“Co-creation” and “a home at the heart of government”: the new Civil Society Covenant

On 17 July 2025, the Government published the Civil Society Covenant – and it holds real promise; promise which needs to be backed by bold, sustained action, and we all must play our part.

The Covenant has its roots in the Compact, an initiative of the Blair Labour Government which was signed in 1998, as a partnership between the Government and the voluntary and community sector. It outlined how the Government saw the role of charities and the voluntary sector as an extension of the state and public services, even if it wasn’t exactly the role that many wished for.

This is more than a reboot, it’s a genuinely new iteration touching every single one of the sectors with which we work, from charity, social enterprise, and faith to public and regulatory, education and private client. The Covenant states that: “Britain’s civil society, including volunteers, charities, faith organisations, co-operatives, trade unions, philanthropists, social enterprises, social investors and purpose-driven businesses, are part of the fabric of our nation.”

Could this be the moment that civil society is recognised as the essential partner it is? Charities, faith organisations, social enterprises, and impact investors – the long-undervalued engines of social value and good – are at last being invited in as equal players in public service transformation. The Covenant aims to reset a historically transactional and often strained relationship between Westminster, local governments, and civil society, in England but also in our neighbouring nations of Wales and Scotland. The language signals intent, using phrases like “equal footing,” “shared delivery,” and “a home at the heart of government”, but the proof will be in the delivery.

Too often, it seems the charitable and social enterprise sector has been treated like a transactional service contractor – often excluded from shaping outcomes, with short-term contracts which threaten their long time viability, and having to work around systems that don’t work for people. It is good to see this Covenant – and the parallel Cabinet Office consultation on the Procurement Act 2023 – hopefully point towards a new commissioning model that values people, not just processes.

The tone from the Government has shifted too. It’s moving from outsourcing to “co-creation”, which will be music to many people’s ears. Alliance contracting, prioritising outcomes, and valuing the unique social capital of charities and social enterprises is the way forward. 

In relation to campaigning and political activity, it is disappointing that there is no commitment to repeal the ‘Lobbying Act’ or chilling anti-protest laws. However, it is helpful that the Government recognises “the independence and legitimacy of civil society organisations to advocate and campaign”, and that so called ‘gagging’ clauses may be challengeable on the basis that advocating against government policies is not a reason for being excluded from “policy discussions or funding opportunities”.

Given the multiple challenges facing civil society, including misinformation, the rise of populism, so-called ‘culture wars’, and curtailments around freedom of speech, it is even more important that debate is not stifled or criticism prevented. There was cynicism in some parts of the sector about the previous Compact and any reboot, but it is better than not having the principles of independence enshrined in a new Covenant. 

As we have said above, we must all now play our part; civil society should, in our view, rally round a call for the Covenant to have clear legal effect by way of being elevated to statutory guidance.

With regard to faith organisations, this Covenant quite rightly notes the important role they play in their communities, and the fact that all elements of civil society need to work with government to meet the needs of society as a whole. It comes at a time when there is a significant increase in public policy highlighting the central role faith organisations have in delivering essential services, and that often they have the only buildings in their communities that can be used for these services.

As to the legal effect of the Covenant, it is widely understood, as with its pre-cursor Compact, to be non-binding – it is more in the nature of a Memorandum of Understanding than a legally enforceable set of commitments. However, in public law, it is often the case that non-statutory frameworks or policy commitments are taken into account and, on occasion, actually relied upon.

Civil Society will want to consider whether there could be any High Court judicial review claims based on an argument of legitimate expectation – that is, can the values, behaviours and principles be taken, in any particular set of circumstances, as clear representations by government that can be relied upon in a court of law. Challenges could also arise in terms of a rationality challenge. Most likely, this will bite on procedural matters. So, this may have a legal impact in terms of how civil society engages with government. Procedural points, like a right to be consulted, are more likely to sound in law, rather than actual outcomes, but we cannot rule out it having a greater legal impact with a fair wind and the right judge. For instance, the Covenant states: “[It] should not cut across existing administrative or statutory frameworks where they meet a higher or equivalent standard, but the Covenant should be used to raise standards where this is not the case” – and this is emphasised in particular at the local level. It also stresses, in a number of places, the independence of civil society organisations from government. Civil society should consider invoking the Covenant and try to rely upon it beyond just its persuasive effect when seeking to oppose funding cuts, grant conditions, clawbacks, restrictions on freedom of speech and campaigning, restrictions on appointments of staff and so on.

To conclude, we have been here before, and many in the sector will be sceptical. Promises of “partnership” have come and gone; trust, once broken, takes time to rebuild, and progress moves at the speed of trust. But this Covenant seems to feel different. The establishment of a Joint Civil Society Covenant Council, with leaders from both government and civil society, could be the accountability mechanism we’ve long needed, with structural change happening as our civil leaders sit at the same tables as government leaders.

With public services under strain, communities fractured, and economic divides deepening, the call for a mission-led, community-powered state couldn’t come at a more urgent time. However, we reiterate that a proper implementation framework is needed to ensure this comes to fruition.

We can all work together to turn this Covenant from words into action, paper into purpose.  At Stone King, we stand ready to help all stakeholders across all our work –  public, charity, education, social enterprise, faith, philanthropy and responsible business – and co-create the future our communities deserve.

You can view the Civil Society Covenant here: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/civil-society-covenant/civil-society-covenant