Ok so I might be stirring a little but I'm a CLS Housing Advisor at a CAB. The CAB get part of their funding from the Local Authority. As a result I'm under pressure from the boss not to make too many complaints regarding the LA's 'YOU SHALL NOT PASS' (Gandalf impression!) take on 184's incase the LA find an excuse to pull our funding. Additionally when enquiries are made our CAB won't say more than 'we have slight concerns'. If the CAB weren't funded in part by the LA it was agreed we would beating the LA's doors down.
There is an obvious conflict of interest but if the CAB didn't run the contract who would?
I would be interested to have the views from other CAB's
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
'I'm under pressure from the boss not to make too many complaints regarding the LA's take on 184's incase the LA find an excuse to pull our funding.'
Really? I find this quite shocking, tbh. I no longer work in a Bureau, but did for a long time, and the 'Impartial' bit of the Aims and Principles was always seen as a fundamental part of daily life - seeking the best for the client regardless of who you upset along the way. I may be over dramatizing, but it does feel a bit thin-end-of-wedge to me - what next, not challenging HB decisions in case someone gets the hump?
And surely the decision-making function of the Council regarding housing law is separate from the Funding section, so would the funding decision makers even know about any complaints you made?
I am genuinely curious as to what form the pressure you mention takes, and whether your manager is (what I would call) old school, or a new school LSC-weary numbers type.
(Apologies for posting anonymously but I do work in the advice sector and wouldn't want to be googled being grumpy about such a situation)
BS
ps - love the blog by the way - I find it very useful for keeping superficially up to date with an area that I no longer have to specialise in.
Firstly thanks for the kind comments about the blog.
I think the boss is a hybrid of the two examples you gave!
One might think that the decision-making function and funding section are seperate. However with Counsellors quick to latch on to any possible story (let's say for instance the CAB making a statement that it had serious concerns about the LA's housing department) then before you know it it's a full blown story.
Our LA recently reported that its homeless prevention numbers were way up. The CAB were asked to comment. Its comments were 'we have slight concerns' which is an understatement of seismic propertions. It's not fair really as we should be speaking up for those who have been disadvantaged.
It's sadly a case of not being able to bite the hand the feeds you
The pressure is not an active make a complaint and you're fired type but rather it being made clear that I should not legitimately annoy the LA too much (something which is extremely difficult for me to do as if a CLS client has a complaint I would not be doing my job properly if I did not assist due to a conflict of interest).
Toughy
I find this shocking too. It reminds me of the scene at the end of Animal Farm where the humans and the pigs are dancing with each other and it stops being possible to tell them apart.
Your post has raised the really important issue of how easily corruption creeps in to this sort of thing. I have heard of this sort of thing happening a lot. Maybe there should be a web site where people can anonymously blow the whistle on this sort of thing.
Yup, independent (except in certain circumstances) would be a better description of our CAB. But then if we were totally independent we might not exist so is it a neccessary compromise?
If I won the lottery I'd say goodbye to the LA and fund our CAB myself just so I can spend my days writting scathing letters to them. Erk what a sad thing to say in reply to 'What would you do if you won the lottery?'
Post a Comment