|
|
 |
| |
Legal advice centres are vital for the poor
• I WOULD like to reply to some of the comments made by Councillor Andrew Marshall about the proposals to re-prioritise Camden Council's Voluntary and Community Sector (VCS) budget in your letters pages last week (Who to fund is a tough decision).
First of all Cllr Marshall asks to be given credit for making the same amount of money available to the whole VCS as last year.
What he fails to mention is that VCS funding will not be maintained in line with inflation, so in reality the voluntary sector as a whole will have its spending power reduced in real terms as wages, rents and general running costs continue to increase.
This inevitably means that our ability to deliver services gets squeezed.
Secondly Cllr Marshall makes a plea that "most importantly we are seeking to make room in the budget for new priorities we also think important."
Clearly with a new administration we should not be surprised to have new priorities, but if they are to be financed within the context of a finite VCS budget, then I suggest what Cllr Marshall actually means is that they are making room for new priorities they think are more important than for example the charitable advice agencies in the borough, as they are to have their funding reduced by a massive 42 per cent - from £1.6m to £930k!
I would also like to make a few general points about the proposed reduction of funding to the advice sector as a whole.
As yet we have not been given any rationale or justification for a reduction of this magnitude and quite simply there isn't one.
I would seriously question that anyone can demonstrate to me that there is a 42 per cent over capacity in the provision of advice in Camden when all the available data, including the council's own, indicates otherwise.
It may well be that savings that can be made through bearing down on some structural inefficiencies; most organisations can find improvements and we acknowledge that we have a duty to do so when in receipt of other people's money, but the idea that we are 42 per cent inefficient is simply not tenable.
What we are keen to do at this stage is actively challenge our own orthodoxy and traditional methods of delivering services and look to give the council better value for money.
But we can only do that from a position of stability and partnership, not whilst in turmoil and facing uncertainty. As such we are looking forward to the consultation process and to use Cllr Marshall's phrase to take up the "bigger opportunity" of working in new ways with them. We do hope that it will be an open process in which we are listened to and not one simply designed to absorb the shock of cutbacks.
If it is an open and listening exercise we at the CAB are confident that along with other organisations we will be able to demonstrate that if left unaltered this cut to the advice sector in Camden will have a devastating effect on the lives of many thousands of the most vulnerable people in our borough and we are confident that such an eventuality is not one of Cllr Marshall's new priorities.
STUART CHADBOURNE
Chief Executive
Camden CAB
•As a former Executive Member in charge of the voluntary sector budget, I find Deputy Leader Cllr Andrew Marshall's statement about the loss of funding for Camden's voluntary sector - particularly advice services - unsettling and at odds with the evidence.
The last time Camden reviewed voluntary sector priorities a great deal of consultation was made with local groups, users and councillors (including some of those now responsible for the funding cuts proposals).
An open and deliberative process was had and which influenced how the council funds community groups.
A two month review during the run-up to Christmas is too short a time for such a radical change in direction and is likely to harm their good work tackling exclusion.
For example, together with the council the CAB undertook a special 'income maximisation' project involving a weekly advice surgery raised incomes by nearly £50,000 among the poorest families, including many full time carers of the long-term sick and disabled, in the north Kentish Town area and in Highgate Newtown in just its first six months.
These people are not just statistics to be toyed with by councillors at the Town Hall seeking savings, they are local residents who really benefit from the hard work of these services.
Labour would not have cut funding for the CAB and Law Centre as they have a key role to play in tackling poverty.
A 40 per cent reduction for advice services is unwarranted and I'm sure goes against the core values of the vast majority of people.
It should not have been suggested in the first place and I urge the Tory/Lib Dem administration not to make the cruel step of forcing the Law Centre, the CAB and disability advice groups to compete amongst themselves for a much smaller a mount of money.
Cllr THEO BLACKWELL
Deputy Leader, Camden Labour Group
•IN his letter to your newspaper last week, Cllr Marshall states that the new council wants the funding of the voluntary sector to be more aligned to its priorities.
