Agenda item
Future funding of an events programme
The reasons for the call in are:-
1. To test fully the argument that Equalities legislation requires the cessation of all “cultural/faith based” events.
2. Because many of the “cultural/faith-based” events are inclusive and, in practice cross-community.
Suggested action for the Call In Overview and Scrutiny Committee to take:-
1. To consider the option of providing greater support to events delivered by the local community by diverting resources from large-scale events organised directly by the council.
2. To take full account of the consultation responses and views of the local community.
3. To consider advice on relevant Equalities duties and legislation
The Executive report is attached. Appendices to the report are circulated separately for Members.
The Lead Member and Lead Officer are invited to the meeting to respond to Members’ questions.
Minutes:
The reasons for the call in were:-
1. To test fully the argument that Equality legislation requires the cessation of all “cultural/faith based” events.
2. Because many of the “cultural/faith-based” events are inclusive and, in practice cross-community.
Suggested action for the Call In Overview and Scrutiny Committee to take:-
1. To consider the option of providing greater support to events delivered by the local community by diverting resources from large-scale events organised directly by the council.
2. To take full account of the consultation responses and views of the local community.
3. To consider advice on relevant Equality duties and legislation.
Councillor Lorber referred Members to the reasons for the call in of this item as set out in the agenda. He felt that the original intention of the proposals to make financial savings was now being justified on grounds of equality legislation which he questioned. In addition, he sought further explanation as to what defined a faith based event, as some of these were inclusive to the whole community. Councillor Lorber questioned whether holding council corporate events was the best approach in holding events and suggested that local organisations were better placed to undertake this as they had more experience and expertise in organising such events and that funds would be better used by providing support to these organisations.
AshwinbhaiGaloria, Secretary of Brent Hindu Council, was invited to address the committee by the Chair. Ashwinbhai Galoria began by stating that Brent was renowned both nationally and internationally for its Navratri celebrations and was the largest and best celebration of its kind in the UK. In acknowledging that the Navratri grant would be maintained for this year only, he requested that the council work with Brent Hindu Council in relation to equality legislation and seek to maintain the grant in future years. Members heard that the Navratri festival was inclusive of all the community and all residents had been invited to participate since the first festival held in Brent some 30 years ago.
Councillor Jones (Lead Member for Customers and Citizens) was invited by the Chair to reply to the initial points raised. Councillor Jones advised that the principal reasons behind the decisions remained because of the need to make financial savings and transitional arrangements offering a reduced amount of events were in place for events this year, whilst a new inclusive programme was intended for next year. Members heard that it was also intended that an Events and Marketing Team be set up to advice and support local organisations on events in future years. Councillor Jones explained that the report had initially been deferred as it needed to take into account changes in respect of the Equality Act 2010 which had come into effect on 5 April 2011. In respect of the consultation, a number of various views had been expressed and there had been some comments made that some residents felt that they did not feel included in some events such as Navratri, whilst other groups did not have any events funded or supported by the council. In this context, further consideration needed to be taken into account with regard to the Equality Act. Councillor Jones added that the council had long been at the forefront of supporting festivals, however the huge challenges posed by the savings required meant that the best way of ensuring that the whole of the community had an opportunity to celebrate was to hold an event drawing on all groups’ participation and this would be undertaken with a ‘Brent Celebrates’ event. In addition, the council would continue to provide Fireworks Night, especially as there were safety issues involved, and Holocaust Memorial Day.
The committee then discussed the call in. Councillor Lorber began by stating that there had been some initial debate over the call in of this item because upon initial publication of the decisions, they had not specifically stated that all cultural and faith based events would cease by April 2012. Turning to the consultation, he argued that undue weight may have been placed on those who had felt that only certain groups benefitted from council support for their events as opposed to a majority of respondents who he felt supported the present funding arrangements. Councillor Lorber stressed that events were often successful where the council had provided funding and support for an organisation to run an event. Furthermore, considerable resources would be needed for an Events and Marketing Team and to hold a one day event such as Brent Celebrates may cost between £500K to £750K and its’ success could be ruined, for example, by bad weather. By contrast, Navratri was a festival spread over ten days which the council had provided a £67K grant for in support. The organisations involved in running Navratri were also effective in getting the wider community involved, including both the old and young. In addition, schools benefitted from the income they received to host Navratri related events. Councillor Lorber stated that Brent Hindu Council and other such organisations did not need the advice of an Events and Marketing Team on how to run the Navratri festival and he opined that the Equality Act would not prevent the council from providing funding for such an event. He asked whether any other council activities were at risk of being stopped because of the Equality Act and stressed the importance of being clear what the implications were for the council as a whole with regard to the Act.
