The stress and uncertainty of repeatedly packing up their lives and moving home is becoming a worryingly normal part of life for some children growing up in poverty, a new report from The Children’s Society has found.

The charity’s new three-year study ‘Growing up in Hard Times’, produced in partnership with the University of Bath, follows the lives of 60 children, giving a child’s-eye view of growing up in poverty in Britain

http://www.childrenssociety.org.uk/what-we-do/resources-and-publications/understanding-childhoods-growing-up-in-hard-times

Moving house multiple times emerged as one of the key themes from interviewing children, with one nine year old having moved home at least eight times and attended four schools.

Children in the report were found to be shouldering many of the burdens of growing up in poverty: making long journeys to school, having to stay indoors in unsafe neighbourhoods and struggling to sustain important friendships after moving area or school. The divisions between poor children and their peers became more marked at secondary school. Some children, particularly teenage boys, spoke of going hungry as their free school meals money fell short of their needs.

Children also reported being punished for breaking school rules on uniform and other equipment because their family couldn’t afford the right kit. Far from being too young to understand their families’ money worries, children instead were found to be keenly aware. Children said they didn’t want to ask their parents for money or items they needed because they knew their parents had little to spare.

Housing minister Gavin Barwell confirmed site-specific negotiations over Section 106 payments for affordable housing could be axed and these contributions rolled into the infrastructure payment to create a centralised fixed tariff in the next Budget – covering all new developments.

Section 106 payments towards affordable housing are agreed after talks over viability, and only apply to larger schemes. Meanwhile, CIL rates are fixed locally as a percentage of development value, and are based on local infrastructure priorities; they are optional for councils to implement, creating an uncertain patchwork for developers at planning stage.

Mr Barwell said to Inside housing : “There would be the potential to have a national system that captured infrastructure and affordable housing. The question I would ask people is: would it be better to have a system where people knew up front, ‘this is the contribution I’m going to be asked for in terms of infrastructure and affordable housing’?”

The government published an independent CIL review alongside its White Paper last month, with the aim of simplifying the system of developer taxes. It recommended a mandatory tariff for all new developments called a Local Infrastructure Tax, based on a centralised methodology, but charged and collected locally. It did not recommend centralisation of affordable housing payments.

Simplification of the system nationally would echo planning policies currently being pursued by London mayor Sadiq Khan: to avoid protracted viability negotiations, he is suggesting that developers which achieve 35% affordable housing on their schemes would be fast-tracked through the planning system.

He added: “A lot of time and money is spent arguing about these things and that’s one of the things that is slowing up our build-out rates in this country, which is something I want to change.”

Lord Bourne of Aberystwyth, a junior minister for the DCLG, he said if councils are achieving 100% of their housing delivery requirement and can demonstrate they will continue to do so if they drop the automatic granting of office-to-residential conversions, then they will be allowed to impose an Article 4 direction.

Article 4 directions are used by councils to remove permitted development rights that allow office-to-residential conversions to go ahead without having to obtain planning permission. Councils have previously criticised the move to make office-to-residential conversions not subject to planning permission as a “free-for-all”. Councils will still have to prove the direction is necessary to protect the well-being of an area, as under the current rules.

Under the current rules office-to-residential conversions do not need planning permission, unless an Article 4 direction is in place.

The government is seeking to build an economy that works for everyone. As we leave the European Union, we will need to ensure that our country can compete in a global economy, and the government has set goals of boosting living standards, growth and productivity, and addressing deeply engrained regional inequalities. However, England’s adult skills system is ill-equipped to deliver this, or to address the trends that will affect our economy between now and 2030.

Demand for skills among employers is low. Employer investment has fallen in recent years and there is a large investment gap with the EU average. Poor skills utilisation means improvements in qualifications haven’t delivered improvements in pay and productivity.

Too much provision is low quality with poor outcomes. In the absence of clearly articulated employer demand, providers have relied on government-designed funding and regulatory systems. This has led to perverse incentives, mismatched supply and demand, and a focus on courses with poor labour market outcomes. Efforts to build a more ‘employer-led’ system risk exacerbating this.

