Yesterday I had a meeting with Betty Boner and Olive Carey about concerns I have with the Children's Centres review process and how the parent consultation part has been conducted up until now.
The main concerns I raised were:
1. That the council had not utilised the database information they have to publicise the dates, times and plans for the parent consultation review. I feel, rather than relying on Centre managers (who are in a difficult position) to take the initiative (and fund a mailshot from their centre's budget) the council should have initially sent a letter to all parents registered centres introducing them to the parent consultation, explaining why it was important to get involved and inviting them to the first meeting.
Because this was not done initially the meetings have been poorly and patchily advertised meaning the meetings have been poorly and patchily attended. The consequences of this are that the parent representatives have been drawn from a small pool of people, the choices of parent reps could be questioned and most importantly any questions that have been asked can't accurately reflect how parents feel because they have been answered by a small, potentially biased and unrepresentative group e.g. in one meeting 5 parent reps were present but 11 had sent apologies.
2. The way the meetings were set up made it hard for parents of young children to attend.
Having a creche can be difficult, not all parents want to leave young children, possibly for the first time, in a creche for a meeting. Having children's centre review meetings where children are not allowed makes it less likely people will come. At the meeting I attended there were only 28 creche places initially meaning fewer than 28 parents for the whole of sefton were expected initially. In addition I feel there was no reason at all, at the meeting I attended, why children could not have been accommodated.
Geographically the meetings have been hard for everyone to attend and this means that when questions such as "How far is reasonable to travel to a children's centre?" have been asked the people answering are more likely to have been people who do not have any barriers to travelling further or to more difficult places. How accessible centres need to be needs to be, if anything, mainly decided by those who find it difficult getting to them.
3. The language used I feel has been misleading and has affected the answers parents have given and when questions have been asked they have not been put in context.
For example: It has often been said "The council has chosen not to close any of the centres" This isn't the truth. I believe it is more accurately that initially the council were not fully aware of their legal responsibilities to sure start centres (the guidance having been issued in march 2010) and had made a proposal to close all phase 2 and 3 centres without realising that they were legally protected. This, I believe, is the reason the "transforming sefton" webpage categorised sure start as an "other service" rather than as a "regulatory service". In reality the Sure Start centres are not likely to be at risk of closure. The council could put a proposal in to close the centres and it is true that they have chosen to withdraw this proposal (which I think was made before they knew the legal obligations) but it is very unlikely that this proposal would ultimately be successful as, in the legislation, emphasis is placed on results of consultation with parents and the community about any closure or significant change to the centres. Basically if the proposal were to be successful the consultation would have to have agreed with the recommendations for closure. The second part of this is that there are many services which are required to be delivered through children's centres. The centres can't be closed because the local authority has a duty to see that services are delivered and often that they are delivered using children's centres.
When the "the council has chosen not to close any of the centres" is said (and it has been said many times by many people) it implies a threat to close. Many parents have been vocal in expressing in meetings that we need to agree to cutbacks or mergers to "save the centres". This is actually not the case. In fact there is a risk that should the consultation process agrees proposals that end up damaging the effectiveness of the centres this would then make them at risk of closures, especially later this year when councils are due to receive further budget cuts. The centres can't be closed unless they are failing or unwanted by parents. I feel the council should be explaining the context of the questions they ask and they must have a contingency plan if the consultation process fails to find a satisfactory answer. Parents must understand that they do not have to agree any plan unless they are entirely satisfied that it will benefit or at least not damage the children's centres.
4. The children's centres managers need to be supported by the council. Having been threatened with closure they are undoubtedly frightened about engaging with people over the review. This is not good for the review process - the centre managers need to be told by the council that they can campaign and engage on behalf of their centre, that they can have petitions and get involved actively with the process maybe brainstorming for ideas to suggest to the council.Olive confirmed that there is no barrier from the council to this and I feel it would be beneficial to the review process.
5. The final issue is that of the inadequate provision of Sure Start Centres in Southport. I don't know what the rest of Sefton is like but Southport is poorly served by children's centres. We have two main areas of deprivation; part of dukes ward (around the town centre and the prom) and part of cambridge ward (marshside) which are in the top 10% and top 5% deprived respectively. Technically you could argue that linaker (our single phase1 centre) is accessible from the part of dukes ward where I live (around 1 1/2 miles away) which is the most deprived part, however I have never been to linaker as it is just too far to walk for my preschooler when I have other time constraints and other walking. For example walking to and from preschool, playing at preschool and walking a 3 mile round trip to the children's centre and playing would absolutely knacker her out before we did anything after school. I always use parenting 2000 which, unlike linaker, is actually in dukes ward. Marshside however does not have a children's centre at all. The nearest centre is butterflies which is about 2 miles away and which is not served by a bus. Second is parenting 2000 which is around 2 1/2 miles away and linaker is just over 3 miles away. I believe there is not a universally accessible children's centre which serves marshside. It may not be possible to open a new phase 1 centre serving marshside as per the government drive to serve areas of deprivation with phase 1 centres but at the very least if southport is currently poorly served by the centres that must be considered by the review as the effects of any changes may be magnified here.
All in all the meeting I feel went well. Olive suggested she do a press brief clarifying the position of the council in relation to closures of centres and agreed that questions in the consultation must be thought about and presented carefully and in context. I would like the council to use their database to wrap up the parent section of the review by sending out a summary of the process so far and it's aims, a returnable questionnaire and an introduction to the wider community consultation which is now beginning. Olive also said she would look into the children's centre provision for marshside. I am hoping they will clarify the position of the council in relation to any campaigning that centre managers might want to do too. The overall feeling I hope have made clear, is that I believe the questions they have asked and the way the parent consultation has been set up means the data they have collected is unrepresentative and I will not tolerate it being used to inform the review or as representative of the parent's views as a group....
We will see... Watch this space...
No comments:
Post a Comment