SISTERS ON A WAR PATH OVER FUNDING

SISTERS ON A WAR PATH OVER FUNDING

Southall Black Sisters have been locked in struggle against Ealing Council with regard to its decision to withdraw funding for our domestic violence services for black and minority women.

This approach is not unique to Ealing. Evidence from around the UK suggests that organisations in the firing line tend to be the more progressive black and minority and feminist projects. At the same time, reactionary, sometimes fundamentalist religious organisations are being given financial support to provide ‘welfare services’, even at the risk of undermining the human rights of the most vulnerable in our communities.

On 17th and 18th July 2008, the supporters and users of the women’s group are planning a demonstration in front of the High Court is hearing the challenge brought against Ealing Council for its failure to have proper regard to existing equality legislation, especially the Race Relations Act, in reaching its decision on our funding.

It is expected that the Council will seek to justify its decision on the grounds that a generic domestic violence service will be better placed to meet requirements of the equality legislation and the so called ‘cohesion’ agenda.

The recent report of the Commission on Integration and Cohesion report, favouring the money " to be channelled over three years to groups which promote integration, rather than towards bodies which represent a single ethnic or religious identity" drew uproar form many leading BME organisations.

Kevin Curley, the chief executive of the National Association for Voluntary and Community Action commented in The Guardian (October 2007) that it would be a shame if the community’s secretary, Hazel Blears, did shift funds away from faith and minority ethnic groups.

The Ealing Council has made much of the need to reflect the racial diversity of Ealing (meaning the white majority population) in the interests of ‘cohesion’. In the process it seeks to argue that the very existence of specialist groups like SBS is unlawful under the Race Relations Act! Ealing Council has also withdrawn funding for key refugee and race equality projects in Ealing.

This approach is not unique to Ealing. Evidence from around the UK suggests that organisations in the firing line tend to be the more progressive black and minority and feminist projects. At the same time, reactionary, sometimes fundamentalist religious organisations are being given financial support to provide ‘welfare services’, even at the risk of undermining the human rights of the most vulnerable in our communities. The subcontracting of third sector services is also contributing to the decimation of groups like SBS.

Voice4Change England, a national body considered as a voice of the BME networks also wrote to the Secretary of State expressing concerns about the most likely impact of the ‘Single Group Funding’ issue.

In a letter to the Chair of the Commission, the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government responded to the criticisms by saying that “the government was ‘primarily interested in the activities being funded rather than the groups delivering them’, and added that single-community groups had ‘often been at the heart of social change”.

This was interpreted by some groups, including Voice4Change England as a welcomed sign for government’s rejection of the proposals on ‘single group funding’ and expected the term to be discarded. The letter was seen as ‘a significant shift from what the commission was saying’. It was read as the idea of single group funding as the exception rather than the rule has been formally ditched.

However, concerns have been growing amongst minority ethnic community and voluntary sector organisations that many local authorities are use the ‘Single Group Funding’ approach to withdraw funding. The shift in funding to groups which promote integration has raised fears that it could trigger a funding crisis for some minority ethnic groups. Already many smaller and medium groups amongst the ethnic community and voluntary sector are failing to secure grants and struggling to keep their heads above water.

Voice4Change England has demanded that Communities & Local Government radically change its attitude to funding BME Third Sector organisations by abandoning its proposed Cohesion Guidance for Funders and instead engage in positive dialogue with the sector in addressing the wider causes of inequality in society.

“If the Guidance becomes official government policy and is implemented, then the very existence of the BME Third Sector organisations is threatened and we could see an end to much of the badly needed support such groups provide to marginalised diverse communities. CLG’s thinking is out of step with what is happening on the ground and doesn’t fit with other government policies that recognise the vital contribution of the BME Third Sector,” says V4CE Director Vandna Gohil.

Earlier this year, Voice4Change England formally has extended its support to National Association for Voluntary and Community Action (NAVCA) in its call for the recognition of the grant funding as the most important mean of supporting and sustaining voluntary civic action.
The Government seems oblivion to the political consequences to the disintegration of BME grass-root organisations. If the concept of ‘integration’ is aimed at winning the dis-chanted ‘white middleclass votes’, it has the potential to backfire in the face of the government.

For SBS campaign details contact:
Southallblacksisters@btconnect.com



Buddhdev Pandya is a political columnist
Email: buddhdevp@googlemail.comJune 2008