The training system has failed to tackle regional and social inequalities. Adults who stand to benefit most from training are the least likely to participate. The adult skills system has failed to support regions scarred by deindustrialisation, and it has failed to address stark regional disparities in economic performance. The apprenticeship levy may accentuate regional skills inequalities by boosting investment most in London and the south east.

The apprenticeships levy as currently formulated would fail to restore employer investment to the levels of a decade ago. The government should therefore expand its apprenticeship levy into a ‘skills levy’, set at 0.5 per cent of payroll for employers with 50 or more employees, and 1.0 per cent for the largest. This would raise £5 billion. Contributions from larger employers should be top-sliced and devolved to provide a regional skills fund for high quality vocational education and training.

KEY FINDINGS

Our economy is set to change significantly between now and 2030. The prime minister has pledged to build an economy that works for everyone, rooted in a more proactive industrial strategy. With two-thirds of the workforce of 2030 having already left full time education, the adult skills system will be crucial in helping us compete in a global economy. But as currently configured it is incapable of delivering the government’s objectives of increasing living standards, productivity, and growth across the country.

In the past, policymakers in England have left decisions on training to the market: the assumption has been that with the right incentives, employers will invest in training for the benefit of all. Successive governments have invested in training in the hope that a more skilled workforce will drive growth.

However, our market-led system has neither delivered the quantity nor the quality of training that we need, and it has failed the people and the places that need it most.

If we are to build a skills system fit for the future, we need to overcome three key weaknesses:

• First, levels of employer demand for skills are low, and employer investment in continuing vocational training per employee in the UK is half the EU average; investment in training and learning per employee fell by 13.6 per cent per employee in real-terms between 2007 and 2015. Neither are employers using the skills of the workforce effectively: the UK has the highest levels of overqualification in the EU. While the apprenticeship levy will stimulate investment, it will only affect large employers, and questions remain about the quality of training and the extent to which skills will be utilised to improve business performance and job quality.
• Second, in the absence of strong and clearly articulated employer demand, providers have relied on centrally set funding and regulatory systems. These have led to a focus on lower-quality courses which often fail to meet the needs of learners or employers. Half of qualifications taken by adult learners are below NVQ level 2, and many offer poor wage or employment returns. Yet at the same time, many skilled sectors face persistent skills shortages that are not met by current provision. Efforts to build a more ‘employer-led’ system risk exacerbating these problems.
• Third, the current system has failed to tackle entrenched regional and social inequalities. It has not supported those affected by economic change in the past, leaving many post-industrial areas trapped in low skills equilibria. While the devolution of adult skills training will help, proposals are poorly coordinated and the budget has been slashed. The apprenticeship levy will stimulate investment most in the areas where it is needed least; London and the south east have more businesses who will pay the levy and invest in training, but they have higher levels of qualifications, and lower skills needs. The levy will raise less, and stimulate training less, in the regions which have greater need. Adults who would most benefit from training – those with low skills, in low-pay occupations and in lower socio-economic groups – are the least likely to participate. Individuals looking to upskill can face numerous barriers, and the decision to charge adults for the full cost of some courses has led to a 31 per cent fall in participation.

Many of the problems with the adult skills system stem from England’s relatively ‘hands-off’ approach to vocational training, including low training standards and a reluctance to intervene in the quantity or quality of training used and delivered by employers.

A shift to a more innovative, higher skilled economy that works for everyone and can help us compete in a global economy will require far more focus on how the skills of the adult working population are being developed and utilised in the workplace. A more ambitious adult skills policy should be informed by the following goals:

• improving investment in, and utilisation of, skills among employers
• increasing the availability of high quality specialist vocational provision
• supporting industries and communities facing economic decline to adapt to the demands of the global economy.

The first order problem we tackle here is underinvestment in the skills system to deliver on the government’s objectives. The apprenticeship levy could help boost investment in skills. But it would neither bring spending back to the levels of a decade ago, nor would it bring us close to the EU average. In the absence of further public investment and demonstrable underinvestment by employers, we recommend that the government expands the apprenticeship levy into a wider skills levy, which would:

• apply to all employers with 50 or more employees
• be set at 0.50 per cent of payroll for employers with 50 or more staff and 1.0 per cent of pay roll for the largest employers with 250 or more staff
• be more flexible, and redeemable against the cost of high quality training beyond just apprenticeships
• top-slice contributions from larger employers to form a regional skills fund, devolved according to local need, to invest in high quality, specialist vocational training.

