Education is very much in the air for social enterprise. I picked up Red Mummy's blog last night thanks to a tip off from Stephen Fry's Tweet which chimed with the things I've been saying about schools. Parents of children in many secondary schools up and down the country are really not happy and they want things to improve. The blog is facinating and echoed a number of conversations I have had lately.
This morning I met with officers from Lambeth Council and Sarah Neuff from the fantastic development trust, Coin Street Community Builders to launch a really exciting initiative designed to develop social enterprise in the borough. I think Lambeth is really showing its dynamic commitment to social enterprise and I look forward to working on a project which I'm sure will establish the borough's credentials for innovation.
Interestingly Lambeth is the only place in the UK that has succeeded in establishing a parent run school, something I discovered when meeting with Paul Mason from Parent Promoted Foundation this morning. Paul is leading the monumental struggle of Barnes, Mortlake and East Sheen parents, trying to establish a school in the area that meets children's needs. The thing I like best about this movement of ours is meeting people like Paul who are real social innovators, fighting to create a world I for one, want to live in. Parents should be able to run schools, certainly where local authorities have failed; they couldn't do a worse job. In fact, I think they could do an excellent one. Paul told me the Foundation have the backing of 2000 local parents, impressive. He and I worked over possible models, related initiaitives and where social enterprise fitsin - all good stuff.
I think this growing development in education (exemplified by the work CfBT commisioned SEL to do on social enterprises delivering extended services in schools) is unstoppable. Clearly the existing system needs an injection of responsibility, commitment and enthusiasm. All qualities you get in spades from people like Paul, working to improve the community for people like me and my family. watch this space for our up and coming conference on this.
This afternoon my lovely board met. The SEL Board is a meeting place for many of the UK's leading social entrepreneurs, chaired ably today by Sophi Tranchell MD of Divine Chocolate. During the discussions we learnt from Carmel McConnell of Magic Breakfast about a great deal they've done with Quaker Oats whose packaging now carries a 5p per pack funding commitment to Magic Breakfast, Carmel's social enterprise that currently feeds over 3000 children a day who arrive at London schools too hungry to learn. So go out and buy Quaker Oats people!
Off to a reception for Southwark Leaders now, no rest for the wicked.
Thursday, 26 November 2009
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Who needs educating?
I enjoyed the third sector bash last night at Barclays, thanks Steve. It was my first opportunity to meet face to face with Mr Curley of the famous "Twitter Wars" (copyright 2009). For those who missed it: Kevin Curley of NAVCA made a few exasperated comments about social enterprise on Twitter in October, wondering if it was a front for more scurrilous behaviour. I rounded with a defence and an offer to take him on a tour of London’s social enterprises, to give him a little more faith in us. Our argument made it to Social Enterprise Mag.
At the time I didn’t get a response from Kevin, but last night I saw my chance! Trotting up I introduced myself, as we had never previously met. Kevin asked me to go easy on him (don’t know what he meant?!) although Toby Blume of Urban Forum, obviously in a mischievous mood was goading from the side lines for me to ‘have a go’. I said that confrontation wasn’t my style but that I would welcome a chat about the issues. Kevin explained that he was fed up with the social enterprise world talking dismissively about grant-reliant organisations, a position I can sympathise with. I told him that I was very much in support of the voluntary sector which was why I had run to join the Board of ACEVO, latterly becoming Vice Chair. He then went on to say that social enterprise is promoted without criticism. I opened my mouth to tell him about the month I’ve been having with the unions who have definitely decided to criticise social enterprise when, sadly, he was whisked away to as it were, fight another day. So Kevin, the offer for the visit still stands - I’d be happy to show you around.
