Let’s make the most of a civil society covenant

Over the past twenty years I’ve observed some governments which have emphasised the role of civil society in their policy agendas, some which haven’t at all, and many which have paid lip service without really doing anything meaningful.  

Platitudes versus practice 

Regardless of which party is in charge, there are recurring structural problems that get in the way of constructive relationships or the holy grail of ‘partnership-working’, especially where central government is concerned.  

Cultural and organsational biases, especially in the Treasury, prioritise what business does and what the public sector does. Commissioning too often boils down to dysfunctional procurement and awarding contracts to the lowest bidder. These systems have proven very difficult to break down or change over decades. 

I saw the effects at close hand during the pandemic, when plenty of politicians lined up to praise the work of charities and volunteers, but the Treasury rolled out scheme after scheme which at best weren’t fit for purpose for civil society organisations and at worst excluded them without good reason, despite persistent and coordinated influencing from sector leaders. 

A new government offers new opportunities 

It’s been a brutal few years for so many, and it’s easy to feel cynical. Many of our beneficiaries are still struggling with the effects of the pandemic and cost-of-living crisis. Income streams are squeezed across the board.  

It’s true that actions speak louder than words, and there’s understandable consternation about the Government’s recent decision in the Budget to change the rates and thresholds around Employer National Insurance Contributions (ENICs), which will add unanticipated costs for medium and larger charities with substantial numbers of staff. 

Despite this, my experience of trying to influence ministers and officials over recent years also tells me that having their positive words is far better than their negative words, or no words at all.  

So I think we must grasp the Prime Minister’s words, when he says: “We need a fundamental reset of the relationship between government and civil society. That is why we’re building a new partnership with the sector to tackle the complex social and economic challenges we face as a country.” To facilitate this, the government is proposing a new ‘Civil Society Covenant’ to agree top-level principles for working together.  

Amidst multiple ongoing crises, we shouldn’t lose sight of the fact that we haven’t heard anything remotely resembling the Prime Minister’s statement since David Cameron over a decade ago. We can’t afford not to grasp the opportunity. 

Reimagining the Compact? 

The New Labour government elected in 1998 agreed something called the Compact with the voluntary sector, which involved substantial funding and visibility across Whitehall. It was supported by Compact Voice, hosted in NCVO, and an independent Commission for the Compact charged with overseeing it and reviewing progress. Local compacts were also agreed across many local authority areas and in some areas these still exist.  

Intended as a two-way agreement, the Compact covered areas like: government respecting and upholding the independence of civil society organisations, giving early notice of consultations, and assessing the impact of new policies, legislation and guidance on organisations. There were several iterations of the national version, but it quietly faded away into insignificance during the Coalition government. 

You’ll often hear the phrase ‘it didn’t have teeth’ mentioned when the Compact comes up – meaning it wasn’t sufficient to hold government to account when it didn’t live up to its commitments. However, despite all the investment in it over more than a decade, I’m not sure that was ever going to be the case.  

Mainly because ‘sectors’ or ‘governments’ can’t really be accountable in the abstract. It’s ultimately the decision-making of individuals and their actions on behalf of organisations or institutions, in a regulatory or legal context, which trigger mechanisms of scrutiny or accountability. As long as we’re speaking in generalities, we’re going to be more reliant on agreed principles or behaviours – codes of practice if you will – which will inevitably be less ‘toothy’ than we might wish. 

For a Covenant to work, it needs your input 

Which brings us to where we are now. Regardless of the flaws or limitations of the original Compact or the proposed Covenant, I think we have to seize this opportunity and use those words from the very top to change the conversation. We have to think of the Covenant as the beginning not the end of something.  

The draft principles for the proposed Covenant contain some really important messages which echo many from the Compact. They will need to mean something in practice if we’re going to change some of those in-built biases in the system and if words like ‘partnership’ are ever going to mean anything. 

For example: underpinning the independence of civil society organisations, their freedom to speak out in support of their purposes and to campaign on behalf of their beneficiaries. Ensuring participation in service delivery and policy-making, empowering and engaging communities in decision-making, and supporting civic rights. Things which to varying degrees recent governments have been far less supportive of – or even antagonistic towards. They’re not just words, they represent important concepts and values. 

The Covenant is never going to solve every problem, and there are plenty of important questions remaining to be answered. For example, around: 

• Principles: The current draft contains four top level principles: Recognition, Partnership, Participation, and Transparency. These seem good, but might others be better or missing: what about Equality for example? 
• Evaluation: How will we know if it has made any difference? How can we make it a living document that evolves over time, rather than something that just sits on a shelf? There need to be some clear, established review points and robust mechanisms to monitor progress. 
• Resources: How will we make it genuinely a two-way street? Civil society organisations can’t do all the work; government needs to commit capacity and political capital too. Where is that coming from? How is accountability built in? 
• Devolution: How can we get the devolved governments, local government, and local health agencies on board, especially since that’s where most of the relationships between civil society and government exist? Without this, any impact will be limited. 

The consultation on the Covenant is being conducted by NCVO and is open until 12 December. There are draft principles, FAQs, and also a ‘workshop in a box’ which you can use with your own networks or memberships.  

So please take a few minutes today to give your view. If my take above resonates your thoughts, feel free to make it your own or borrow any of these points in your submission. And be honest but constructive – if we engage with it seriously, then at least there’s the potential to turn those warm words from the Prime Minister into an instrument for change. 

We anticipate that the final version of the covenant will be launched sometime in the new year, so stay tuned to DSC for further news and developments.