We estimate that the skills levy would raise over £5 billion in 2017/18 – double the £2.6 billion raised by the apprenticeship levy. Top-slicing a quarter of the contributions of the largest firms would create a regional skills fund worth £1.1 billion, to be devolved to regions with lower skills. While the apprenticeship levy may accentuate regional inequalities, top-slicing the skills levy would narrow them. It would also restore the adult skills budget to close to the levels of 2010/11 in real terms and it would increase employer investment from 52 per cent of the EU average to at least 80 per cent.

The introduction of a skills levy will also provide greater scope for tackling the second and third order problems we identify here: a collective action failure and persistent regional and social inequalities. We will set out how government can address these failures in our next report.

INTRODUCTION

The north of England has a rich and vibrant civil society. In the past, that strong civil society produced radical solutions to tackle social problems, including the establishment of co-operatives, mutual societies and trade unions. More recently, as the welfare state has found itself unable to tackle social issues alone, civil society has been strengthened by its voluntary and community organisations and social enterprises – which, taken together, are commonly referred to as the ‘third sector’. Reliance on the third sector to find and deliver social solutions is stronger than ever as the North is undergoing considerable change, in response to – and as part of – longstanding economic and cultural trends.

IPPR North is currently leading a programme of research on the future of civil society in the North. This will initiate and assemble a coherent evidence base to help inform and shape local, regional and national policymaking regarding the role of civil society in the north of England. As part of that programme of work, this report presents groundbreaking new evidence on the state of the third sector in the north of England in 2017.

ABOUT THE DATASET

Data was collected in 2016 by St Chad’s College, Durham University using online questionnaires across the north of England. A total of 3,594 responses were received, including 1,462 from the North West, 1,083 from Yorkshire and the Humber, and 1,012 from the North East. This represents a response rate of 12.7 per cent across the North.

This data will be analysed in depth, and a series of reports exploring key trends and relationships in detail will be published from the early summer of 2017. This report presents initial headline findings from the study from across the whole of the north of England, and explores three key areas of analysis.

The size and strength of the third sector in northern England, including:

• the contribution of the sector to the northern economy
• the range and diversity of third sector activity in the North
• the strength of relationships within the third sector, and with the public sector and business.

The financial situation of the sector, including:

• how the sector is resourced and financed
• how the financial situations of third sector organisations (TSOs) – with different characteristics and working in different areas – vary.

An examination of third sector organisations (TSOs’) expectations about and preparations for the future.

The 34,000-home landlord, according to Inside Housing, has identified properties across the North West that are not fit for purpose, and is already thought to have sold 850 units, as part of an initial tranche of 1,200 homes.

Having announced last year that it was embarking on an offsite construction venture with China National Building Material Company, the housing association is going on an efficiency drive.

It is demerging from both Derwent & Solway Housing Association and Leasowe Community Homes, taking more than 4,000 homes out of its portfolio.

The additional homes 4,000 are expected to be released on a piecemeal basis to a variety of operators in the North West, following a large-scale stock survey that took place last year.

The group wants to ensure that surpluses were being used for new homes, rather than repairs and maintenance on not-fit-for-purpose assets.

Thanks to Liverpool Mutual Homes for hosting

1            Presentation by Plus Dane on their new Involvement methodology – Emma Sneyd and  Irene  Crone

Plus Dane has re- recruited to an involvement method which includes scrutiny and task and finish (through Plus Dane Voices).

Only 2 from the former panel applied

PD shared their recruitment adverts – short and focussed – see handouts and presentation.

Scrutiny net presentation PLUSDane

Tenant and Customer Engagement Strategy

PDV Consultation Application Form

PDV Consultation Request Form

PDV Consultations Report Form

PDV Information Document

The Coms team at PD supported the recruitment, the team benefited from their input – including thinking about key messages to send out to younger people.