On the Twitter Wars by the way, I got a number of comments from people like David Floyd of Social Spider, who felt that I had not properly answered Kevin’s point that if some social enterprises are critical of grant based activity, implying only income generation is sustainable, then why do so many of them look for grants? It’s a good point and one I should answer. The truth is that many social enterprises need grants, at least at the beginning, for example Green Works, which started with a grant but now turns over £2 million through income generation. Ultimately start up social enterprises often need investment and sometimes need grants, but moving away from grant based activity should be the objective and it’s that aim that distinguishes a social enterprise from a conventional voluntary organisation. It’s a bit like courgettes and pumpkins. The plants are almost identical but the fruits are very, very different.
I also bumped into Jeremy Swain of Thames Reach who didn’t realise he’d been quoted in Monday’s Guardian on the Andy Burnham position against outsourcing. I was able to get the article up on my blackberry to show him, showing technical prowess I didn’t know I had!
Had an email today from a friend, Carina, in East Sheen where I live, who asked me to sign her petition to No 10. It calls on the government to reverse its decision to legislate home schoolers into a cocked hat through draconian monitoring, when so little is currently offered to support them.
East Sheen is leafy and for the most part prosperous, we have some great primary schools and yet as I have said before in this blog, our secondarily schools are grim. They fall below national average and have unacceptable records of pupil violence. Carina is one of a few brave parents I know who have given up work to home school their children because they believe, in the face of their options, they have to. She has shown courage and commitment to her children and could do with a world of resources to support her, not to mention a quality school to send her children to. What does she get instead? Monitoring, supervision, bureaucracy and an implicit criticism of her choice to home school. Right to choose? I don’t think so. Why is it that so many of the ‘choices’ politicians talk about in fact create no choice at all?
As Toby Young tells us in last Sunday’s Observer, it is in fact very difficult for parents to set up their own schools, as he in Acton and the parents of East Sheen are finding. I think the pioneers of parent run schools should be encouraged. I think the Government needs to get off the fence on whether parents of just local authorities should control the budgets and I think social enterprise can help. SEL’s conference in the spring on the future of education will be the place these things are thrashed out in more detail and hopefully we will see more parents like Toby and Carina eventually getting the support they need to educate their children to a standard they find acceptable. In the meantime I urge you to sign Carina’s petition.
The other thing you need to do this week is vote in the Social Enterprise Awards! Two of SEL's members, Global Ethics and BikeWorks are in the running, so of course I encourage you to vote for them, but the main thing is that you vote - and get friends and colleagues to do the same. This link lets you do it online, so you've got no excuse!
Finally, if you represent a private company (or if you buy anything at all in fact), BUY THINGS FROM SOCIAL ENTERPRISE! SEL has been running a programme to encourage and support corporate companies to put social enterprises in their supply chains. Almost all those we approached have been positive, many have met with us, introduced us to their procurement people, looked at the long, long lists of social enterprises selling everything from paper clips to team building away days, come to the conference we recently held on the subject (with support from KPMG)... and so far, bought very little. So if you want to get involved and, yes you guessed it, BUY SOMETHING, e-mail our magnificant Director of Business Services Lesley Miller.
At the time I didn’t get a response from Kevin, but last night I saw my chance! Trotting up I introduced myself, as we had never previously met. Kevin asked me to go easy on him (don’t know what he meant?!) although Toby Blume of Urban Forum, obviously in a mischievous mood was goading from the side lines for me to ‘have a go’. I said that confrontation wasn’t my style but that I would welcome a chat about the issues. Kevin explained that he was fed up with the social enterprise world talking dismissively about grant-reliant organisations, a position I can sympathise with. I told him that I was very much in support of the voluntary sector which was why I had run to join the Board of ACEVO, latterly becoming Vice Chair. He then went on to say that social enterprise is promoted without criticism. I opened my mouth to tell him about the month I’ve been having with the unions who have definitely decided to criticise social enterprise when, sadly, he was whisked away to as it were, fight another day. So Kevin, the offer for the visit still stands - I’d be happy to show you around.
Getting gruff with Kevin Curley...
