CLS partnerships: 'more cash, less talk'

Community Legal Service Partnerships (CLSPs) are in danger of becoming talking shops which actually aggravate gaps in advice provision because they lack the funding to address regional problems, research has suggested.

A report by the Advice Services Alliance (ASA) backed CLSPs as a forum for sharing ideas, but warned there was 'a danger that [they] end up devoting their energies to considering only how to prioritise and ration existing resources'.

It suggested that the the Lord Chancellor's Department (LCD) and Legal Services Commission (LSC) take an over-centralised approach, as they control a major source of partnership funding, the partnership initiative budget (PIB).

'[The] "centre" is in effect telling the "locals" what to do, and to a lesser extent how to do it, but without giving them the resources to get started or money to spend when they have decided what is needed,' it argued.

The report concluded that CLSPs might be hindering the development of the Community Legal Service (CLS) as a national service because of variations in funding and how they operate.

It said: 'At the moment there is a serious danger of uneven development within the CLS, and this may be increased by the activities of the partnerships, and further increased by the impact of the PIB'.

The report also backed findings from previous studies that solicitors' involvement in CLSPs was lower than desired because they were not remunerated for their involvement.

Some also perceive a bias in favour of the not-for-profit-sector when it comes to resources.

ASA policy director Ann Lewis said: 'We think it is time for a full and open debate on the CLSPs, what they have achieved and their role in the future.'

A Law Society spokesman said: 'At present, the Community Legal Service is under-resourced and the risk is that individuals will be left without access to legal services on important issues such as immigration or housing matters.'

Legal Action Group director Karen Mackay questioned spending vast sums of money on administering CLSPs without making money available for changes.

'CLSPs are only as effective as their resources allow them to be,' she said.

LSC chief executive Steve Orchard said around 630 million was spent this year on CLS services, excluding the extra 170 million for asylum work.

'Resources are and always have been limited,' he admitted.

'However, better co-ordination, led by CLSPs, can make a difference.'

An LCD spokesman said CLSPs were working well and were approaching 100% coverage.

'CLSPs present a unique opportunity for funders and providers to come together and, through the planning process, to have a genuine influence over targeting of government funds,' he insisted.

The LCD is planning a review of the CLS later this year.

See Editorial, page 15 (see Gazette [2003] 15 January)

Paula Rohan