Discussions

Much has been made of the apparently increasing regulatory burdens placed on the voluntary and community sector. Recent media coverage has focused on the extensions to Criminal Record Bureau checks, the establishment of an Independent Safeguarding Authority and introduction of Vetting and Barring Orders. Activists point out that it is not just safeguarding that has impacted on small community groups and semi-formal activities – but also food hygiene/health and safety/licensing regulations and changes in the Planning Act (2008).

Media coverage – including much of the third sector press - has focused primarily on the idea of over-regulation and ‘regulation for regulation’s sake’. However, initial research by the Below the Radar work stream at TSRC reveals a more complex and varied set of responses to the above changes.

For some, regulation is to be welcomed as a means of ensuring that the sector is acting in the best interest of children, genuinely protecting vulnerable adults and ensuring public safety. In this view – there is a ‘myth’ about the complexity of regulations as they impact on community groups.

For others, regulation has replaced trust and is therefore part of the process of breaking down civil society and (through the burden of regulation) excluding community groups from responding to local social needs or entering into service delivery.

For some, groups will ‘always find a way around the regulation’. For others, establishing new community groups – or just sustaining existing ones – is becoming harder and harder. Why volunteer only to get bound up in red tape?

Whether you are a small community group or a large voluntary organisation – we would like to hear your experiences of dealing with ‘the culture of regulation’. Has there been an impact? How has this affected your group/organisation? Has the group/organisation changed as a result?

(More information on the Independent Safeguarding Authority and Vetting and Barring Orders)

Dear Lydia

A very good question: why volunteer when you jsut get bound up in red tape? It reflects that very old tension in the voluntary sector between activity and people wanting to do things and do thigs now versus issues of safety, child protection etc. One commentator has described the legislation which surrounds the voluntary sector as an attempt to 'regulate enthusiasm'. How/can you do that and how do you strike the right balance between regulation and enthusiasm that both encourages and protects all involved.

For me you comments raise a further question. How can umbrella bodies (you mention Brown Owl so presumably in this case the Girl Guides nationally) such as Councils of Voluntary Service, Volunteer Centreshelp

• small local groups manage regulations which can feel like a burden?
• challenge over-regulation which gets in the way of voluntary activity?

 This is a very real challenge but one thing has been encouraging about the work we are doing with small community groups. There is a lot of talk about people not being active in groups any more - indeed a whole literature about the loss of 'social capital' and formal social networks- yet despite everything we are finding a wealth of grass roots community activity. Much of this, however, goes unacknowledged though by policy makers and other more formal agencies.

Dear Alex

Apologies for the delay in responding. BCU clearly has a well developed system for dealing with regulation and this has clearly brought rewards in terms of profile and access to funding. You make one very important point - that being affiliated to a national body helps in terms of guidance, templates etc. The question is what happens to very small groups without that infra-structure support?

All too often they 're-invent wheels', are not aware of where to go for support/advice and give up feeling that it is all too complex.

This response to a 'balanced approach' to regulation and making it managable is reassuring. But we would like to hear from 'tiny groups' and what is their experience?

Angus