29 people showed an interest in the Scrutiny Panel which is now settled at 16 people.

Given homes are from Chester to Merseyside, there is quite a distance to travel. The usual distance travelled can be 2 hours, which makes a long day for those who are meeting from 7-9pm.

Usually 12 people attend. Meetings are 2 weekly got 2 hours

PD is looking at digital potential for connections.

The do their work through a closed Facebook page outside meeting time.

The Involvement staff wanted buy in from local tams so they spent time explaining what they were trying to achieve and used referrals and nominations from officers to recruit as well as the literature circulated.

The CEO has been involved by stating how important the process is. This has been helpful.

PD has developed a procedure for understanding tenant opinion from the PD Voices.

Officers have to feed a strapline in all board reports to say what tenant involvement there has been, which is beginning to change the culture but also, the active challenge on this means that reports/policies etc will not go for approval if this section of the standard reports to EMT and Boards is not complete. This is a sort of tenant impact assessment at each Board

PD has an integrated database on the Housing Management system to record how many tenants have been involved

New Policies must be run past Plus Dane voices – some people are chosen to assist through a task and finish group.

The team have developed a communications plan and tenants also do real time mystery shopping.

PD have a “Landlord Plus Strategy” which supported the spend of £120k per annum.

Tenant Board members are recruited which may be tenant and leaseholders

The whole initiative on involvement is business driven – social purpose and focus on those at risk to the business.

PD does not attend tenant meetings. They have adopted a more enabling role to help the groups to help themselves. They may attend the AGM.

PD operates their meetings with tenants by themes (like adaptations).

Leeds CC has been experimenting on an involvement trigger in their 57,000 homes, including rewards like increased repairs/adaptations. They will present at the next meeting

They have 100 Housing Officers. They do an annual home visit where they discuss rents and involvement, but they speak to every tenant once a year.

LCC do 3 enquiries a year on scrutiny – this is to the Councils Corporate centre – software is used to track the delivery of recommendations he process is very formal and under review.

Magenta living now has a scrutiny and consultation panel.

Great Places consultation panel tends to look at performance and policy. The involvement staff have boosted the tenant input by contacting tenants for feedback directly.

2            Presentation on recruitment and induction – Trafford Housing Trust – Mark Karlisle

Trafford HT seeks out a pool of people to get involved at sign up.

Mark took the meeting through the approach to recruitment and then their induction for new tenants (see slides)

Quality and Insight Panel.Induction Presentation FEB 2017pptx

Training Action Plan

QIP Induction Flowchart 2015

QIP Interview Question 2016 VS2 matrix

QIP Application & Declaration Form

Quality and Insight Panel JD

Terms of Reference for Quality and Insight Panel NOV 2015 vs 1

Code of Conduct – Board QIP Community Panel Members 2011

Six Month Feedback QIP scrutiny case studies

Three Month Feedback

360 Feedback Annual Review Form Induction Docs SEPT 2016

INTRODUCTION TO THE QUALITY AND INSIGHT PANEL VS2 FEB 2016

Terms of Reference for Quality and Insight Panel Sept 2013

Neighbourhood Champions handbook

Code of Conduct – Board QIP Community Panel Members 2011

Neighbourhood Champions Procedure

Mark supports the tenant scrutiny (4 a year) and all Tenant groups.

Board value the contribution of involved tenants – Scrutiny reports to Committee of the Board.

Scrutiny and topics come from business intelligence reports – generally the panel are invited to support and to scope a piece for work required by the landlord by an officer.

THT are growing, they have just agreed a deal to expand their housing stock by 2500 homes by L&Q – they have 9000 already.

THT have used the CI team to support and develop a survey and to make calls to different groups who are under-represented. Whilst they are keen to make involvement more representative, literature and publicity showing the current panel show a specific demographic which might be off-putting to others.

They use customers to support this.

They also bring in a youth group on a Wednesday night, every 2 weeks to make calls

Issues relating to equalities, representation and gathering views of uninvolved groups were discussed.

