The steering group which put the Pilot together seeks a meeting with DfES officials to discuss implementation.
An early start is practicable.
Setting off in a different direction?
---Original Message---
From: Davis, Warren [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 11 December 2003 15:24
To: 'Duncan Fisher'
Subject: RE: Early Interventions Pilot Project
Duncan,
Thanks for your e-mail and the background on the Parenting Fund. We are currently at the stage of identifying members of a small steering group to meet and begin to identify some of the issues. Following from that meeting, we will draw up a project plan and identifying what resources will be required. At this stage, it would be useful for us to meet again and discuss our proposal.
I will be in contact with you early in the new year, once we have something more concrete to discuss.
Regards Warren
Tel: 020 7210 8601
Response to the DfES email by Duncan Fisher, who introduced the NATC to the Minister; and who is conversant (i) with the ways of Whitehall (ii) with these policy issues
---Original Message---
From: Duncan Fisher [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: 11 December 2003 08:59
To: Warren Davis
Subject: Early Interventions Pilot Project
Dear Warren,
Can we meet again (perhaps with Bruce again?) to discuss the pilot project? We need to keep you fully informed about everything that we know about and I think it would be valuable for us to understand your plans. Perhaps we
could fix a date early Jan?
Attached is the email I sent to the Parenting Fund managers (see below)
- that line of enquiry appears to be a red herring since (i) the Parenting Fund is not really available after all, and (ii) you have access to funding elsewhere!
Still, it was worth a shot, and my policy is to test every possibility! All the best,
Duncan
---
The email below, by Duncan Fisher, is a sophisticated dissertation from an ‘insider’ to other ‘insiders’ about the wider background. It covers:
- the general ‘jockeying for position’ of the previous two months - the implications and importance of EI
- a sensible way forward
The policy analysis is high-quality and accurate. Every hope for coherent development was dashed.
Dear Ruth and Clare,
I thought it would be useful to let you know about the discussions we have been having with Lord Filkin at DCA. We have had two very useful meetings with him and with Warren Davis. Lord Filkin has asked us to meet him a third time in January.
The reason to inform you is that the Parenting Fund was discussed at the last meeting - I brought the subject up and I wanted to let you know why. Doubtless you will be fully briefed through the normal channels (Lord Filkin is talking to Margaret Hodge about all of this), but our view should be helpful, I hope.
The Early Interventions Pilot Project is a highly significant response to the problems in the family courts at the moment. It establishes a protocol ("parenting plans"),which the courts use to determine expectations of shared
parenting in a variety of different contexts (age of children, geography, housing, etc.)
With the authority of the court behind them, the infrastructure of family and child support around the court is re-jigged so that thousands of couples will be diverted from divisive, adversarial and expensive litigation, all of which are particularly injurious to children. There are also procedures for fast-track responses to fears of violence and abuse. It is all based on successful approaches in other countries, US particularly, but adapted to UK conditions.
The project has been developed quietly in the wings for the last seven years by a small group of people who have gradually built up support, in the
judiciary in particular and engaging with DCA (then LCD). Fathers Direct had been watching the process from the sidelines and we came to the conclusion some months ago that this really was the way forward. We noted that, amidst the cacophany of extreme opinions in this field, there was little space for sensible and practical solutions to have a public airing. And so in July we decided it was time to help project this initiative into the public debate. This strategy worked well . We wrote pieces in The Times and the Guardian and briefed other journalists. This led to broadcasters taking up the
issue: Lord Filkin was interviewed about the project on Newsnight and there was an extremely positive discussion on Woman's Hour. Margaret Hodge was questioned about the Pilot Project in Parliament the same day. In short, a middle ground was created and this catalysed broad agreement among reasonable voices. This has never happened before.
Lord Filkin called us into his office, along with Oliver Cyriax, the real
behind-the-scenes architect of the whole approach. After two good meetings, it has been broadly agreed that the pilot project should be allowed to carry on strictly at the local level, and the Inner London Family Proceedings
Court will be the local lead body [Ed (DF): this was an impression that turned out to
be exaggerated: rather, Lord Filkin responded positively to these ideas] . This
approach takes out all the impossible national politics from the process, allowing the new approach to be negotiated with local agencies only. We have also agreed that, as far as possible, the pilot project should not be made the focus of public attention by Government or anyone else. This provides the opportunity for the project to get on rapidly to produce results, rather than dealing with the media and
radical groups the whole time. If the project works, then a new way of running the family courts will have been proved to work, and the whole debate will be different.
I have advocated that the pilot project be funded by the Parenting Fund or another fund under your management. I have said that you have well
established mechanisms for effectively assessing and managing local projects and this would be no different than any other local project you have funded (except that politically, this is particularly sensitive.)
In terms of timetable, the Inner London Family Proceedings Court can start operating the project in September. This gives adequate time (just!) to prepare in advance - setting up the management structure and consulting about and agreeing procedures and printed materials. The architects of the project are continuing to develop the project because it is clear that rapid results are of the essence, because of political pressures. I have offered
to help write a project schedule and think about a budget.
One detail I need to say - Fathers Direct is not pitching for this project. We are doing all this simply because we realised if we did not use the resources we do have at this particular moment, the fevered public debate about the family courts could continue in a self-defeating circle for ever, without seeing the solutions that already exist. The resources we bring to this are (i) we work well with the media, (ii) we have channels of
communication to many of the participants in the debate, including to those at the opposite extremes, (iii) we know how to create and widen the middle ground, and (iv) we know how to create new projects with viable structures. We see our role as providing a temporary helping hand to the architects of the project, to DCA and to DfES (the Family Policy Divison under Bruce Clarke), all of which will actually be carrying forward this approach and hopefully in future rolling it out nationally.
I will be copying this email to Warren Davis, so that he and Lord Filkin's office are kept aware of our communications with the Department on this issue.
I hope this is useful. All the best,
Duncan
Duncan Fisher
Director, Fathers Direct 01873 810515
N.A.T.C.
NEW APPROACHES TO CONTACT 56 Perrers Road London W6 OEZ Tel 020 8748 1081___________________________________________________________________________________________________________
(recipient deleted)
BY HAND 16 December 2003
Dear
Management of the Pilot Project
Please find enclosed an update of where matters stand. The Minister has been thoroughly briefed on the detail of the Pilot; a third meeting is scheduled for January. The Pilot has strong government support.
The Project was always envisaged as judicially-led.
The attached papers set out an appropriate managerial structure. The essence is: (i) the judicial lead is signified by the judiciary itself convening the Pilot Project
Judicial Steering Committee
(ii) the appointment of a Project Executive Committee reporting to that Judicial Steering Committee
The same proposal, as outlined to Lord Filkin, has been relayed to Government; it seems an obvious and simple way to proceed.
Perhaps you would get in touch if you have queries? Yours sincerely,
Oliver Cyriax
PS There is of course a larger DCA /DfES initiative deriving from Making Contact Work; it does not alter the central principle of the Pilot’s Steering Committee as distinct and ring-fenced
Ministerial Overview (DCA)
Page 1, internal NATC memo; how things seemed to be after the 4 December 03 meeting