Rising Curve Blog

Charitable donations, from individuals, businesses and other organizations, play an important part in our society. They are also a significant sector of the economy - the Charity Commission estimates that nationally the 190,000 charities registered with them have an annual income of £32 billion, employing almost 600,000 staff.

Many people (maybe more than realize it) make use of charities and they are among the most trusted of organizations. Despite this the Charities Aid Foundation estimated that in 2006/7 the proportion of people donating to charity fell by 3% from the previous year, to 54% of the population.  The amount donated also fell by 3%, to £9.5bn.  These figures are not yet very bad news, but worrying none the less.

At the same time the part played by charities is supposed to be increasing.  The government wants to see more variety in the providers of our public services, especially health and social care, and the charitable (or third) sector features significantly in these plans.  Social enterprises, developed by charities, also have a growing part to play.  And as there seems to be political agreement around these policy developments this approach is likely to remain part of the agenda for some time to come.

If this is the national picture, what part is the Midlands playing? The region has a history of community, charity and corporate philanthropic activity and this seems to continue today in to some extent, although we do not have very much directly relevant information. How strong is the culture of charitable donating in the Midlands?  How much of the money from the Midlands goes to Midlands charities? How can we be sure we are making the maximum benefit from donations?  What has to be done to increase the amount that is donated?

Much of our connection with charities is based on faith rather than rational analysis – we have a general belief in charities as a good thing and we often have particular attachment to certain charities based on sentiment. If we want to make better choices we need better information on how much is already donated, from which sectors of society, and where it goes. Donors also need to be able to find out more about where and how they might give money to have maximum benefit for the Midlands, if that is what they want to achieve.

At national level New Philanthropy Capital provides independent analysis of the charitable sector around social themes.  Established by wealthy benefactors who found they had no way of finding where best to direct their donations, their reports are now essential for informing better giving by these benefactors.  They have influenced decisions about donating many millions of pounds and have helped increase donations in a number of sectors. We would like to see the development of a similar analysis of Midlands charities and donation, allowing better targeting of existing contributions and, hopefully, increased levels of giving.

We already have national debates comparing levels of donating in Britain to those of the USA and whether or not people who work in the City of London, for example, ought to donate more to charity.  In the Midlands we need our own debate on these maters and better data to support the discussion.  
We welcome your views on these issues – you can comment below - and are keen to work with others on ways to address them.  Please get in touch.

Posted by gricher at 03:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

The announcement that the Black Country Urban Park (UP) bid to the lottery was not successful in the People’s 50 Million Pound phone vote was a major disappointment (see here).  

We wish the winner, Sustrans, well with their project and hope that in 5 or 10 years time we all have something we can point to and be proud of and of its impact on neighbourhoods and people’s lives.   We should remember that the West Midlands has done well from the lottery in the past, such as last year’s announcement of £6.7m for projects in the region to promote wellbeing ().  

There are, though, a number of lessons for the lottery and the Midlands after this competition. This was a major programme, in terms of the money at stake and the effort involved.  Thirty-three entries were received for the first round call, being cut to a long list of thirteen, before the final four were announced for the national vote.  This was a considerable effort for the Lottery and the bidding organisations.  Yet the programme does not seem to have set the nation’s pulse racing.  Only 286,285 votes were cast, with a Sustrans proposal winning with 41.69% of the vote – only 119,348 votes!  Allowing for the fact that many of those could have been multiple votes by individuals (separate phone and internet votes could be cast) we may be talking about a vote for £50m being won on the basis of as few as 60,000 people.

Maybe it was the ambitious but slightly vague aim of the Lottery programme to find ‘a groundbreaking project that would inspire communities to revitalise the areas where they live’ that failed to stir more people to vote. Or maybe there was confusion over pitching a national project against three regional ones in the final competition. Possibly expecting significant engagement in communities that the project was looking to inspire was too much to expect. If such a vote is done again, perhaps we ought to give the money to the area with fewest votes, as this may be the one where the people are most in need it to make them inspired.  The lottery needs to think seriously about whether or not to use this approach again to decide a national competition.

This was a very good bid for the Black Country and we should not lose sight of its aim to change the image and expectations linked to the area.  Yes, there were industrial heritage and tourism goals, and immediate environmental improvements to be gained, but this was potentially just the start of the benefits.

