Recent historical context
Prior to the General Election in 2010, there were 'Local Strategic Partnership' (LSP) arrangements in almost every local authority area in England. The 'New Labour' Government had encouraged these partnership structures and indeed, had made some elements of central government funding dependent on their existence. The Audit Commission referenced the effectiveness of LSPs in its local authority inspection assessments. Many council leaders (though by no means all) regarded LSPs as useful forums for discussing cross-agency and cross-sector issues with other public bodies, the business community, faith communities and the local voluntary and community sector (VCS). Interestingly, however, there was never a statutory duty to establish or maintain a LSP.
It would be reasonable to look back and conclude that the state and effectiveness of LSPs across the country varied enormously. Some were large, unwieldy 'talking shops' - whilst some were very effective strategic bodies focused on their place, co-ordinating policy, action, resource allocation and services to secure shared outcomes. In the two-tier shire areas, there was often confusion between district and county-based LSPs, and some districts even had more than one LSP based on former rural and urban district council boundaries.
Council leaders, who saw an important element of their role to be 'place shapers' and/or 'community leaders', often found the LSP to be useful platforms. In contrast, other council leaders often delegated chairing or attending LSPs to other councillors or even to their officers. Membership and attendance from other public bodies and the business community was all too often vacated by the most senior personnel, especially if the LSP was seen as ineffective and/or of little or no relevance.
That said, even prior to 2010, local authorities and their partners had begun to review and reform their local partnership architecture. There was a recognition that all too often the structures had grown like 'topsy' with the result that organisational structures looked like cobwebs spun by very drunk spiders; and in some cases, their added value was little better! Thus, there was a shift in emphasis from 'meeting, talking and posturing' to one of securing outcomes from public sector budgets that were under pressure with severe cuts to come. Public service boards (with or without politicians as members) were created in a number of places to co-ordinate public expenditure. And it is a fact that the New Labour Government's 'Total Place' initiative was a spur to such an approach.
However, the unintended consequence when the public sector began to focus itself in this manner, was that the VCS and even business communities often felt marginalised. It is true that some places created new forums for dialogue and exploration of ideas, which included leaders and representatives from the public sector, business, VCS and faith communities - but inevitably, this was usually without even the pretence of some sense of executive or even advisory power over the public sector.
And today?
The localism agenda of the Coalition Government and its public expenditure policy has accelerated the demise of many LSPs and the weakening of others. No longer were specific grants to be handled by an LSP; there were no external inspections and assessments to test local partnership working; community budgets required different partnership arrangements from those required for 'Total Place'; the public sector was pre-occupied by making cuts; Local Enterprise Partnerships offered the opportunity for new relations in a different format between business and local authorities; the re-organisation of the NHS removed the Primary Care Trusts that had sat around the LSP board tables; and 'health and well-being' boards provided a new table for the NHS and local government to sit at.
Suddenly, some council leaders decided that these 'partnerships' were expensive luxuries that could be abolished to popular acclaim or equally, in some cases, with no member of the public noticing. Bilateral relations could and would be fostered with the NHS, police and others. Again, however, the only sector that often felt that it was being excluded was the VCS and even then some council leaders were more interested in the VCS as contractors delivering public services than as an alternative voice of local communities and groups.
Last week, when visiting a London Borough Council, in a conversation with me a senior and experienced local government officer observed that: at the very time when all public sector agencies are facing major financial and other challenges; when the need for a vibrant and strong VCS is greater than ever; and when the focus is on economic growth and jobs - one might have expected that LSPs or something similar would have come into their own. However, when I speak to other leaders and senior officers from the public, business and VCS sectors around the country, I now realise that any sense of uniformity of local cross-sector partnership architecture has been completely blown away. A few places have retained and even strengthened their LSPs, but it seems that many, if the not the majority, have abandoned this approach.
Prima facie, the current scenario is perverse
Contemporary social, cultural, economic and environmental problems are increasingly complex. Addressing issues such as poverty, social exclusion, chronic illness, community safety and economic regeneration requires and demands multi-agency and cross-sector responses.
Factors such as reductions in public expenditure, fragile economic growth, demographic changes and increasing public expectations are accentuating the challenge of securing appropriate outcomes to these issues.
There is and should be a growing recognition of the need for greater co-ordination and collaboration within, between and across the public, business and VCS sectors. They should be working together across traditional sectorial, institutional and professional silos, with a clear focus on delivering cross-cutting outcomes to enhance community and economic well-being.
So, is this the time to revisit LSPs?
I am not advocating that past arrangements be resurrected precisely as they were before or that there could or should be one model that will be relevant for every place.
I am, however, increasingly of the view that in every place, there needs to be a strategic body that brings together leaders and representatives from the public sector, business, faith communities and VCS. Such bodies are likely to be led and co-ordinated by the local authority with political leaders to the fore - but with no one organisation or individual dominating (a challenge, I know, but it is the only way the errors of the past will be avoided).
The time is past for talking-shops and single agency domination.
Local authorities should show community leadership and establish partnership arrangements that will
•develop a shared vision and agree outcomes for the place
•drive a local growth agenda and enable the place to play a concerted role in its sub-regional growth strategy
•provide the space and opportunity to build effective trust and collaboration between the sectors
•engage the newly elected police and crime commissioners and clinical commissioning groups in local collective leadership
•offer a forum to discuss and ideally co-ordinate public sector budgets, strategic commissioning and service delivery
•facilitate 'Total Place', community budget and early intervention initiatives
•explore and implement opportunities for sharing resources, assets and people between the sectors and organisations
•ensure that the VCS voice is heard and can influence local public policy and resource allocation
•enable business to play a constructive role in shaping local places and local economies
•enable joint approaches to support community and neighbourhood empowerment and building community resilience
In 2013 and over the next few years, I predict that many places will regret the abolition of their LSPs and other places will be creating new local partnership and collaborative arrangements. What they are called is of little matter but what they can achieve can be very significant and relevant to local communities, businesses and citizens. And surely that is the whole point?