Don't cut money from voluntary bodies, PM tells local authorities 4

Finance | Niki May Young | 16 Sep 2010

Prime Minister David Cameron told local authorities yesterday not to “do the easy thing” by cutting budgets for voluntary bodies in their communities.

Cameron told his audience at Prime Minister’s questions that instead councils should look at core costs and “how you can do more for less”.

His comments came in response to Labour MP for Bolton West Julie Hilling who advised that Bolton Community and Voluntary Services had already lost £89,000 of grants this year for small voluntary groups. She asked what the Prime Minister would do to save these groups, if he believed in the Big Society.

Cameron responded that while the government had to make spending cuts, "... we should say to every single council in the country, ‘When it comes to looking at and trimming your budgets, don’t do the easy thing, which is to cut money to the voluntary bodies and organisations working in our communities. Look at your core costs. Look at how you can do more for less. Look at the value for money you get from working with the voluntary sector.’ The honourable lady should take that message to her local authority. That is the message that I would take to her local authority, and everyone should try to work in that direction.”

The Charities Aid Foundation, however, have called for Cameron's actions to speak as loud as his words, asking that the government "insist that spending decisions of individual departments consider as a priority the need to strengthen civil society and take account of the long-term impact the work of the voluntary sector has on local people and communities," said CAF head of policy Hannah Terry.

"Despite pressure to slice budgets now, local authorities need to be brave enough to look at radical and innovative ways of engaging with the sector in order to achieve better outcomes, together with long-term savings to the public purse. Short-term cuts to the sector will be a false economy for society as a whole," she added.

Directory: Charities Aid Foundation

Place a comment

Tony Farrow
Chairman
Sleaford Voluntary Car Scheme
6 Jan 2011

I have run this Scheme for now over 5 years, we have never cost any of our councils any monies, never asked for anything yet when our computer blows up, I ask for £200.
What does the scheme get as an answer Sorry No due to cut backs ! Then why does the PM come out with the above statement of not hurting voluntary schemes or people.
If nationally, All Voluntary schemes packed up for the day, this country would stop.

I am Afraid that the Voluntary Sector is only thought of by people as that individuals do such a great job, you never ever really seem to get noticed as a general scheme etc

Look how many people were awarded in the Queens awards this year.How many Voluntary Schemes ?

Sorry I now think is it worth it, does the Councils really care ? ( NOT EVEN £200 IN 5 YEARS )

We never get called or written too to say thanks

But I know people that use us really appreciate us thats all that matters or is it ?

thanks

Happy New Year

[Reply]

Vincent Rogers
18 Sep 2010

Cutting funding to the community and voluntary (third) sector, unfortunately, still seems something of an easier option taken by too many statutory bodies. The main reasons for this, I believe, is two-fold: (1) The lack of creative and innovative thinking by too many public servants; and (2) the perceived incompetence of the Equality and Human Rights Commission.

Firstly, why cannot the whole of the public sector - at least within local geographic boundaries - look at the feasibility of unifying their so-called back office functions. Why, for example, can't a single human resources or finance or information technology function provide support to the local authority, health family and emergency services? The economies of scale could, possibly, be quite substantial and monies saved here may mean that cuts to the third sector are less severe.

Secondly, as far as I'm aware, the Equality and Human Rights Commission was partly set up to ensure that listed statutory bodies carried out full equality impact assessments to ensure that people with so-called protected characteristics, e.g. the more vulnerable and isolated members of society based on the grounds of 'race', sex, disability, etc., were not subject to detriments/unfair treatment. This, it seems to me, has failed to happen and, as a result, actual outcomes of public sector decisions - i.e. removal and/or redeuction of funding to the third sector, continue to discriminate against certain individuals and groups of people - often well served or only served by the third sector - and this should not happen!

[Reply]

Peter Horah
Vice Chair of CAYSH
CAYSH
16 Sep 2010

Well - it's no good stating the obvious once the impact has been experienced. In Croydon, over 25 charities have had their funding withdrawn and now risk closure.

The charity of which I am a voluntary trustee has been forced to make huge cuts which has resulted in making our most senior person redudant so that we can maintain front line services.

It has taken many years to put together a complex jig-saw puzzle that has required charities to continually change and deliver the services that Governments have been deligating.

Mr Cameron: it is too late! You simply don't understand how things work and this displays a hopeless attempt at tackling the deficit whilst damaging the very organisations that you expect to deliver social care.

Once this jig-saw is damaged; it will take years to put it back together again.

[Reply]

Ed Tait
16 Sep 2010

Don't cut Local Authority budgets then, I tell Government.

[Reply]

Comments

[Cancel] | Reply to:

Name *

Email *

Organisation

Job Title

Comments *

Verification *

* Please read our Community Standards

Close »

Community Standards

The civilsociety.co.uk community and comments board is intended as a platform for informed and civilised debate.

We hope to encourage a broad range of views, however, there are standards that we expect commentators to uphold. We reserve the right to delete or amend any comments that do not adhere to these standards.

We welcome:

Robust but respectful debate
Strongly held opinions
Intelligent relevant discussion
The sharing of relevant experiences
New participants

We will not publish:

Rude, threatening, offensive, obscene or abusive language, or links to such material
Links to commercial organisations or spam postings. The comments board is not an advertising platform
The posting of contact details for yourself or others
Comments intended for malicious purpose or mindless abuse
Comments purporting to be from another person or organisation under false pretences
Gratuitous criticism, commentary or self-promotion
Any material which breaches copyright or privacy laws, or could be considered libellous
The use of the comments board for the pursuit or extension of personal disputes

Be aware:

Views expressed on the comments board are left at users’ discretion and are in no way views held or supported by Civil Society Media
Comments left by others may not be accurate, do not rely on them as fact
You may be misunderstood - sarcasm and humour can easily be taken out of context, try to be clear

Please:

Enjoy the opportunity to express your opinion and respect the right of others to express theirs
Confine your remarks to issues rather than personalities

Together we can keep our community a polite, respectful and intelligent platform for discussion.