On the Twitter Wars by the way, I got a number of comments from people like David Floyd of Social Spider, who felt that I had not properly answered Kevin’s point that if some social enterprises are critical of grant based activity, implying only income generation is sustainable, then why do so many of them look for grants? It’s a good point and one I should answer. The truth is that many social enterprises need grants, at least at the beginning, for example Green Works, which started with a grant but now turns over £2 million through income generation. Ultimately start up social enterprises often need investment and sometimes need grants, but moving away from grant based activity should be the objective and it’s that aim that distinguishes a social enterprise from a conventional voluntary organisation. It’s a bit like courgettes and pumpkins. The plants are almost identical but the fruits are very, very different.
I also bumped into Jeremy Swain of Thames Reach who didn’t realise he’d been quoted in Monday’s Guardian on the Andy Burnham position against outsourcing. I was able to get the article up on my blackberry to show him, showing technical prowess I didn’t know I had!
Had an email today from a friend, Carina, in East Sheen where I live, who asked me to sign her petition to No 10. It calls on the government to reverse its decision to legislate home schoolers into a cocked hat through draconian monitoring, when so little is currently offered to support them.
East Sheen is leafy and for the most part prosperous, we have some great primary schools and yet as I have said before in this blog, our secondarily schools are grim. They fall below national average and have unacceptable records of pupil violence. Carina is one of a few brave parents I know who have given up work to home school their children because they believe, in the face of their options, they have to. She has shown courage and commitment to her children and could do with a world of resources to support her, not to mention a quality school to send her children to. What does she get instead? Monitoring, supervision, bureaucracy and an implicit criticism of her choice to home school. Right to choose? I don’t think so. Why is it that so many of the ‘choices’ politicians talk about in fact create no choice at all?
As Toby Young tells us in last Sunday’s Observer, it is in fact very difficult for parents to set up their own schools, as he in Acton and the parents of East Sheen are finding. I think the pioneers of parent run schools should be encouraged. I think the Government needs to get off the fence on whether parents of just local authorities should control the budgets and I think social enterprise can help. SEL’s conference in the spring on the future of education will be the place these things are thrashed out in more detail and hopefully we will see more parents like Toby and Carina eventually getting the support they need to educate their children to a standard they find acceptable. In the meantime I urge you to sign Carina’s petition.
The other thing you need to do this week is vote in the Social Enterprise Awards! Two of SEL's members, Global Ethics and BikeWorks are in the running, so of course I encourage you to vote for them, but the main thing is that you vote - and get friends and colleagues to do the same. This link lets you do it online, so you've got no excuse!
Finally, if you represent a private company (or if you buy anything at all in fact), BUY THINGS FROM SOCIAL ENTERPRISE! SEL has been running a programme to encourage and support corporate companies to put social enterprises in their supply chains. Almost all those we approached have been positive, many have met with us, introduced us to their procurement people, looked at the long, long lists of social enterprises selling everything from paper clips to team building away days, come to the conference we recently held on the subject (with support from KPMG)... and so far, bought very little. So if you want to get involved and, yes you guessed it, BUY SOMETHING, e-mail our magnificant Director of Business Services Lesley Miller.
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
Burnham's bad hair day and Bob's demise
My friend Julie came over this weekend and offered me some top tips for my blog. As she is the International Editor of the UK’s favourite celebrity magazine I thought I’d pay attention. She loved the personal stuff, thought the politics were interesting, if a little long (sorry) and said I needed more photos – what do you think? All comments welcome!
I caught a good radio piece on Saturday, arguing that women are losing out on the top city jobs during the recession. This reflects conversations I have had recently with leading ladies within the third sector where we have noticed that several big jobs for which we know outstanding women who have applied, have concluded with the appointment of less obviously qualified men. I am sure the chaps gave outstanding performances but I can't help but wonder why the scarcity of jobs is appearing to lead to the boys competing more successfully? Are we being peremptory? Time will tell, but as we head into what could be the whitest, most male dominated parliament in a generation I don’t think the third sector can sit on its laurels.