3. Rewards for involvement and also for other services, findings so far and more information – Tracy at Habinteg

 Tracey is doing a review of tenant incentives, allowances and ways to encourage involvement.

Mary at Cestria/ISOS sent in the following inititiaves, she was unabel to attend this meeting:

• Return of new Tenancy Agreements (x 3 different categories) by deadline – Prize draw entry of £100
• Difficult to let properties
  • Decoration vouchers
  • Carpet provided
• Employment Programmes
  • Empty Homes Programme – £25 B&Q Voucher on completion of course
  • Care Skills Foundation Course – 20 reduced cost driving lessons (£5), Theory & Driving Test paid one completion of course

Trafford Housing Trust give additional incentives in basic repairs and enhanced services, like Irwell valley for tenants as part of a reward for maintaining the tenancy

Thirteen Scrutiny Panel (formerly Vela and Fabrick) have completed a review of tenant reward schemes.

Southway were reviewing their landlord led reward schemes, Irwell Valley and Alliance Homes have been running similar schemes for many years

4. Capturing information on tenant involvement -Tracey at Habinteg

LMH are considering how they might stretch their panel wider by using existing diverse community groups to do their research.

LMH use a profiling form for involved customers.

Magenta audit tenant groups

Leeds CC discussed their focus on the public sector equality duty in engaging tenants in local conversations

PlusDane shared their recruitment registration card earlier; all those who show an interest are sent a card back to confirm they are on the involvement database

5. Deregulation, Comprehensive Spending review – Yvonne

Yvonne took the meeting through the latest housing policy changes and those which are imminent

 YD CSR update Jan 17

Autumn_Statement_Briefing_2016

Rent_freedom_Consultation_Document_final

Rent Freedom – Member Roundtables

Rent Freedom – Member Roundtables

• A new white paper on housing is due in February
• The government is looking at rent freedoms for building HAs to set their own rents from 2020 onwards
• Brexit impact on tenants – not yet clear but information on this in the newsletter – housing costs likely to rise and to squeeze at a time of rent reduction
• Other housing policy changes in the Governments Autumn statement have represented a few u turns for tenants on things like:
  • Right to buy – delayed and will be piloted in a region – possibly the Midlands
  • Lifetime tenancies – now optional
  • Pay to stay – no longer compulsory
  • Deregulation – triggered a review of tenant involvement standard by the HCA to ensure tenants are consulted on major changes like disposals of stock, mergers and major changes. Closing date 22^nd Please share any consultation you do with tenants with S.Net colleagues

6. Review of the VFM standards

The HCA is about to review its VFM standard as it increases the pressure on efficiency saving   to enable new homes to be built. They are reviewing the need to have an annual VFM   standard and instead of this some standard efficiency indicators – like that being worked on  by a group of HAs, led by the Home Group.

The publication of the statement is unwieldy for tenants to understand but many HAs have improved the prose on this for their website or tenant annual report.

The replacement VFM indicators are mainly financial calculations and do not show comparisons at this time. Consultation will occur when the Home Group project has been  tested more widely.

Return on assets – knowledge of each estate/neighbourhood/area/block is a common  compliant of the HCA in reviewing VFM work. The work is suggested to support investment, disinvestment and overall asset management and performance plans. Can tenants support the sifting of this data?

Are your tenants reviewing 6 monthly the delivery of the promises in the VFM standard? – this is a useful exercise for tenant groups to understand VFM better.

Are your tenant groups making VFM recommendations on their scrutiny reports and other work when making recommendations for change?

