Agenda item
Voluntary and Community Sector Strategy Consultation
To consider and comment on the draft strategy and consultation questions.
Minutes:
Tabled paper, a copy of which would be interleaved with the minutes: consultation events to be held in the community.
Nasim Ahmed, Programme Manager Third Sector & External Funding, introduced, and highlighted key points, in the report which informed the OSC of current work to refresh the Tower Hamlets Third Sector Strategy (2009-2011) and presented the initial draft of the resulting Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) Strategy for consultation, prior to adoption by the Tower Hamlets Partnership. Ali Ahmed, Third Sector Strategy Officer, was also in attendance to answer questions from the OSC.
A comprehensive discussion followed which focused on the following points:-
· Consideration that an aim of the Strategy should be that each person in Tower Hamlets had equal access to services provided regardless of where they lived. Data in the Strategy [Appx 1/page 19] indicated where different VCS organisations were based, but mapping catchment for service provision would be more relevant: which people were being provided with services and where. Particularly as the map of VCS HQ’s showed a skew to the west of the borough.
· Consideration also that the Strategy should aim to build capacity where there was need, and this required a mapping of need in the borough. Such capacity building would support the Strategy’s objective of enhancing resilience and financial sustainability for the VCS. Clarification was sought and given as to the consideration given when developing the Strategy to linkage with the Mainstream Grants Programme in this context.
· Consideration that community organisations should define their own rules, set their own priorities and alliances and the emphasis on TH Partnership structures, and activist Community Champions in particular, was overly prescriptive and would not achieve the desired change. Ali Ahmed responded that the Strategy tried to use the mechanisms of the TH Partnership but gave an assurance that Council Officers would not dictate the agenda.
· Commented that the Council had devotedly developed a strategy defined by LAP areas to ensure that services were decentralised and provided on the doorstep. The Strategy should aim to ensure that established VCS organisations (VCSOs) operating in the LAPs with good track records of performance continued to be supported
· Commented that the importance placed on communication, transparency, impartiality and receptivity to the concerns of VCSOs would be key to the success of the Strategy.
· Clarification sought and given as to the consideration given to linkage between the VCS Strategy and the Council’s Asset Management Strategy, in the context of VCSOs seeking premises to operate from.
· Consideration that given the impact of funding constraint on VCSOs the Strategy should make an assessment of the challenges and problems they faced and suggest ways to find solutions. VCSOs were multi-sized and therefore the issues they faced as a group were complex. How would the Strategy provide support to them across the piece?
· Commented that a number of VCSOs in Tower Hamlets were cutting edge, and the Strategy should aim to provide support for them to move to a national level and market their expertise with a view to raising income.
· Consideration that the Strategy’s reference to forging stronger links with Canary Wharf was inappropriate, given the significant resources/ efforts it already made for the community. Nasim Ahmed responded that this was not a reference to Canary Wharf Limited, but to large corporate organisations based there. It was important to capture their good work under 1 umbrella but also ensuring that this delivered what the community wanted and not what the corporates thought it wanted. Discussion followed on the value of corporate days to assist the community, in which the positives and negatives were explored.
· Consideration that the geographical distribution of planned consultation events [tabled paper] was unequal, some venues were physically inaccessible (examples on the Isle of Dogs and North of Bow Road E3 given). Also the timing of events was not inclusive of all the community. Accordingly clarification sought and given as to the rationale and decision making for this.
· Comment that a number of different approaches to the VCS had been taken in the past which had not worked so it was essential this time to ensure the Strategy was a success; particularly in the context of reducing resources available to support the VCS and increasing demand for its services. Consideration that what was proposed did not appear significantly different to before, and accordingly clarification was sought and given as to the perceived differences in the Strategy/ approach. The Chair emphasised the importance of having a clear objective for the people of Tower Hamlets in mind when developing the Strategy: How could the community be linked to the Council, and what were the desired benefits for Tower Hamlets?
· Consideration that the activities of the VCS were complex and consideration must be given to partnership working to deliver these.
· Consideration that there was a clear linkage to the Enterprise Strategy and examining how to support local businesses. It was important to engage with the business community on this and the methodology used in the roll out of the “Business Connectors” initiative at Canary Wharf merited examination in developing the VCS Strategy.
· Clarification sought and given as whether registered providers had been consulted.
· Noted that consultation was ongoing to the end of November 2012.
The Chair Moved and it was:-
Resolved
1. That the contents of the report, and draft VCS Strategy attached at Appendix 1, be noted; and
2. That Officers be requested to take account of the OSC comments and suggestions to strengthen the VCS Strategy.
Action by:
Nasim Ahmed, Programme Manager Third Sector & External Funding
Chris Holme, Service Head Resources, Development and Renewal
Supporting documents: