Shetland Trust defies OSCR on governance reform

Governance | Gareth Jones | 16 Feb 2010

The Shetland Charitable Trust is on a collision course with the Scottish regulator after its trustees refused to ratify changes to the composition of its board.

A working group of trustees has spent the last year coming up with the proposals, which would see the board slimmed to 15 members, after OSCR told the charity it had to reduce its links to the Shetland Island Council.

But following debate at an open board meeting last week, council convener Sandy Cluness moved to delay a decision until after the next local government election, saying: "I am not against change. But the review and the consultation you had have not demonstrated to me that the people of Shetland want this.

"The option is not that there will never be change, but the appropriate time would be after 2012."

Defeated, the Trust’s chair Bill Manson reportedly said: "What you are saying is that the working group worked for a year and got it wrong, or not right enough."

Executive in favour of change

The meeting had begun with a presentation from the Trust’s general manager Ann Black (pictured), who called for the trustees to accept the proposals as they were likely to satisfy OSCR.

These would see the new board reduced to 15 members, comprising eight councillors and seven non-councillors, whereas at present all 21 of the Island's councillors are automatically given a place on the Trust’s board.

The Trust manages investments worth £143.0m and in the year ending March 2009 recorded an income of £18.1m.

Speaking to Civil Society, the Trust’s principal accountant Mary Anderson said OSCR was unlikely to accept changes being postponed.

“I think the next stage is we’re thinking about inviting OSCR to come and meet the trustees, and we’ll have to try to persuade the trustees that at least having a plan for change by 2012 is likely to be mandatory.”

A spokesman for OSCR said the body was in dialogue with the Trust but was not prepared to comment publicly on the situation.

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.