Ros writes in Lib Dem Voice, January 2008

Community involvement

I’ve just got back from the Lords, where we had a debate this afternoon on the Government’s recently published “Action Plan for Community Empowerment”.

It’s hard to know which pair of words is the more depressing “Action Plan” or “Community Empowerment”   Their Lordships certainly failed to be either empowered or active. Apart from the mover – my noble Friend Lord Greaves – and the front benches, there were 2 backbench speakers plus one Bishop making his Maiden speech on the subject. There were twice as many speakers for today’s other two debates, on China and on missile defence.

Nevertheless, I’m grateful to Tony for tabling the debate, and drawing the attention of the House to another piece of well meaning central government guidance which totally misses the point. I know Tony isn’t everyone’s cup of tea,  but personally I believe we all owe him a debt of gratitude for developing the style of community politics which remains the basis not only of our own campaigning, but which has been copied by the other parties, sometimes too successfully.

This so-called Action Plan shows many of the traits to which we’ve become accustomed from New Labour.

It’s top-down, showing a certainty that communities (whatever they might be) must be empowered whether they want to be or not and that empowerment is a sort of gift which can be bestowed on to the grateful recipients. It’s an impossible task to convince this government that communities are not nice, neat definable things full of people who are just aching to get involved at every turn, provided its at a time when it suits government and on issues which they decide are relevant.

It seems to have escaped government that years of policies which simultaneously move power and resources from local government to quangos and central government has meant that communities often have no idea to whom they should be talking. And when they have established exactly who is responsible, they are told there isn’t the funding, it doesn’t match some target or priority set by government, or they are specifically barred from doing something by legislation.

There is a lot of evidence to show how the paraphernalia of consultation, focus group, complaints and feedback has not been used by public bodies to improve or change their services or the way in which they are delivered. How can we expect more people to get involved when it is clear to them that their involvement won’t make a jot of difference?

People will get involved if they care about something, and if they think that by getting involved they can make a difference. For that to happen, there has to be genuine local autonomy.