Case study: PACE

Under threat from London Councils' cuts!

It should not be assumed that LGBT people can just access local mainstream service provision. LGBT people commonly report negative experiences relating to their identity in mainstream provision. Homophobic bullying in schools is a key example. 23% of users who had accessed mainstream services for help when feeling suicidal reported a negative experience relating to their LGB or T identities. Ignorance, assumption and overt anti LGBT sentiment have been cited as reasons for negative responses.

A review of PACE user data across all services for last year reveals a very broad spread of boroughs. In the year, only one borough had not had any users at PACE. No one borough represented more than 12% of total users (and this was an isolated case, the next highest borough being 8.5%). 19 boroughs contributed 2% or more of total service users at PACE and 14 boroughs represented between 0.5% and 2%. It is suggested that LGBT services are often genuinely pan London because of this fact. This is supported by the fact that there is very little duplication of LGBT service provision in London.

It is unfeasible and inefficient to replicate each of the individual LGBT specific services on a borough-by-borough basis. Withdrawal of pan-London funding will have a disproportionate impact on LGBT service provision because there is no other specialist provision of service in these areas (as demonstrated by the above examples). In effect this will amount to a withdrawal of service to this part of society, which at current estimates is not an insignificant number of people. 

Say No! to cuts by writing to your council leader, grants committee and your MP.  Click here to get their details and template letters.