853

news, views and issues around Greenwich, Charlton, Blackheath and Woolwich, south-east London – what you won't read in Greenwich Time

Final judgement on Greenwich’s law centre

with 6 comments

It won’t come as a surprise, but Greenwich Council’s cabinet voted tonight to uphold its decision to withdraw funding from Greenwich Community Law Centre on Trafalgar Road.

The decision was “called in” for review by Conservative opposition leader Spencer Drury, who voiced fears that the loss of the centre would leave the west of the borough with “little or no cover” for legal help, and that proposals for replacement services were short on detail.

Greenwich has decided to change the way it funds legal advice services, dividing up each area of welfare law into separate contracts that agencies can bid for. In the past, agencies had effectively acted as a consortium, which the council says costs too much money. GCLC won none of the contracts, and will lose its funding from November.

Barry Mills, who has worked at the centre for 21 years, told the cabinet that the centre is the only agency in the borough which provides free advice for all areas of welfare law, and is still getting referrals from the organisations that are supposed to be replacing it.

The centre’s work is complex, and so are the arguments surrounding this issue. But one particular aspect – immigration law – stood out. GCLC is the only agency in the borough with staff qualified to offer advice on immigration – it’s illegal to do so otherwise. But, despite having four staff who have passed the tests, it still lost out to Plumstead Community Law Centre, which currently has no such staff.

“No reasoning has been provided for this, nor explanation, and it is extremely surprising as the centre is the only provider of free immigration advice in the whole borough, and we have 137 open cases,” he said.

“We have been running the entire workload of immigration advice in this borough for at least a year now as the previous Plumstead worker was no accredited and did very basic advice only.

“Given the council’s commitment and agenda around equality and diversity, we believe it should be reconsidered in any event as it is woefully inadequate given that immigration clients are among the most vulnerable in the community, and in our experience often exploited by unscrupulous private practioners.”

He also added that losing the centre’s base on Trafalgar Road would leave clients without a familiar place to go – weekly “outreach” work was “rarely successful” while some clients were “not mobile, with some fearful of using public transport”.

Local mental health experts are among those who have spoken up for the centre.

“We are rooted in the local community and cannot be replaced by outreach and e-mails,” he said.

GCLC won more money in tribunal awards, welfare benefits in compensation than the grant allocated to it by the council, Mr Mills explained – raising at least £345,000 last year.

“Many successes are unquantifiable,” he continued. “Stopping deportations, getting repairs done, keeping families together, stopping deportations.

“All of these things result in harmonious living and assist in social cohesion.”

But Greenwich Council’s project director Mark Baigent – in evidence barely audible thanks to the council’s shonky sound system – insisted that a “consortium approach” to providing legal help had not worked, and it had been decided to provide a “centre of excellence in each field”.

Deputy council leader Peter Brooks said the decision was “an officer’s recommendation which we thought was the right decision to make”.

“We have to make a decision, times are hard,” he added.

Council leader Chris Roberts said legal services had acted as a “cartel” before, artificially inflating costs.

“In this current climate, moving to one provider in each [legal] area is more cost effective. The council has been doing it this way, and we expect it of the voluntary sector too. It was inevitable that somebody would not succeed.”

Centre management will meet on Friday to decide their next steps – if there are any next steps to take. But their supporters are furious, and cite what they say are numerous contradictions in the council’s arguments.

Indeed, the centre and the council – which has long wanted to centralise advice services – seem so far apart, it’s hard to imagine them ever being reconciled.

Conspiracy theorists might like to look at the centre’s offices themselves – a tidy corner shop on Trafalgar Road, which looks from the outside to be in good nick… and owned by Greenwich Council. The loss to people in the Greenwich area looks very much like a potential council accountant’s gain.

Written by Darryl

18 October, 2011 at 11:30 pm

6 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. The loss of legal aid, and access to expert and suitably qualified local legal services up and down the country is certain to mean at best extremely stressful delay for those seeking help and at worst, justice denied. But that kind of “cost” is one that politicians (local or national) don’t seem the least bothered about.

    Sad times.

    Lucy

    19 October, 2011 at 3:17 pm

  2. I have never felt so cut off from democracy as I did last night. The needs of local people, particularly the most vulnerable, did not appear to be on the leading officer’s agenda, or in the minds of the cabinet. That said, possibly they slipped in a few heartfelt words before they nodded through the decision but as a person with a hearing problem (of which I informed the chief exec before the meeting started) never in all my life have I attended a meeting at which I was able to hear so little. Several people with reasonable hearing were also unable to follow much of what was said. There is little point in having these meetings open to the public if they cannot hear what is being said. It is fundamentally undemocratic.
    The previous cabinet meeting at which the same people made the same decision was almost as bad, thus denying people the right to challenge points which they cannot hear.
    Of the shameful decision itself, I’ll comment more later, it is still sinking in.

    Carol Brown (@carolmbrown)

    19 October, 2011 at 8:43 pm

  3. They only think of underlying numbers at the end of the day not the cost benefit ratio to society. Greenwich has serious one party issues akin to a stasi state much like other areas where one party has ruled the roost for so long. May be local government needs to be made more democratic for the little peop;le then their voice is really heard and not ignored.

    Gabriella Hudson

    23 October, 2011 at 5:59 pm

  4. Greenwich Law Centre gone…….I am devestated.

    I hope those involved in its closure will soon experience a legal loss that will eventually lead to their ruin.

    CCee

    25 October, 2011 at 11:35 pm

  5. [...] A bit late with this, and there’s not very much else to say at the moment, but Greenwich Community Law Centre has applied for a judicial review of the council’s decision to withdraw its funding from this month. [...]

  6. [...] The centre, on Trafalgar Road, lost its funding on 11 November following a vote taken by the council’s cabinet last month. [...]


Hello! Please join the discussion below.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 472 other followers