News

More than a trace of disillusionment was detectable in the speech chief executive Stuart Etherington gave at the National Council for Voluntary Organisations' annual conference a fortnight ago.

He feared in particular a scenario where charities involved in public service delivery were being relied upon to "pick up the pieces" of public sector failure.

"Although we have made substantial gains by focusing so much as a sector in the past 10 years on our relationship with government, we have lost focus on the other things we do," Etherington told delegates.

For an organisation that has consistently supported the government's drive to increase the sector's involvement in public services - although always with the proviso that organisations should have the freedom to opt out - Etherington's words hinted at a weariness with the government's agenda.

At the same conference a year ago, he dismissed worries over the sector surrendering its independence to deliver public services as a "tired old story" that needed to be "put to bed".

Whitehall would do well to sit up and take notice of the NCVO's apparent change of heart if it wants to avoid alienating one of its few allies in the sector.

Many organisations, including the Social Directory for Change, have stuck firmly to the belief that voluntary organisations would risk their cherished independence if they became more involved in public service delivery.

The NCVO, by contrast, has consistently promoted the message that those who want to deliver public services should be allowed to do so, without losing independence, and those who do not should not suffer.

If the NCVO's stance seems to be wavering, it is unsurprising given the mounting evidence of the government trying to prescribe the sector's purpose and direct its activities to complement its own policies.

Heavy criticism has been levelled, for example, at the Big Lottery Fund - the result of the merger of the Community and New Opportunities Funds.

Concerns that organisations whose aims did not tie in with government policies would lose out financially grew after the operator's funding streams were announced before the supposed consultation on them had even ended. The open grants programme that had existed under the Community Fund, which allowed people to apply for large sums of money for a wider range of causes, no longer exists.


Even where the government is supposed to be supporting the sector to deliver public services, there have been unexplained and unacceptable delays in the releasing of funds.

Etherington has been forced to write to the Home Office asking why the £80m allocated to implement the ChangeUp programme, to be spent on areas such as governance and IT, has yet to materialise.

The landmark decision last week by the Charity Commission allowing charities to deliver a whole public service rather than a supplementary one will make it easier for the voluntary sector to become involved in the public service delivery agenda.

But, as Campbell Robb, director of public policy at NCVO, points out: "It should not be seen as giving carte blanche to councils to transfer responsibility for public services to charities. It will be important that any such newly created organisations, as with any charity, can satisfy two critical tests: that their governance structures and mission are truly independent of the founding authority and that their purposes are charitable and provide a genuine public benefit for the community."

Research carried out by the NCVO last year showed that it was large organisations that were benefiting from cash coming into the sector via public services, while medium and small ones had seen their income fall.

Despite government rhetoric that voluntary groups have a choice about becoming involved in public services, there are worrying signs that the number of genuine options available is diminishing.

In the past four years, policy changes in the voluntary sector have been formed with public service delivery in mind and the millions of pounds that have flooded into the sector have been for those that want to play ball. The question is, where does that leave those that do not?