The assumption you make is that by their very nature, third/voluntary sector organisations promote participation and whilst many of them do there is no actual requirement for them to do so, and no penalty if they don’t. And that I think is the crux of Simon’s point: that we can do great things to engage local communites but we are not mandated to do so.
I sometimes think that there is a bit of an emperor’s new clothes mentality about the third sector… no-one wants to admit that our sector is not all sweetness and perfection. Adam @ IntelligentGiving repeatedly makes the point that we allow the assumption that “charity” = “good organisation” and yet there are plenty of charities who are far from reputable.
Want some proof? Look how many charities don’t file their annual accounts with the Charity Commission. It’s the only thing that a charity is legally required to do each year, and countless charities don’t seem to have the ability to do it. And not just small charities. Now compare that with the furore over MPs trying to hide their expenses. It seems that whilst national and local politicians have to account for every penny they spend, charities can use other people’s money (often tax exempt) without bothering to file even the most basic of records.
Simon’s argument is that charities must not replace local civic representation because there is little accountability within the charity sector. Trustee boards are generally the “great and the good” and even when there is an active campaign to bring a wider set of people into the goverance of a charity it still relies on individuals who are selected and have no statutory accountability to anyone else.
Our next meeting is about civil society, and I think Simon Jenkins made an excellent point in his Hinton Lecture back in November (sorry I’ve only just around to reading it).
Namely that whilst we all may think a more active voluntary/third sector is a good thing, it undermines local democracy and takes power accountabilty.
Watching the second video made at the previous 20:20 event, one thing that struck me was how much it looked like The Apprentice. Fifteen people in suits sat around a gray-walled boardroom with our Sir Alan figure (Rod Aldridge) giving advice whilst cutaway interviews with the “contestents” revealed their passion and insights for the sector… I was half expecting someone to say that they will always give 110%.
Please tell me the future of the Third Sector isn’t going to be like that…
Olly
The assumption you make is that by their very nature, third/voluntary sector organisations promote participation and whilst many of them do there is no actual requirement for them to do so, and no penalty if they don’t. And that I think is the crux of Simon’s point: that we can do great things to engage local communites but we are not mandated to do so.
I sometimes think that there is a bit of an emperor’s new clothes mentality about the third sector… no-one wants to admit that our sector is not all sweetness and perfection. Adam @ IntelligentGiving repeatedly makes the point that we allow the assumption that “charity” = “good organisation” and yet there are plenty of charities who are far from reputable.
Want some proof? Look how many charities don’t file their annual accounts with the Charity Commission. It’s the only thing that a charity is legally required to do each year, and countless charities don’t seem to have the ability to do it. And not just small charities. Now compare that with the furore over MPs trying to hide their expenses. It seems that whilst national and local politicians have to account for every penny they spend, charities can use other people’s money (often tax exempt) without bothering to file even the most basic of records.
Simon’s argument is that charities must not replace local civic representation because there is little accountability within the charity sector. Trustee boards are generally the “great and the good” and even when there is an active campaign to bring a wider set of people into the goverance of a charity it still relies on individuals who are selected and have no statutory accountability to anyone else.
Olly
Our next meeting is about civil society, and I think Simon Jenkins made an excellent point in his Hinton Lecture back in November (sorry I’ve only just around to reading it).
Namely that whilst we all may think a more active voluntary/third sector is a good thing, it undermines local democracy and takes power accountabilty.
How can we address that issue?
Olly
Watching the second video made at the previous 20:20 event, one thing that struck me was how much it looked like The Apprentice. Fifteen people in suits sat around a gray-walled boardroom with our Sir Alan figure (Rod Aldridge) giving advice whilst cutaway interviews with the “contestents” revealed their passion and insights for the sector… I was half expecting someone to say that they will always give 110%.
Please tell me the future of the Third Sector isn’t going to be like that…