London Fairness Commission and London Funders Event

01 02 16

This event brought together members of London Funders to discuss three questions under the themes of philanthropy, youth employment and a fairness index.

Philanthropy

  1. What institutional vehicle is needed to increase the amount of philanthropic giving in London?
  • Is an institutional vehicle needed, if so how could they shift or implement a notion of fairness?
  • What are the motivations and barriers to ‘fairness philanthropy’?
  • Unlocking wealth from individuals and the City of London. Focusing on young professionals who are not already wealthy to gain an early interest and commitment
  • Need to work out how to approach ‘local’ higher national wage – involve local businesses, including BID.
  • Philanthropy needs to be more connected, both London wide as well as place based (local solutions). Increasing the connection between individuals and companies that are based here and the local communities.
  • Place based philanthropy; joint pool of funding e.g. ‘Islington Giving’ had been active for four years with over 3million volunteers.
  • How do we I.D. new funders?How do we make giving ‘visible’ so that philanthropists feel recognised? Who ‘pitches’ to philanthropists?Is there a recognised cohort of philanthropists / corporate? Would a vehicle work when ‘philanthropists’ give because they are asked by friends? How do we connect philanthropists with opportunities?
  • We need to recognise that they will fund what they want. How do we achieve recognition that reducing inequality is in philanthropists interests?
  • Taxation as a lever?
  1. How could philanthropic giving be focused onto fairness issues?
  • In USA there is more is more of a history / culture of philanthropy geared at fairness. Do we risk making ‘unfairness’ worse by trying to stimulate philanthropy?
  • How do we get focus on fairness in London given it is perceived as wealthy?
  • Could we position opportunities to philanthropists as providing ‘access’ and improving lives by address housing, transport and childcare?
  • How much effort should go into stimulating philanthropy? Will it contribute to making London fairer?
  • Fairness affects all, not just the realm of politics. Getting better understood, but case still needs to be made.
  1. Who should make these changes happen, and when?
  • The Mayor as a champion of fairness, the GLA an obvious political home.
  • Link to existing initiatives e.g. Mayor’s charters and success ‘fund’ of Olympics volunteering.
  • Individual issues such as transport costs, housing, next iteration of London Plan should include social infrastructure.
  • Identify tangible activities that capture imagination and creating culture; creative examples of fairer provision e.g. Hackney Community Transport, Lewisham Borough renting as private landlords and LLW.
  • Legitimacy of pursuing policy objectives.

Journey to a job

  1. How do we achieve an appropriate strategy for addressing London's skill shortages, employability and job brokerage?
  • Define skills shortage; engineering, construction, nursing. Build up these skills so Londoners are on level competition to international market.
  • Offer range of academic, practical and soft skills through a range of paths by increasing access to skills development; HE/FE, Princes’ Trust, volunteering, social activities.
  • Greater understanding of the challenges from schools and colleges.
  • Apprenticeships should pay minimum wages and be high quality.
  • Apprenticeships and work experience are critical routes to employmentthey wouldn’t have heard of.
  • Education system has been about education, not getting people job ready. Who develops competencies needed for employment?
  • Coordinated employer engagement, such as work visits and work experience.
  • Need to redefine strategy – co-designed with young people so we are delivery what they need, Confidence building is key
  • Look into journey of becoming a NEET, for example likely to have been excluded from mainstream school.
  • Stats at each LEA
  • Recognise change will happen over a generation. Work with this group from early age e.g. Talent Match.
  • Problem of political short-termism of the ‘four year’ cycle. Long term bipartisan approach - pre mayor – The London Challenge.
  • Communicate impact of CSR and welfare reforms.
  • Non-standard English names are a barrier to jobs. Bearing in mind London won’t have an ethnic majority soon, should we anonymise CVs?
  • London’s employers like free movement of people, so able people are more attractive.
  • How do we develop a consensus on way forward – should it come from a politicians or involved businesses?
  • How do we give every young person networks, advice, support and soft skill, perhaps focusing on young people leaving care or focusing on most deprived boroughs
  • Early intervention, before primary school.
  • Subjects not assessed / no league tables where social / emotional development happens
  1. How do we create a London-wide strategy for addressing the one in 10 young Londoner currently not in education, employment or training?
  • Route through employment development in employment; maintaining employment beyond entry level.
  • City Bridge could look into each local borough for emphasis on local partnership
  • Work readiness gap.
  • Mayor to have ‘convening’ role in developing strategy.
  • Create base hub/safety net.
  • Local Authority led business and education partnerships.
  • No one size fits all but should have access to some sort of framework.
  • Creation of leadership and benchmarking.
  • Saturday job campaign and encouraging creation of first jobs.
  • Paid and open access internships.
  • Wary of qualification inflation.
  1. Who should make these changes happen, and when?
  • Address through schools
  • Understand supply and demand
  • Mayor should be responsible along with a strategic partnership with DWP re sections and opportunity.

Fairness index

Level of detail required for a fairness index to be useful for informing funder decision-making?

  • Ten indicators at most. Not the London poverty profile
  • Life expectancy from the richest and poorest wards
  • Strap line – ‘Fairness is good for all Londoners’
  • Score card and issues to action
  • Different measurements for different indicators needs to be nuance
  • Measured through assets; income and happiness
  • Particular to city living, culture: access and expense of culture but include environment and air quality.
  • Per capita and per ward.
  • Who already holds the data? Family and Parenting Institution and TfL did something similar but need to tailor about fairness.
  • If this is a generational issue Fairness Index needs to be used alongside development policy. Needs to be monitored.

Where would a fairness index be best placed on an ongoing basis?

  • Charitable organisation to hold to account.
  • GLA/Trust for London could jointly own it – possibly with London Councils.
  • Indicators need to be linked to policy work/someone’s strategy and work but not held by GLA

London Fairness Commission and London Funders 01.02.16