EU Portal .net

A critical examination of the notion of ‘partnership working’ in relation to Community Development and life beyond the General Election 2010

Introduction

As Youth & Community Work practitioners, the need to understand the term ‘Partnership’ is becoming all too important within our profession in the 21st Century. Within this paper, the historical journey of partnership and role of the community sector will be discussed alongside the concept of Partnership. To do this, the relevant theory surrounding the notion of partnership will be discussed and a number of different examples will be outlined in order to relate these to practice. A further factor of the examples will be to show that partnership is a very broad term, which can describe organisations and agreements between groups and individuals; however they can have a very wide range of goals, aims and objectives.

 

Conceptualising Partnership

Two key theories which we can apply to Partnership working are the concepts of ‘Normative’ and ‘Formative’. Generalised, the former is defined as an adjective which relates to objects which are “based on or prescribing a norm or standard” (Answers Corporation[a]; 2010) while the latter is an adjective which can be, “susceptible to alteration by development and experience” (Answers Corporation[b]; 2010)

Sorensen and Torfing (2005) are able to apply normative techniques to partnership which are needed for the formation, functioning and output of governing networks. They state two core aspects, one being that all affected persons should be involved in creating open-ended  policy and the second being that each facilitator should show respect for other opinions and be committed to transparent and responsible decision making.

For those who are critical of the normative approach, Diamond (2004) leads the critique which suggests that institutional reform is needed to ensure that all parties have a level heading. One suggestion which is tabled to achieve this is that public agencies should be supervised by local supervisory boards on which local residents serve on, all the time being supported by community facilitators.

A number of sources agree that the partnership approach is a better and more efficient way of using scare resources (Morse & McNamara; 2006, Gilchrist; 2004) and Somers & Bradford (2006) also relate to this, stating that partnership is the natural action of networking and building inter-agency relationships. Other commentators focus on how it challenges an increasingly bureaucratic approach to the work within the sector (Milbourne et al. 2003, Balloch and Taylor; 2001). Both Tett (2005) and Geddis (2006) reflect on the impact which Partnership has for service users, stating that there are positive factors in which “new spaces” are opened up and that service users and communities are involved in.

Not all the critiques of the Partnership approach are positive however, as there are a number of key critics who derive their critiques from their experience of the issues which have faced Partnership within the voluntary and community sector in the Republic of Ireland. Out of three key analysts, let’s consider the key points of Meade (2006), who outlines a number of vital points within their commentary. The influential position in which the Catholic Church historically holds in terms of the partnership which is described as being an organisation with influential in both political and cultural life. Another influence was the Celtic Tiger economic boom of the 1990’s, which had massive implications for partnership working as Ireland quickly transformed from one of the poorest countries in Europe to one of the wealthiest. The first discussion of ‘Social Partners’ in fact preceded the Celtic Tiger, as it was enclosed within The Programme for National Recovery in 1987 however the ‘partners’ being referred to in this document only extended to the Government, main employer groups and trade union groups. This said, it would be wrong to dismiss this as a catalyst for change in partnership working, as in 1996, the social partnership has included the community and voluntary sector as its’ fourth pillar. Although the partnership has progressed, and the influence of the church has decreased, commentators such as Nolan et al (2003) suggest that ‘competitive corporatism’ is now taking place, whereby the priority is given to economic stability and international competitiveness rather than equality and social solidarity. Meade (2006) is able to summarise the position of social partnership in Ireland by contrasting it to the position of the UK government;

“Hodgson (2004: 145) explains that the United Kingdom’s Home Office in common with its Irish counterpart envisages itself as ‘nurturing’, ‘strengthening’ and ‘developing’ civil society. But there, as in Ireland, state intervention is designed to generate a particular kind of civil society – one that bolsters the neo-liberal consensus, compensates for public sector withdrawal and studiously avoids critical assaults on state power”

(Meade, R; 2006, p.361)

Contemporary Examples of Partnership

One of the most well known contemporary examples of partnership is the Nationalisation of Northern Rock, which was a reaction to the Subprime Mortgage Crisis which became apparent in 2007; however had its roots in the late 20th Century. While the Nationalisation took place in 2008, further recovery methods were announced by the government in 2009 and implemented in 2010. This method of recovery was based essentially splitting the bank into two parts, and selling the positive assets off (BBC News; 2009). This all involved the government pulling its weight to ensure this was allowed to happen, as shown by the European Commission waiving the plans through (Northern Rock plc: 2010). This state aid programme has shown signs of initial success, with the company improving its performance in 2009, however still making a loss of over £200M (BBC News; 2010).

With relevance to Community Development Work, there are countless examples of Partnership across the country with some well known, large scale examples. An International example of a partnership is the Community Development Partnership of Philadelphia-Neshoba County, Mississippi in the United States of America. Created in 2001 in a decision to bring the areas Chamber of Commerce, Industrial Development Authority and Tourism under a single umbrella organisation (Community Development Partnership; no date), this partnership is one that clearly has its aims rooted in commercial quarters. It does show however, that it is inclusive of a number of wider interest groups in the areas, including the aforementioned, as well as representatives from the county area, city area and representatives of the local indigenous people group, the Choctaw Indians.

An example from my locality, in Bangor, Northern Ireland, is the Kilcooley Community Forum, which is a constituted community group consisting of representatives from all the constituted groups active within the estate (Kilcooley Community Forum; 2010). The estate is the third largest in the country, built from the 1960’s to the 1980’s to resettle people who had been displaced from inner-city Belfast due to violence. The religious demographic of the area is predominately Protestant, with only 6.3% declaring as Catholic within the electoral ward (Crown Copyright; 2009).  The forum consists of organisations and projects such as; The Citizens Advice Surgery, Kilcooley Community Centre, Dufferin Piker’s (a local fishing group), Kilcooley Primary School as well as the local Presbyterian and Church of Ireland Churches and other groups. This form of Partnership is in stark contrast to that in Mississippi State, as it is clearly focused on the needs and participation of the people of the local area.

The Historical Aspects of Partnerships in the UK

As Bunyan (no date) states in outlining the partnership approach, it currently characterises policy-making in the UK and was born out of changes made in the 1970’s and 1980’s where shifts were made from social democratic to neo-liberal values. Historically, the shift from right to left of governing parties in the UK Parliament in 1997 due to Labours historic win after almost 2 decades of Conservative rule. This was largely welcomed as a new dawn by the voluntary and community sector, which is widely seen as being left of centre liberal in its ideology.  To understand this journey, the movement of Community Development work needs to be related to the context of the different political realms which the United Kingdom has been governed by in the past fifty years.

During the 1960’s and 1970’s, partnerships were focused around addressing deprivation. Indeed, a great deal of addressing was needed after the economic decline post-world war two. The first major change in partnership was triggered by the Conservative Ministry of Margaret Thatcher in the 1980’s, where the market became part of welfare and a move was made from co-ordination of services to the contracting of services. This can be exemplified by the way the Government at this time cut funds to local authorities for housing in particular. To address the deficit and issues of poor levels of occupancy, vandalism and other social issues, many councils embarked on the private letting scheme and in some cases, partnered with the private sector, selling large amounts of estates to private developers and agents. This remained the case for most of the 90’s which the nature of obtaining funds changing as explained below.

The nature of partnership working went through a significant change in 1997, of course coinciding with the election of Tony Blair and the first Labour Government in eighteen years. Where the Conservative government of John Major saw funding being sought through partnership bidding, this was advanced post-1997, with partnerships being intertwined into central government and funding being awarded to multi-agency partnerships created such as Sure Start. Bunyan (no date) describes the Partnership approach as characterising social welfare policy making within the UK at this time. Furthermore, the position of the third sector was cemented in terms of its relationship with government, formally recognising the sector with the right to, “campaign, to comment on Government policy and to challenge that policy irrespective of any funding relationship that might exist” (Home Office, 1998). It is currently a common theme for political representatives to suggest partnerships in order to secure funding or rescue services which are facing cost-cutting exercises (Easton, A; 2010, Chisholm, M; 2006, Williams, Lord; 2003)

 

The Implications of Partisan Change in 2010

After thirteen years of Labour government and with dwindling opinion poll results in favour of the Conservative’s, the up and coming General Election of 2010 is possibly the greatest chance for change in the UK, with implications for all parts of life, including the community and voluntary sector. The current media position is that the election will be a close fought two horse race, with a distinct chance of a Hung Parliament. The parties are also of this belief, so much so that there have been hints to tactical voting by political leaders (BBC News; 2010) in order to maximise the potential for them to be victorious. The most important question for our sector is at this time, of course, what will the implications be for our work?

Taking into account the manifesto pledges of the three main parties, summarising the Liberal Democrats pledges first; key priorities with relevance to our sector include; educational charities to be placed in control of academies under the scope of local authorities rather than Whitehall. Increasing the places for apprenticeships, university and vocational higher education courses as well as scrapping university tuition fees over six years (The Liberal Democrats on Education; 2010). They pledge to build thousands of homes which are affordable to Young People and offer protection from negative equity (The Liberal Democrats on Housing; 2010), while enforcing equality for women and encouraging the productive growth of a multi-ethnic society (The Liberal Democrats on Equality; 2010).

In relation to the Labour Party, Gordon Brown pledges to continue to boost education, citing the place which ‘Extended Schools’ have in allowing children to further their education and allowing them access to after school activities and clubs (The Labour Party – Education; 2010). The party recognises that many families are reliant on the public sector and wish to build on progress which they have made including Sure Start and Neighbourhood Policing Teams (The Labour Party – Families and Pensioners; 2010). In terms of equality, The Labour Party sees no place for discrimination and prejudice in modern Britain, and wish to simplify the legislation in this area by bring in The Equality Bill, which  will simplify the complex web of nine pieces of law and approximately one hundred statutes into a single Act of Parliament (The Labour Party – Equalities; 2010).

With respect to the Conservative Party, in a similar vein to the Liberal Democrats it is an aim of theirs allow charities, parent teacher groups and co-operatives to establish Academies (The Conservative Party – Schools; 2010). Specific aims to community include supporting community groups based on their effectiveness on tackling social issues rather than based on ethnicity (The Conservative Party-Community Relations; 2010). The Conservative Party is the only major party to completely lay out its aims for the Voluntary Sector, stating that a Tory Government would “create a more supportive environment for philanthropy and volunteering”; “reforming the Big Lottery Fund to ensure it spends all its Lottery Funding on the voluntary and community sectors” and; “helping smaller charities to win a fair share of Government funding” amongst others (The Conservative Party – Voluntary Sector; 2010).

Conclusion

In summing up, the notion of Partnership working has, after a long journey, found itself a home at the centre of our sector, being used to positively organise communities and groups who have a varied range of focus. As has been outlined, however, the current political climate of the General Election 2010 will undoubtedly prove a critical juncture of the partnership approach.  We are without doubt coming to the crossroads, and it is an unpredictable position we find ourselves in. It would be the closing argument of this paper, however, to state that with the unpredictability of a possible hung parliament and with Political Parties leaning more and more towards the centre than ever before, that the future is positive both the approach of partnership and community development as a whole. Only time will tell, however it would be personal opinion that with the eventual recovery of the British Economy and the centring of Politics in the country, it could prove a prosperous decade for the voluntary and community sector, as a loss of what New Labour initiated may be seen as a failure of a new governing party by the wider public.

Bibliography

Answers Corporation (2010) [b], Formative Definition. Available at:  http://www.answers.com/topic/formative(Accessed: 10/4/10)

Answers Corporation (2010) [a], Normative Definition. Available at: http://www.answers.com/topic/normative (Accessed: 10/4/10)

Balloch, S & Taylor, M (Ed), (2001), Partnership Working: Policy & Practice, Policy; Bristol.

BBC News (2009). Northern Rock confirms Split plan. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8121517.stm (Accessed: 14/4/10)

BBC News (2010). Northern Rock losses see sharp fall. Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8559143.stm(Accessed: 14/4/10)

BBC News (2010). Will Tactical Voting Swing 2010 General Election? Available at: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8612463.stm (Accessed: 17/4/10)

Bernanke, B.S (2009). Four Questions about the Financial Crisis. Available at: http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/bernanke20090414a.htm (Accessed: 14/4/10)

Bunyan (no date). Partnership Working. Extract from Ma Thesis.

Chisholm, M (2006), Written Answer to Communities – Partnership Funding Question in Scottish Parliament, 8 May 2006, available at:http://www.theyworkforyou.com/spwrans/?id=2006-05-08.S2W-25161.h&s=Partnership+funding#gS2W-25161.r0 (Accessed: 9/4/10).

Community Development Partnership (no date). Our partnerships. Available at: http://www.neshoba.org/partnerships/(Accessed: 8/4/10)

The Conservative Party (2010), Policy – Where We Stand – Schools. Available at: http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Where_we_stand/Schools.aspx (Accessed: 11/4/10)

The Conservative Party (2010), Policy – Where We Stand – Voluntary Sector. Available at: http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Where_we_stand/Voluntary_Sector.aspx(Accessed: 11/4/10)

Diamond, J (2004), ‘Local Regeneration Initiatives and Capacity Building: Whose “Capacity” and Building” for what?’ in Community Development Journal, 39, p.177-189, Available at: http://cdj.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/39/2/177 (Accessed: 16/4/10)

Geddis, M (2006), ‘Partnership and the limits to Local Governance in England: Institutionalist Analysis and NeoLibralism’ in International Journal of Urban & Regional Research, 30(1) p76-97, Academic Search Complete [Online], Available at: https://gateway.cumbria.ac.uk/ehost/,DanaInfo=.awfdCigyjwqy35Mq32+detail?vid=3&hid=8&sid=34af07ed-4463-4eda-86ca-1a57fe7395c0@sessionmgr12&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ==#db=a9h&AN=20588427 (Accessed: 13/4/10).

Gilchrist, A (2004), The Well Connected Community: A Networking Approach to Community Development, Policy; Bristol.