1. Devo-health is happening – but it is likely to happen slowly. One of the biggest surprises in Greater Manchester’s ‘northern powerhouse’ deal was the decentralisation of the region’s £6 billion annual health and care budget. Other areas initially declared an interest in a ‘formal’ devo-health deal but have subsequently fallen away, with only London and potentially Birmingham likely to follow suit, albeit with different models on the ground, in the coming months and years.
2. Devo-health has the potential to help local areas respond to gaps in quality and funding in health and care. Specifically, devo-health may allow local areas to move towards place-based public services and population health systems, firstly by aligning and pooling budgets (and decision making power) at the local level, and, secondly, by empowering – and passing down accountability to – local leaders to drive forward with change.
3. As yet decentralisation is more akin to deconcentration or delegation than devolution. Devo-health areas have received new powers over commissioning and budget allocation, however, there has been little change in regulation, workforce or revenue raising and (at least on paper) accountability. Most importantly, in places like Greater Manchester, it will be the health secretary rather than the combined authority or mayor who is ultimately accountable for the NHS, and all organisational statutory responsibilities will still run upward to central government.
4. This lack of real decentralisation might make it harder for local areas to unlock the potential benefits of devo-health. In particular, the maintenance of existing accountability mechanisms may allow local leaders to pass difficult decisions back to the centre, or the centre could to continue to intervene unhelpfully in local decision making. These deficiencies may keep money locked within existing silos and limit change on the ground.
5. A ‘devo-health+’ deal for areas that have demonstrated the ability to manage their existing devo-health powers might allow them to go further and faster in the future. New powers would focus on the accountability mechanism, commissioning structures, regulatory functions and revenue raising and can be split into incremental and long-term changes.

Policy recommendations

ACCOUNTABILITY

• Incremental: Give metro mayors the power to develop strategic plans and outcome frameworks, alongside local health and care partners, and put a duty on others to comply with/deliver against them.
• Long-term: Make the mayor and combined authority accountable for the NHS, including changes to organisational statutory accountabilities within the region.

COMMISSIONING

• Incremental: Amend existing national legislation – in particular Section 75 of the NHS Act 2006 – to better enable the pooling of budgets and commissioning functions locally.
• Long-term: Create new national legislation to codify place-based health and care, soften emphasis on organisational silos, and move from competition to collaboration.

REGULATION

• Incremental: Allow devo-health areas to make joint appointments between NHS England and NHS Improvement in order to join up financial and quality regulation.
• Incremental: Give devo-health areas a combined financial control total for providers – and between providers and commissioners – and fully delegate/devolve the management of their share of the national sustainability and transformation fund.
• Long-term: Simplify the regulatory environment as part of new national legislation, including formally merging the regulatory functions of NHS England and NHS Improvement (and its component parts).

REVENUE RAISING

• Incremental: Allow areas with devo-health deals to test the use of minimum prices and ‘sin taxes’ on cigarettes, alcohol, and sugar and fat in order to discourage overconsumption.
• Incremental: Give local areas greater fiscal devolution – with a focus on land taxes – to allow local government to properly fund existing services.
• Long-term: Investigate the possibility of a wider fiscal devolution deal to allow local authorities to match-fund the NHS.

WHICH REGIONS SHOULD RECEIVE THESE POWERS?

• Incremental: Give existing devo-health areas (Greater Manchester and London) the ‘devo-health+’ powers set out above.
• Incremental: Devo-health is still an experiment: pilot areas must demonstrate hard outcomes before devo-health is rolled out countrywide.
• Incremental: Use learnings from the devo-health pilots to allow other areas to benefit from decentralisation but within the confines of the NHS (potentially through STPs or through changes to the national architecture).
• Long-term: If devo-health delivers in pilot areas, allow other areas to follow suit, provided they meet clear and strict eligibility criteria.

60-second summary

Migrant integration is one of Britain’s most politically sensitive topics. Yet what facilitates and impedes integration, and even the definition of what ‘integration’ actually means, are difficult to pin down. This report looks at the town of Bedford, to gain an insight into what works, and what doesn’t, in creating a socially cohesive town. Having had similar levels of immigration as most towns and cities in Britain, and given its diverse population and conventional socioeconomic profile, Bedford is an instructive case study to investigate integration in Britain today.

The government recently commissioned Dame Louise Casey to undertake a review into the integration of Britain’s most isolated communities. That review raised alarm at the poor state of integration in Britain. While it made some important observations, it offered few concrete suggestions for what can be done. This report looks at how Bedford’s residents have made integration work for their community. We argue that Bedford’s experience shows how concrete, empowering interventions can boost integration.

Some factors make Bedford a well-integrated place: the pace of demographic change has been steady and there has been good local leadership. Local people have made small adaptations to make the process of integration easier for newcomers. Community groups have proven resilient.