We accept it is only right that the council should wish to review its funding priorities. However proposals need to be properly set out and fully considered.
The report to the council's Executive on October 11 failed to provide any justification for slashing the budget for advice agencies by a massive 42 per cent.
It also failed to address the implications of this for Camden residents. The proposal was in fact set out in Appendix seven to the report that was not seen by many people, including some councillors.
We note that Cllr Marshall also has not provided any justification for the cuts in his letter. Is there less need for advice in the borough to justify this cut? Or is it that advice agencies are not providing a good service?
Cllr Marshall himself accepts in a report to the full council that Camden has severely deprived communities: it is now ranked as the 15th most deprived local authority area in the country and seventh most deprived in London.
If advice agencies are closed due to the proposed cuts, where will some of the most vulnerable sections of the local community go for advice and assistance with basic rights such as keeping a roof over their heads, claiming welfare benefits, challenging unfair dismissal or discrimination?
Last year, the Law Centre alone received over 10,000 telephone queries from Camden residents; over 6,000 Camden residents came into the Centre for legal advice; and we acted in over 1,300 cases for Camden residents.
We get more people through our doors than we can possibly deal with.
Unfortunately, people at our drop in advice service sometimes have to wait for more than two hours to be seen. In April 2006 we received a glowing audit report from the Legal Services Commission for our work. We are certain that other advice agencies in the borough are just as busy and provide as valuable a service to their clients.
The council has failed to recognise the enormous social and economic benefits the advice sector brings to the local community.
The council has also failed to address the uncertainties over the funding of legal services by the government. The council needs urgently to reconsider its decision. We have invited Cllr Keith Moffitt, the Leader of the Council, to our AGM on November 30 2006 to speak on the proposed cuts to advice services in Camden.
SARVERLALLJEE
Camden Community Law Centre
Prince of Wales Road, NW5
•ON November 1 I went to a public 'consultation' meeting held by Kilburn councillors.
Only about 15 people attended perhaps because it was not very well advertised, or could it be that people feel their views are not going to be heeded?
Those that were there demanded an expansion of local services for both young and old to help the most vulnerable and needy and in particular to increase support for voluntary organisations such as the nearby Winchester Project already threatened with cuts.
Is the new Lib Dem/Tory Council going to listen to us and reverse the cuts? If not these meetings are a waste of time, not to mention money!
KATHARINE BLIGH
Priory Road, NW6
•I'M writing to the CNJ after reading with concern about the new council's plans to cut funds to Kentish Town CAB and Camden Law Centre on Prince of Wales Road.
As a lawyer, formerly at a local firm of solicitors, it has always been apparent to me how many local people rely on these vital services to help them in circumstances where access to justice is unaffordable, or daunting, or where they need help with understanding information or accessing local services and support.
In today's society it's clear that some people can get by perfectly well (or perhaps just muddle through) dealing with the direct debt culture and navigate themselves around the financial services industry, their mortgages, and the legal issues which affect all of us from time to time.
For those who find it hard - the elderly, people from immigrant communities, people with English as a second language or people with mental health problems or long-term illnesses - local advice centres provide a vital opportunity to get friendly advice and are a lifeline when people have no one else to turn to.
Amongst other areas, they provide advice on benefits - ensuring people get what they are entitled to, and on housing; often helping where people need to fight their corner against an unscrupulous landlord.
They also offer advice on how to deal with Town Hall decisions which have been unfair. Camden is such a mixed borough, and so it goes without saying that we need to make sure that there are services for the less-well off and the vulnerable too - so why cut funds by 40 per cent as you report?
For all those who raised concerns about the closure of Post Offices - the same should apply for saving our advice centres from cuts. They are both a key part of what keeps our borough inclusive.
Luckily this decision can't just be made without consultation at the Town Hall. I see there is a by-election in Kentish Town. Maybe people should send a message to the Lib Dems by saying "no to cuts!"
ELIZABETH MIDDLETON
Princess Road, NW1
|
 |
|
|
|