Easton, A (2010), Easibus Service: Bangor debate in Northern Ireland Assembly, 2 February 2010, Available at: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/ni/?gid=2010-02-02.8.5, (Accessed: 9/4/10)

HM Treasury (2009). Treasury Confirms 1 January Restructuring of Northern Rock. Available at:http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/press_116_09.htm(Accessed: 14/4/10)

Home Office (1998) Compact on Relations Between Government and the Voluntary and Community Sector in England, Crown Copyright; London.

Kilcooley Community Forum (2010). About Us. Available at: http://www.kilcooley.org/index.php?id=2(Accessed: 8/4/10)

The Labour Party (2010), Education. Available at: http://www.labour.org.uk/policies/education (Accessed: 11/4/10)

The Labour Party (2010), Equality. Available at: http://www.labour.org.uk/equality (Accessed: 11/4/10)

The Labour Party (2010), Families and Pensioners. Available at: http://www.labour.org.uk/policies/families-and-pensioners(Accessed: 11/4/10)

The Liberal Democrat Party (2010). The Liberal Democrats on Education. Available at: http://www.libdems.org.uk/education.aspx(Accessed: 11/4/10)

The Liberal Democrat Party (2010). The Liberal Democrats on Equality. Available at: http://www.libdems.org.uk/equality.aspx(Accessed: 11/4/10)

The Liberal Democrat Party (2010). The Liberal Democrats on Housing. Available at: http://www.libdems.org.uk/housing.aspx (Accessed: 11/4/10)

Northern Rock Plc. (2010). Investor Relations: Stock Exchange Announcement. Available at: http://companyinfo.northernrock.co.uk/investorRelations/news/viewFeedarticle.aspx?id=169296873417676(Accessed: 14/4/10)

Northern Ireland Neighbourhood Information Service (2009). Area Profile Report – Dufferin. Available at: http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/mapxtreme/report.asp?INIT=YES&POSTCODE=BT191FP&DESC=FromGeneral&CurrentLevel=COA&ID=95XX150006&Name=95XX150006&Override=WARD&OverrideCode=95XX15&OverrideName=DUFFERIN#Demography(Accessed:9/4/10)

Meade, R (2005), ‘We Hate it Here, Please Let Us Stay! Irish Social Partnership and the Community/Voluntary Sectors conflicted experience of Recognition’ in Critical Social Policy, 25(3), p249-273. SAGE; London.

Morse, S & McNamara, N (2006), ‘Analysing Institutional Partnerships in Development: A Contract Between Equals or a Loaded Process?’ in Developmental Studies, 6, p321 -336, SAGE [Online]. Available at: http://pdj.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/4/321, (Accessed: 12/4/10).

Mostyn, Lord Williams of (2003), Peace II Funding Debate in House of Lords, 10 September 2003, Available at: http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2003-09-10a.120.0&s=Partnership+funding+northern+ireland#g120.2 (Accessed: 9/4/10).

Nolan, M et al (2003), Partnerships in family Care, Open University Press; Maidenhead.

Somers, J & Bradford, S (2006),  Discourses of Partnership in Multi-Agency Working in the community and voluntary sectors in Ireland in Irish Journal of Sociology, 15 (2) p67-85, Academic Search Complete [Online] Available at: http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/detail?vid=1&hid=13&sid=9c0b0152-a785-4969-9294-33b22f09f05d@sessionmgr4&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZQ==#db=a9h&AN=24164328 (Accessed: 12/4/10).

Sorenson, E & Torfing, J (2005), ‘The Democratic Anchorage of Governance Networks’ in Scandinavian Political Studies, 28(3), Available at: http://portal.uam.es/portal/page/portal/UAM_ORGANIZATIVO/Departamentos/CienciaPoliticaRelacionesInternacionales/doctorado/Seminarios y cursos de profesores invitados/MaterialesBGuyPeters/SorensonIII.pdf (Accessed: 15/4/10)

Taylor, I (1997) Developing Learning in Professional Education: Partnerships for Practice. Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University; Buckingham.

Tett, L (2005), Inter-Agency Partnerships and Integrated Community Schools: A Scottish Perspective in Support for Learning, 20(4) p157-161, Wiley Inter Science [Online] Available at: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118696303/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0 (accessed: 15/4/10)

 

About the Author

My name is Nathan Erskine and I’m a 21 Year old student. I hold a BA(Hons) in Youth & Community Development work as well as a Professional Qualification in Youth Work and I’m currently working towards an MA in Comparative Ethnic Conflict. My undergraduate institution was the University of Cumbria in Lancaster (University of Lancaster Degree Award) while my current studies are at Queen’s University Belfast.

My base interests are Youth & Community Work in Northern Ireland; the application of community work to conflict resolution; Peace & Reconciliation and young people and communities participating in governance.

It is my hope to become a published article writer in the near future, so please feel free to read my articles and provide feedback of any kind! You may contact me at nerskine02@qub.ac.uk

Online Gambling in France – the latest developments