1. The Voluntary Sector and Horizontal Policy- making devolution in the UK: the case of Northern Ireland Nick Acheson Social and Policy Research Institute, University of Ulster

2. The UK’s assymetrical federalism  Differences in political context and administrative style;  England is divergent from ‘traditional’ welfare state;  Control over social policy seen as an important justification for devolution;  Less difference between the 4 ‘nations’ in policy towards the third sector than other policy areas.

3. Why is devolution a question for voluntary sector studies?  Both organizations and the problems they seek to address are embedded in ‘social economy’ of welfare and the political settlements that underpin welfare states;  Insofar as these are different, over time there will be divergence in:  What organizations exist;  What they do;  How they relate to state institutions ;  Analysis of differences can contribute to theorizing state/sector relations

4. Where to look for differences  There is a need to develop a shared theoretical framework on which to base comparisons;  Extent of commitment to ‘horizontal’ policy- making towards the sector as a whole;  The nature of that commitment;  Extent of impact of ‘modernization’ agenda

5. Some Northern Ireland context  The ‘Troubles’ and their consequences;  The democratic deficit  ‘Helicopter rule’  Nature of political settlement  Lack of political commitment to civil society  The divided nature of civil society  The dependence of the NI economy on public expenditure

6. Total central government funding of voluntary and community organizations in the UK per capita per nation 2001/02 Total funding (£) England24.52 Northern Ireland49.76 Scotland34.17 Wales33.56 Total UK34.45

7. Horizontal policy on voluntary and community organizations in NI  There is no ‘Third Sector’ as an object of policy in NI.  Long history of government intervention in the sphere of voluntary action  1993 Strategy for Support of the Voluntary Sector and for Community Development  First ‘horizontal’ policy in the UK  Influenced the conclusions of the Deakin Commission

8. Voluntary Action, New Labour and the NI Peace Process 1  The 1998 ‘Good Friday Agreement’  civic forum  Equality provisions in 1998 Northern Ireland Act  Northern Ireland ‘Compact’ endorsed by the newly elected Executive in 2001  2003, Partners for Change: A Government Strategy for the support of Voluntary and Community Organizations  - Joint Government Voluntary Sector Forum established

9. Voluntary Action, New Labour and the NI Peace Process 2  2003, Assembly suspended and a return to Direct Rule 2003 – 2007 application of New Labour policies  2005, Positive Steps: The Government’s Response to Investing Together: Report of the Task Force on Resourcing the Voluntary and Community Sector  Narrative of the voluntary sector’s role closely aligned to that in England (minus the debate about the compact), but  Modernization of government and cementing the peace conflated  A strong narrative commitment to the vital role of the sector in this context accompanied by lacklustre support from individual government departments

10. Time for the voluntary sector to “move over”  2007 Newly elected Assembly and Executive reinstated;  2008 (Dec) existing policy framework ends, New policy framework due.  Little ideological commitment to ‘New Labour’ assumptions among political parties in power;  Time for the voluntary sector to “move over”; goodbye compact?

11. The voluntary and community sector in NI: Key trends Income from European Union sources has dropped from £82m in 1996/97, £58m in 2003/04 to £11m in 2006/07 Sector is contracting: Income down by 7.2% between 2003/04 and 2006/07, but Government funding is up: now the largest single funder, spending £259.1m (45% of total income, up from 35% in 2003/04) Two thirds (67.3%) of organizations were dependent for half or more of their income from government sources and more than one in five (20%) for 75% or more; Half of all income was generated by 5% of organizations;

12. Organizations by industry: earned income and funding from government % Organization % earned income %Funding from Government Advice and information 8.918.048.5 Arts/cultural/ heritage 8.38.723.3 Community development 27.020.031.5 Disability 7.482.581.6 Education/trai ning 6.562.083.1 Health7.333.513.8 Older people4.77.274.4

13. A switch to earned income?  Trend data is unreliable and contradictory, but; Earned income accounted for 50.8% of all income, up from 23.5% in 2000/01; As a proportion of income from government, earned income increased from 7.7% in 2000/01 to 31.6% in 2003/04 and 64.3% in 2006/07.

14. Three key changes in funding environment  Collapse of funding from European Union with the ending of the second Peace Programme and the redirection of EU funds towards accession states  Increasing dependence on government funding  A significant switch to earned income from voluntary and grant income (among the organizations responding to questionnaire)

15. Where is this going?  the marriage of convenience is over;  Increase in hybridity among insiders – welcome to the shadow state;  A marginal life for outsiders (how will they make their voice heard?)