Comments on: The way forward for Communities First

By: martyn

martyn — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 19:58:36 +0000

Hello Bethan.
We met last week when I came to visit Steffan. I attend a local CF partnership. My impression is that it can work well but it dpends on the personalities involved. If the local authority attendees take the mantle then they drive matters, if strong local community members take it seriously (as in our case) the the partnership becomes a vehicle for inprovements in the area. My group is very active and does not allow CF, Gavo etc personnel to just do their own thing. We drive priorities, monitor progress, make decisions and take the lead. As a result the partnership is well attended and popular. If you would be interested in attending one of our meetings then you would be most welcome.

By: rhodri

rhodri — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:54:33 +0000

An estate receiving 500k a year should see some serious improvements in the lifetime of CF. That is not the case in my area. Instead that money is squandered on wages and badly thought out projects. The community is not put first because the usual suspects who corner all the local grants are in there first. They’re limited companies so not accountable to the community, the assembly or the charities commission. They produce endless glossy reports that nobody reads to say what a great job theyre doing but when it all comes to an end what will be left? A Food Coop distributing fruit and veg to a few dozen people and that’s about it. It’s been a shocking waste of money and the minister responsible should be ashamed of himself.
I also think youre right Bethan to say that it’s been dominated by Labour cliques. In my area that’s certainly the case. Does anyone have an overview of the general situation – is it true of every project? It would be good if Bethan and other AMs would focus on this v important project before any more money is wasted.

By: David

David — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 09:36:13 +0000

While the idea of CF is great for giving local communities a sense of direction, the way it is managed is not helpful in empowering the very people it was designed to encourage in the first place.

I agree with Angela that we need to let the people themselves decide what should be done and for them to take responsibility for the various projects.

There can be no better drag anchor on freedom and empowerment than for CF staff to be “directing” and “doing things for” people in local communities.

A culture of social entrepreneurship and risk taking is urgently needed as this will be the only way that Wales can truly transform its areas of low economic activity and deprivation.

And the best people to carry that out are the very people whom CF had identified as target groups. But how can we expect our communities to aspire to make the big necessary changes if the “organisers” don’t empower and allow individuals to follow their own ambitions and goals?

By: Arfon Jones

Arfon Jones — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 06:49:59 +0000

There is a WAG office in Merthyr that supposedly monitors CF. The two CF Partnerships I am aware of are both based in the community with little or no linkages to the local authorities, they don’t thrive, they fail. It would be interesting to get a list of all CF employees and we would probably see a lot of connections to the Labour Party and of course nepotism.

By: Siôn Jones

Siôn Jones — Sun, 19 Jul 2009 15:20:51 +0000

Bethan – I have some experience of C/F, having volunteered as a memberabout 18 months ago.

I have never been involved with such a chaotic organisation. When I became a member, there was no induction pac – Mission statement, Temrs of reference, articles of association, member’s responsibilites, list of officers and staff members and all the ther things you would mormally expect.

I took on certain responsibilities, but found that I was unable to proceed because contact key members of staff. E-mails and phone messages not being responded to. I was only asking for permission to proceed before spending ( a very small amount) of the C/F money.

I also found tha t what were called ‘Board meetings (temporary)’, whatever that means, were attended by all the members of staff. Very democratic, but not a board meeting! And the meetings were scheduled to be convenient to the Staff rather than the board meembers, which meant that I was often unable to attend.

I also found that the staff were being paid directly by the Council, and therefore subject to the careerist concerns of civil servants rather than the independent enterprising ethos that underlined the original concept. What a shame! I don’t seek to denigrate anyone here, but if C/F is to succeed, its structural and administrative foundations need radical re-thinking.

By: tina ludlow

tina ludlow — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 19:56:16 +0000

The trouble with C/F is if its lead by the authority it is not working. if lead by communitys it thrives. i have on a number of issues spoken to WAG, and local authority only to be told by Wag its not our responsability to monitor C/F, so please tell me who monitors its progress or lack of it.

By: angela el

angela el — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 13:14:54 +0000

may be the committee should revisit why CF was set up
It followed a pilot scheme People in Communities, that actually worked.The recommendations from the evaluation of PIC were discarded as the then Minister wanted quick wins
The way it is set up CF will never deliver to communities as a value for money scheme.
Get rid of the partnerships
Base the initiative in the community, not in town halls
Trust the community to know what’s needed
Put in an overarching admin that gives equality of and quality
Get rid of the support network and let community buy in what and who it wants
That’s the way to empower and include and all the other buzz words
But bottom line it will produce more outcome than what u have now , mind that wouldn’t be hard.

By: Arfon Jones

Arfon Jones — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:44:11 +0000

I’m sure that if the £214 million had been shared between the 22 Local Authorities we would have seen some measurable outcomes and improvements by now. Empowerment and betterment is fine but can we really afford to do this in a public spending squeeze? Local authorities will struggle to maintain statutory services not to mention discretionary.

By: Bethan

Bethan — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 12:03:43 +0000

I don’t know if I say they are not working well, but that there are many questions that need to be asked about its direction, what it wants to deliver, and how. Its a very ambitious programme, and I think we need to be realistic in what it can achieve in Wales.

By: Arfon Jones

Arfon Jones — Sat, 18 Jul 2009 11:55:57 +0000

Nice of you to accept that C/F are not working well and that WAG have been poor in measuring their performance and outcomes. I have written several times to WAG and the only response you get is that they are meeting their aims and objectives…I can’t see it myself…child poverty levels are not improving and neither are child protection and the looked after population. All the data shows deterioration. Frankly WAG have wasted £214 million on C/F since 2001 creating jobs for those with local political connections.