The launch of the new Civil Society Covenant promises to be a reset moment for the government’s relationship with the third sector. But has it achieved its aim? Our Policy, Campaigns and External Affairs Manager, Sam Dalton, explores what the Covenant means in practice.
Last month, the government launched its much-awaited Civil Society Covenant, described by Lisa Nandy, the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, as “a new chapter in the relationship between this government and the remarkable civil society organisations that form the backbone of our communities”.
This is supposed to be a reset moment, marking a significant change in how government and civil society engage and work with one another, the degree to which civil society voices are listened to at the highest level, and how we can better hold the government to account.
But has the government achieved this ambition?
Back in March, Emmaus UK set out five key things we thought were crucial for the government to include in its Civil Society Covenant, drawing on our years of experience working in communities to end homelessness and championing the voices and insights of those with lived experience. These were:
- Involving people with lived experience
- Engaging a wider range of organisations including small providers
- Involving civil society from the start
- Making sure the Covenant has real power
- Properly funding civil society
- Here we take a look at the extent to which these have been reflected.
What does the Covenant get right?
It’s great to see a strong recognition that those with lived experience of issues are the people whose insights and views are crucial when shaping policy and practice. The Covenant encourages organisations to involve those with lived experience closely in their work, and says the government will “recognise the value of different evidence sources, including lived experience” as part of an aim to improve data and transparency.
Our second key ask, to ensure a wide range of organisations are engaged with, has also been listened to. The government stresses it wants the Covenant to be inclusive of all types of civil society organisations, including those of big and small sizes. It should not only be larger organisations, used to working with government regularly, whose voice should be heard.
The online hub of resources and development of a programme to build capacity across civil society should help smaller organisations play their part. The respect for civil society’s independence to advocate and campaign will benefit organisations of all types.
It is not only about involving civil society, but involving civil society from the start. Organisations on the frontline need to help shape policy from the outset, not just be consulted on something already decided. The Covenant’s focus on “early engagement” is therefore welcome, “to enable civil society to contribute insights and expertise to define the problem, create a shared purpose and agree outcomes.”
All of these principles are great, but one of the key asks of Emmaus UK and other organisations was for the government to be held accountable to these. We support the government’s pledge for annual reporting on how well it is performing against the Covenant, to include all government departments, local authorities, plus bodies that work with the government like the NHS, and those in the criminal justice system.
Room for improvement?
Though we think the government has set out a strong set of principles for its work in partnership with civil society, the success of the Covenant will depend on how well it is implemented at the practical level.
Certainly, we believe there are areas where the Covenant could be strengthened. Though lived experience has a strong focus throughout, there could be more specific commitments around the involvement of people with lived experience in advisory groups and other forums at the heart of decision-making, where meaningful engagement can happen.
As part of Emmaus UK’s work on supported housing, we are really pleased the government is setting up a Supported Housing Advisory Panel including those with lived experience. It would be great to see this kind of initiative replicated across different policy areas.
The government could have more explicitly recognised the challenges posed to smaller organisations in having their voices heard, and demonstrated a clear commitment to tackling these through the capacity-building programme it has promised.
And when it comes to the annual reporting of performance by government departments against the Covenant, we would still like to see more detail on what the consequences of failing to live up to the Covenant’s principles will be. This can’t be a toothless set of commitments that carry no weight.
The need to back civil society financially
Our fifth key ask was for the government to ensure civil society is properly funded. While this may be beyond the realm of the Covenant itself, it is impossible for civil society organisations to fully take advantage of a reset in relations with the government, if as a sector it continues to face such severe financial challenges.
In terms of the government responding to this, there has been a mixed picture of late. Despite a hard-fought campaign, there has been no reimbursement to charities for the increase in National Insurance contributions, while the Department for Culture, Media and Sport has seen a real terms budget decrease.
On the other hand, local government funding will be rising overall. “Although the voluntary sector will welcome parts of the Spending Review, it doesn’t go far enough to support charities facing tough operating conditions”, said NCVO in June.
Part of the government’s stated aim of “capacity building” throughout civil society depends on the question of how charities can fare in a challenging and uncertain funding context, and we urge the government to keep this firmly in its mind as the Covenant is implemented.
GOV.UK: Civil Society Convenant
Emmaus UK: 5 things Emmaus has called for in response to the government’s new Civil Society Covenant