Agenda item

The Chairman reported receipt of the above mentioned motion from Councillors Jeff Osborn and Peter Edge, worded as follows:

“This Council views with concern the manner in which the policy on voluntary sector group funding has been implemented. In particular two well regarded voluntary furniture recycling groups, in different parts of the county, have been poorly treated – the Burnbake Trust and Group 5. They have had all their Wiltshire Council funding withdrawn, with little or no consultation.

The consequence is that these organisations are now at risk of closure, with a loss of local community resilience and serious reputational damage to this Council. Council need to reconsider; discuss the matter further with all those involved and seek to salvage something practical from this drastic situation”.

To assist Council in its consideration of the above motion, a briefing note had been circulated.

In speaking to his motion primarily in respect of Group 5, Councillor Jeff Osborn referred to the comments made by the Chair of Group 5 earlier in the meeting. He stated that he remained concerned that there had not been adequate correspondence with the affected groups. Furthermore, he stated that it was a small group fully run by volunteers, who did not charge for the furniture they provided and that they provided a very valuable service to the community. He considered that the reduction in their grant had tarnished the Group’s reputation. He asked that relevant Lead Members visit the organisation to discuss the situation.

Councillor Laura Mayes, the Cabinet Member for Children’s Services,  in her response focused on two key issues about consultation and what could be done to address the current situation. The Council had committed to making strategic savings for 2015/16 and that all Voluntary and Community Sector organisations had been advised by letter that the Council was looking to make cuts in this area of at least 10%. She apologised that Group 5 did not appear to have received its letter. The Council also wanted all voluntary organisations to be less reliant on the Council being their sole funders.

In relation to the Burnbake, the Council had provided initial set up and regular funding.  Burnbake had secured funds from  a number of sources including charitable trusts  and raised funds itself, leading them to build up significant reserves.

In relation to Group 5, Councillor Mayes explained that it received funding from Selwood Housing, Trowbridge Town Council , it did  not try to raise funds itself. She compared it to other similar organisations which made a small charge for their furniture as a way of generating some income and suggested it should try and undertake some fundraising measures. Furthermore, officers had offered to discuss these issues and would continue to offer assistance in Group 5 securing other sources of funding.

On being moved by the Chairman and seconded by the Chairman, it was

Resolved:

That Motion No. 19 be debated.

On opening the debate initially to Group Leaders, Councillor Jane Scott stated that some funding was available from the Council’s emergency fund which could be used to meet a small charge which could be levied by Group 5. A much wider discussion could be had with Group 5 as with other organisations to include providing opportunities for adults with learner difficulties and for trainees and apprentices.  

Councillor Jon Hubbard expressed his concern that there had not been adequate consultation with groups prior their funding being reduced or withdrawn, nor that they had been properly supported to find more sustainable funding before implementation of the cuts imposed by the Council to ensure they were sufficiently prepared.

Councillor Ernie Clark felt that it was unfortunate that misunderstandings had arisen especially where groups had had all their funding cut and expressed concern that the users of Group 5 services were often very needy and might not be able afford to pay any charges.

Councillor Ricky Rogers commended Burnbake for their work and stated that a number of its volunteers did so because it was also being supported by this Council. He agreed that withdrawal of Council funding could tarnish a group’s reputation.

Councillor Graham Payne provide some background on the history of Group 5 and its work. He stated that volunteers had benefitted from new skills leading to further employment after periods of unemployment. He made reference o the letter date 30 December to the Chairman of Group 5 which had not properly addressed. He expressed concern as to the inadequacy of the communication, and explained how misunderstandings had arisen as to the scale of the reduction in funding. Furthermore, he emphasised the importance of keeping local members informed of changes to funding in their communities.

Councillor Alan Hill expressed concern that some of the comments in

 the debate implied criticism of officers who had no right of reply in Council meetings. The Chairman, in response, drew the meeting’s attention to the wording of the motion and asked that subsequent speakers restrict their comments to terms of the debate.

Councillor Helen Osborn stated that Group 5 received £5,000 from Wiltshire Council which was used for rent, storage and some petrol. Furthermore, that as there were only 4-5 volunteers running the service they may not have the capacity for further fundraising.

Councillor Fleur De Rhe Phillipen stated, that in her experience of working with charities, that organisations needed to be flexible and take help where it could be found.

Councillor Bill Moss referred to the importance of maintaining reserves to mitigate against unpredictable financial circumstances.

Councillor John Thomson made reference to Wiltshire Council’s  voucher system which enabled people to get furniture, and that this scheme was linked to voluntary sector who could benefit from this. Furthermore he encouraged the group to discuss their future with the Council.

Councillor Gordon King, reminded councillors that some support was rigorously means-tested, and implored that this be revisited.

Councillor Richard Clewer challenged the view that the removal of Wiltshire Council funding would do damage to an organisations reputation.

Councillor Laura Mayes stated, in response to some of the concerns raised, that the Council had offered to meet groups, via telephone and email, and had given them a named officer to help them find further source of funding. Councillor Jeff Osborn emphasised the importance of face to face contact.

Councillor Peter Edge, in relation to the Burnbake group questioned the amount of reserves quoted earlier in the meeting, it had £75,000 of restricted reserves and an amount in cash. He gave some background on the group and how it was set up to work with people needing work experience and the valuable service it provided. He encouraged the lead member to continue to have a dialogue with Burnbake.

Councillor Laura Mayes confirmed that she was happy to discuss options on securing alternative funding with both groups as well as any other groups in a similar situation. Councillor Laura Mayes suggested the deletion of the following section from the motion given the Council had been proactive in trying to discuss the situation with both groups: ‘and seek to salvage something practical from this drastic situation’.

Councillor Simon Killane supported the motion and the engagement by the lead cabinet member. He also suggested the scrutiny process as an avenue to explore the processes involved in this situation.

Councillor Mayes emphasised that the Council had on several occasions offered to meet with Group 5. In accepting the motion, she considered there had to be commitment from Group 5 to meet with the Council.

On being put to the vote, it was

Resolved

1.       This Council views with concern the manner in which the policy on voluntary sector group funding has been implemented. In particular two well regarded voluntary furniture recycling groups, in different parts of the county, have been poorly treated – the Burnbake Trust and Group 5. They have had all their Wiltshire Council funding withdrawn, with little or no consultation.

2.       The consequence is that these organisations are now at risk of closure, with a loss of local community resilience and serious reputational damage to this Council. Council need to reconsider; discuss the matter further with all those involved.

The meeting then adjourned for lunch at 13.00

The meeting reconvened at 13.45