Councillor H B Patel sought clarification of the term ‘protected group’ and what evidence was there that faith based festivals were divisive. He enquired why the Equality Act had not been taken into account at an earlier stage as it had come into effect from April 2011. Councillor H B Patel commented that the council had a duty to support local organisations and that as a significant proportion of Brent’s population were of Indian ethnicity, support of the Navratri festival would be merited. In addition, the Navratri grant was considerably smaller than the costs involved for Brent Celebrates and would be run by organisations who were very experienced at organising Navratri events. Furthermore, people from all sections of the community attended Navratri. Councillor H B Patel also opined that in practical terms it was not possible to support exactly the same degree of support to each group. He also commented that many faith-based events attracted visitors from outside Brent and he enquired what weight was put on the council’s duty to attract visitors to the borough in the context of the Equality Act.
Councillor Gladbaum acknowledged that the council had worked with Brent Hindu Council for 30 years and that the partnership had proven a big success, however in the context of the financial challenges the council faced, it could not continue to support festivals in its current form. It was no longer possible to provide financial support to Brent Hindu Council, but Councillor Gladbaum had every confidence that the organisation would be capable of raising their own funds and to continue to run successful Navratri festivals.
The Chair commented that newer protected groups would inevitably be less experienced in operating events and he enquired how a fair balance could be struck in relation to this. He also stated that festivals such as Navratri helped unite the community and suggested that if the council did not support such events, this could also be construed as divisive. With regard to the consultation, the Chair noted the considerable support for Navratri including the 5,000 plus signatures petition submitted requesting that the Navratri grant be maintained. The Chair commented on the Navratri festival’s popularity with large turnouts and that it had been running successfully for years in comparison with minor events that have a lower turnout, support and inclusivity. In addition, the funds provided were often reinvested through hire of Brent school halls to host Navratri events. The Chair also suggested that some groups had a greater appetite for festivals than others and that this should be taken into account.
In reply to the issues raised, Councillor Jones explained that some groups had historically been generously funded compared to others, however the inequality in funding was now a bigger consideration because of the Equality Act. The present funding arrangements could be perceived as divisive or not being inclusive enough, whilst some responses to the consultation had requested more inclusive events. Councillor Jones felt that the council’s corporate events had been successful in the past and it was envisaged that the Events and Marketing Team would work with groups to put together such events in the future, whilst also providing expertise and advice to organisations to host their own events. She acknowledged that the impact of the Equality Act needed to be considered on other council activities too.
Councillor Butt (Deputy Leader of the Council and Lead Member for Resources) commented that the Executive report clearly highlighted option three as the recommended option which set out what festivals the council would cease to provide financial support for.
Councillor Powney stressed that the Equalities Act 2010 was an Act of Parliament and therefore the council was legally bound to abide by it and it was not a question of choice. Some protected groups had received more council funding than others and a concern in respect of this had also been raised in the consultation.
Fiona Ledden advised that under the Equality Act 2010, the council was obliged to pay “due regard to protected groups” and consideration of how its actions would impact differently on different groups. In particular, it needed to consider how some groups may be perceived to be receiving services and support from the council which were not provided to other groups. The council needed to reconsider how it provided services to the community and to ensure that it gave due regard to the different needs of different protected groups. The needs of protected groups would be assessed to see how these could be provided for, whilst fostering good relations between the different groups also needed to be undertaken. Fiona Ledden acknowledged that it was a complex issue and the council was still at the formulative stage as to how it was to interpret the Act. The committee heard that a faith group would be regarded as a protected group and that where one such group was receiving funding whilst others were not, this could be perceived as unequal and this was a major factor the council needed to consider. Fiona Ledden advised that due regard in respect the equalities impact needed to be given by the Executive and officers for each key decision that was made. She confirmed that the council had the power to exercise its ability to attract visitors to Brent and to generate income from this. Members also heard that training in respect of the Equalities Act 2010 would be made available to all councillors.
Members then decided not to agree to a recommendation suggested by Councillor Lorber that in view of the impact the decisions would have on large sections of the community, the Executive be requested to reconsider funding arrangements for the festivals programme and to consider a better approach as to how the funds could be used. He added that the Executive could distribute funds from the grant making scheme to the various groups taking into account the Equalities Act 2010.
RESOLVED:-
that upon considering the report from the Director of Customer and Community Engagement, the decisions made by the Executive be noted.
Supporting documents: