.
Mr Cowell: That is part of the
problem, John. Partnerships breed in the north-east and, I am
sure, elsewhere. Every partnership agrees that there should be
an overall partnership or an overall strategy, but they all think
it should be their strategy and their partnership should do it.
What the assembly does allow is that kind of sustainable overarching
strategy where things like the health debate can find their place
alongside all of the other debates because I think part of the
problem is that—
| 