But for some parts of Bedford’s community, integration has been more difficult. There is some evidence that enclaves are starting to develop. Bedford can try to head off these developments – by using planning legislation to foster ethnic diversity, for example.

The least integrated groups include eastern European migrant workers – particularly men who tend to socialise with others of their nationality and may be in Bedford transiently – and some groups of Asian Muslim women. Our focus groups with women from this hard-to-reach group found that household responsibilities, very low levels of confidence, traditional views of women’s roles in the family and little understanding of the options available combined to inhibit many of these women from engaging with wider Bedford society.

Some have argued that these women should be compelled to integrate, and penalised if they do not; yet our research found that the most effective strategy to overcoming this lack of integration is through actions to empower these women to overcome their obstacles. Simple adaptations to existing provision have been effective in Bedford, making a significant difference to many lives. Further small, sensitive adaptations to service provision could help build levels of confidence and mitigate family members’ concerns about women’s integration. These empowering adaptations offer instructive examples to other parts of the country, where there are concerns that some parts of the community are not integrated.

Key findings

Bedford has a long history of immigration, with major waves arriving from the 1950s, from a variety of different ethnicities. Civil society has broadly responded well to the challenges posed by increasing diversity, and local decision-makers have shown leadership in prioritising the issues of cohesion. But the pace of change is picking up. High levels of immigration are having an impact. Internal migration of ethnic minority Britons and higher birth rates among the non-white British population mean that all areas of Bedford have become more diverse over the past 20 years – and this trend is set to continue.

BARRIERS TO INTEGRATION FOR EASTERN EUROPEAN WORKERS AND ASIAN MUSLIM WOMEN

While the town is largely well integrated today, there are signs that enclaves are beginning to form. Data analysis from the 2011 census suggests this, as does our qualitative research undertaken with local residents, civil society stakeholders and service providers. Increasingly, there have been concerns that some migrants are not integrating well in the town, leading separate lives that leave little room for engagement with the rest of Bedford’s population. This is particularly the case for eastern European workers and among the Asian Muslim community.

For eastern European workers, EU free movement rules meant that while some settle in Bedford and gradually become part of the community, others come only transiently. Working largely among speakers of their own language, living in bedsits and with little call to establish passing contact with the rest of the town, these migrants – particularly men, who have less contact with services such as schools than women – do not follow the pathway of integration that previous migrants to Bedford have laid down.

Some Asian Muslim women have apparently struggled to establish even basic indicators of integration, such as learning some English or establishing connections outside the cultural group even after living in the town a long time. A range of factors combined to impede their integration.

• Hostility of family members to their engagement with people outside the social group, from husbands, mothers-in-law and parents for social and cultural reasons, and from some sons on religious grounds.
• Low levels of confidence impeded these women from making the steps that facilitate the integration of other migrants. Engaging with public services, going somewhere on their own, approaching authority figures or travelling to an unfamiliar part of the town were simply too intimidating.
• Household and caring responsibilities reducing the time and opportunities available for integrating.

We found evidence that sensitive adaptations that allowed women to overcome these obstacles could have a transformative impact on their integration. For example, a local swimming pool secured permission to run a women-only swimming class, which it targeted (primarily, but not exclusively) at Asian Muslim women. Over time, this swimming class reduced scepticism from hostile family members. Women’s confidence increased, and they managed to collectively organise their childcare responsibilities. Small, judicious and empowering adaptations made integration easier.

Adaptations such as these can be controversial. Gender segregation, especially in order to cater to religiously conservative groups, is a contentious issue. Similarly, using compulsive strategies to compel migrants to integrate causes concern in some quarters – but when used judiciously and in ways that are empowering and not punitive, there is a place for such measures.

Recommendations

• Target English language learning at the most isolated migrants and set up an interest-free loan to pay for tuition.
• Educate boys on the role of older women as well as girls of their own age.
• Develop the provision of culturally-sensitive childcare.
• Set up an integration hub in areas where migrant workers congregate.
• Establish a selective landlord licensing scheme.

This is a useful summary – an on the day briefing from the NHC: