In June 2008 the Conservative party announced that it intended to make the third sector a priority and encourage it as a force for social progress (‘A Stronger Society: Voluntary Action in the 21st Century’). Whilst I was pleased to hear this announcement, I believe that the details of the proposal could change with consultation and it will be interesting to see what the final document says.
One proposal that I particularly agree with, is to protect the Lottery funds from the Government. Setting up the Voluntary Action Lottery Fund to be “dedicated” is very positive. This is certainly topical as London tax payers are currently at risk of paying for the 2012 Olympic Games when the lottery funds have been exhausted elsewhere.
However, when governments have tried to simplify the regulation of the third sector in the past, they have often ended up making the rules unnecessarily complicated. For example, the proposal to simplify the regulation of gift aid is welcomed, but consideration must be given as to whether the current impracticalities require a complete rewrite of the rules or just minor changes.
One area that is undoubtedly in need of radical simplification is the carrying out of Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks. Whilst it is necessary for these checks to be an integral part of the third sector, too many legal processes can cause serious delays and a loss of efficiency. Streamlining the administration of these checks, as proposed, will undoubtedly lead to improved efficiency, but this must not come at the price of yet more bureaucracy.
Another proposal I agree with is for Lottery giving to be changed from grant giving to contract giving. This would mean that sponsors actually have to deliver on their financial promises to the third sector, whereas promises to the Lottery under the current regime are less likely to materialise.
Regrettably, but perhaps not surprisingly, there are a few ideas amongst the proposals that I consider to be gimmicks or at least not fully considered. One example is the proposal to allocate government employees eight hours a year for voluntary work, in the hope that this will encourage volunteering to become the social norm. In fact, I consider that because a major concern for charities is how to fill in the skills gap providing them with a volunteer for eight hours a year with no reference to their skills set is unlikely to offer any notable benefit. Instead of satisfying a predetermined quota, the focus should rather be on filling the skills gap.
The creation of an Office of Civil Society is another proposal that has been warmly received; however the proposal needs to be reconsidered alongside the Social Investment Bank and the Charity Bank as well, particularly as their roles could look very different in light of the current credit crunch.
Whilst the Green Paper appears to offer a very good package, I believe a real assessment is only possible after the proposals have received consultation.
For further information, please contact Reza Motazedi, Head of Vantis' Charity & Not for Profit Group. Or please complete the online enquiry form below.