Many good people come out of the Black Country, and sadly too many of them stay that way – out of the Black Country.  This was a chance to raise the aspirations of the people in the area – much needed, it would appear, on the basis of the vote.  It was also a chance to improve the image of the area and make it a better place to live, encouraging more people to stay in, and move to the area.  If the aspirations of the area are to be raised as an aim of regional regeneration strategies this is an essential requirement.

So where next?  We support the idea of continuing to develop the separate projects within the bid.  The proposal for a 12-mile green corridor between Walsall and West Bromwich, for example, is environmentally important and local and regional regeneration money should be found for it.

The goal of developing the limestone caverns and Wrens Nest should also be pursued – with regional and national backing.  Sometimes we in the region do not realise the national and international significance of these sites.  It would be a disgrace not to develop them to their full capacity; as it stands they are just left to rot.  Once the caverns collapse, they will be lost.  There should be a national campaign to save and enhance these sites.

We would also like to encourage the local private sector to back these developments.  Many businesses could benefit from enhanced tourist opportunities from the caverns and Wrens Nest.  If the aspirational aspects of the proposals are developed too all local employers could potentially benefit by making the area a better place to live and work, helping to attract and retain the best employees.

The area has need of a grand vision but despite having a population of around a million people it could not muster 100,000 to vote for their own benefit.  For us this highlights the importance of pursuing the development of this vision and working much harder to ensure that those people support it to the hilt.

Posted by gricher at 03:14 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

We note the recent media coverage of a Confederation of West Midlands Chambers of Commerce report arguing that something needs to be done to address traffic congestion in the West Midlands (BBC Midlands Today 3/12/07; Birmingham Post 3/12/07; Express and Star 3/12/2007)

The report was based on a survey of businesses in the West Midlands, many of whom said that congestion was adversely affecting their trade, either by increasing operating costs or by losing them business.  While the businesses are reported to be in favour of improved public transport and a better integrated transport system (the Confederation calls for government investment in a ‘30-year national integrated transport strategy’), the tone of their message is largely one of their desire to see new and improved roads in the near future, such as widening the M6.  Also, more than 60 per cent in the survey do not see the present public transport system as a viable alternative to roads.  It might be possible to argue about the way the survey was carried out, but it is still important to listen to the messages the report contains.

Meanwhile, Friends of the Earth were reported to be in favour of better public transport but against calls for more road building, on the grounds of impact on the environment.

Both the business and the environmental lobbies have perspectives that resonate with our everyday experiences and concerns.  We witness congestion on our roads and public transport, and experience the frustrations.  We worry about the economic future of the West Midlands, about our own employment and the need to support the development of business in the region. Yet we are all becoming more aware of the impact of economic development on the environment and the impact of man made emissions on global warming.

It is good that some common ground is possible between these issues and the organisations articulating them – namely the need for better public transport.  Yet this is a long term strategic goal and it is likely that business wants better roads sooner than this.

So what is to be done?  We need to move beyond the economic/environmental standoff and find answers addressing both concerns.  The longer term development of roads in an integrated transport network will address environmental matters, if managed properly and with good will on all sides. Businesses have to show a greater willingness to switch to public transport where possible, while environmental pressure groups need to recognize the realities that both businesses and individuals face when dealing with transport problems.  Currently West Midlands’ business relies more heavily on the road network than the national average.

In the shorter term we support more road building to address the immediate concerns of businesses and other road users, but within an auditable framework of commitments from business to reduce their carbon footprint over the short and medium term.  A regionally agreed futures carbon trading mechanism between business and regional agencies is surely not beyond our collective wisdom.  

The carbon reduction might be in terms of changes in transport use - more efficient vehicles, fewer road journeys for businesses (including more employee-days working from home), or more use of public transport.  The mechanism ought to include other reductions too, such as more efficient working practices, self-generation of energy or better insulation of work premises.

There are, of course,  established regional agencies to overview this.  The Confederation of West Midlands Chambers would be an ideal organisation to speak for business in the development of the methodology, helping to agree targets and audit the system.  Regional transport, government and development agencies are also well placed to help develop an innovative approach to economic and environmental development.  It would be a landmark in turning the concept of ‘sustainable development’ into practical, demonstrable reality and we hope that by working together we can make it a reality.

Posted by gricher at 03:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)