Drawing on fieldwork data relating to the specific areas of children’s centre provision and play facilities, the ‘illustrative examples’ brought together the concerns of service users, service deliverers and other stakeholders to describe and analyse examples of BCC processes to deal with due regard ‘on the ground’.
Reductions to services were considered a necessary response to a significant cut
Page: 176
to funding from central government, and a narrowing of services within children’s centres and supervision of some play facilities were two of the proposed reductions in services.
Two key processes were in place to meet the due regard standard. Firstly, equality impact assessments were carried out for both proposals, and secondly, a widespread consultation was conducted which fed into the decision-making process that ultimately lay with the Bristol council cabinet, with some formalised organisational scrutiny carried out as part of the procedure. A larger, city-wide decision to cut back and re-focus children’s centre services, as well as cut training budgets, was accepted, though the smaller, play park resources were maintained.
Training formed a key part of the processes to ensure a strong equalities culture, though mitigation measures, identified during the EIA process, included providing different routes to training, such as student loans.
Both types of services were used by single mothers, and participants in this study had discussed the importance of the services and support from children’s centres such as childcare, help into work, and developmental parenting support and a way to combat isolation; and their reliance on the free play amenities which could provide a secure social space for them and their children. Access to these (or a lack of it) had implications for participation and engagement with the local community; and their needs being recorded and acknowledged by service providers via the services they accessed for information, advice and support.
Local providers were given some autonomy in how they targeted service users, though within a framework set by local authority guidelines which specified particular ‘equalities groups’. Single mothers were included as one of these groups, and the impact on them as a vulnerable group was acknowledged within the EIA though not explored or explained by data, though input from the public consultation provided further context highlighting, for example, the detrimental impact on mental health, confidence and employability that children’s centre closures would have on some single mothers. From the findings of this study, it was also clear that single mothers had specific needs from the amenities they used which related to their being a sole carer. The consultation content also stressed concerns that narrowing service offerings could exclude others who may be less vulnerable but still need support, and may increase stigmatisation of the services. In this context, the EIA and consultation data gave a picture of ways in which different groups were in contention for resources, for example, BME groups
Page: 177
and single mothers may need more support from children’s centres; and services for older people were competing for resources with early years provision.
The impact of the changes was, therefore, complex. Children’s centres had remained resilient despite previous cuts, and whilst the new, proposed changes introduced constraints, there were also areas where individuals might benefit, eg, from support which was targeted on very specific groups. There was concern that the centres would become stigmatised, however, through the provision of developmental support and other opportunities to learn ‘good’ parenting skills – which this study has highlighted as motivational for single mothers, there may still be a core group who would benefit from the services. Those who argue that the Duty helps with making ‘fairer’ decisions might use this as an example of highly valued, but diminishing resources being redistributed to those most in need.
Overall, it was important to note that the council, though diminished in respect of being able to fund resources still had a powerful remit to both communicate and give legitimacy to requirements to meet equality standards underpinned with sanctions though service level agreements and equality standards.
The ‘illustrative examples’ allowed a view across the structures put in place by the local authority to address the Duty, particularly through the EIA process. Despite cutbacks, the local authority had retained considerable power to allocate or remove resources, but the outcomes from delivery of these services were not always straightforward. In addition to being able to allocate money and resources and tangible items, such as play-park supervision or parenting courses, the council was also ‘authoritative’, in that their decisions could imbue non-tangible outcomes. These could represent Giddens’ ‘rules’ of signification, such as shared feelings of safety and well-being or increased confidence. While not always quantifiable, nevertheless these were important considerations for the delivery of more evolved and substantive levels of equality which include recognition, respect and participation in civic life. Identifying where there were enabling structures (as opposed to those which constrain), or where there was room for increased agency within these structures allowed a better understanding the ways local actors might continue to have some impact, despite diminishing resources, in the reflexive activities of the system.
______________________________
As outlined above these contextual illustrations aimed to describe aspects of the structural and agential fabric of the processes involved in local authority
decision-Page: 178
making. This was done to dismantle and better understand how such processes work. Using Giddens’ structuration theory, alongside examples of practices of agency, served as a useful way to break down and understand some of the structures which contributed to the production and reproduction of the social practices surrounding local authority decision-making. This was used as a basis for exploring further the way the Duty works ‘in practice’ as a piece of reflexive legislation, and an analysis is developed in greater detail in the following, penultimate chapter of my thesis.
Page: 179