This weekend, catching up with reading, I read the Guardian interview with Shirley Williams. She’s a woman I admire. I loved her frank admission that she is always late. I am an offender in that department, much to my husband’s frustration. In my case it comes of having absolutely no sense of time and in trying to do too much. I thought her take on the politics of globalization was spot on; as was her characterisation of a UK unable and unwilling to see itself as part of Europe never mind a wider world; and it was interesting that she confessed that she had been reticent to fight for the leadership in either the Labour Party or the SDP because she was awed by senior male colleagues. She now regrets thinking she wasn’t good enough. I wonder how many women end up saying the same thing. Sadly too many, I suspect.
Monday failed to get out of the stalls as Sam’s chesty bug meant he was too ill to go to school. Chris and I drew straws, as we do whenever the children are sick, and I stayed at home. Sam and I watched the new Star Trek movie which was absolutely fab whilst I kept up with emails, which were dominated by the kerfuffle Acevo (where I am Deputy Chair) leaders are having with Health Secretary, Andy Burnham.
The background is that in September Mr Burnham surprised us all by reversing government policy, in a speech where he announced that the NHS would only consider outsourcing services if they were in difficulty and no public sector provider could be found. This flew in the face of everything government had encouraged social enterprise to do since 2005. It also had the effect of making only the unions happy. The line the papers took (Guardian yesterday, Times today) is that Labour is capitulating to the unions because they are bank rolling their election campaign. I’m not so sure. Fundamentally the search for quality and competative price in the NHS is an unstoppable one, as is the creation of a new generation of public service employees who either work for themselves or private companies. The government knows this, they have been supportive about the move and nothing else has come out since Burnham’s speech, so in my opinion they must simply have been having a bad hair day!
As for the unions, namely Unite and Unison, they think they don’t want social enterprises touching the NHS because the alternative is a status quo. It isn’t. The choice is the third sector or the private sector. Standing still isn’t an option and so far no party spokesperson (with the exception of Andy Burnham) has said it is. I have a Masters in Industrial Relations and I was a union FTO (Full Time Official) both here and in the US for nearly 5 years and it grieves me to find myself in opposition to the labour movement. I firmly believe in employee representation, I have got very cold on a number of picket lines outside garment factories in Kentucky and Pennsylvania, for instance, and I know what I am talking about when I say that social enterprise offers employees as strong a voice as any other organisational model, including that of the public sector, and in no way precludes trade union representation. On the contrary, we welcome it.
Bob - post attack
Shock , horror. Whilst looking after Sam my East Sheen allotment neighbour Ben called to say my site had been vandalised (above). Bob, our handmade and rather beautiful scarecrow, had been pummelled and knocked to the ground and the contents of my shed, including next year’s seeds (I hope it isn’t an omen), had been thrown in the water butt. Poor Bob. I wonder what goes through a person’s head when they are beating up a scarecrow?!
I loved Grumpy Old Women on the Beeb last night. They scoffed at the idea of working mothers “having it all” which I wasn’t so keen on, but then the wonderful Germaine Greer, patron saint of Women with Attitude, told us that the only thing women have all of, is all the work. Love it. India Knight lamented the war between working mothers and so-called stay at home mothers, which I too feel sad about. I think it comes from the natural tendency of women to feel guilty and inadequate. It’s a total waste of energy. I think we should unite against our detractors and defend the right of all women to choose their own paths. I just hope more of us crunch the gravel to top jobs.
Talking of hair, for those who've asked, my hair, post straightening, has perked. After 3 long days looking like the Pardoner in The Canterbury Tales, with hair as “smoothe as a strike of flex” (for which read lank), I’ve now returned to something approaching normality- a blessed relief!
I caught a good radio piece on Saturday, arguing that women are losing out on the top city jobs during the recession. This reflects conversations I have had recently with leading ladies within the third sector where we have noticed that several big jobs for which we know outstanding women who have applied, have concluded with the appointment of less obviously qualified men. I am sure the chaps gave outstanding performances but I can't help but wonder why the scarcity of jobs is appearing to lead to the boys competing more successfully? Are we being peremptory? Time will tell, but as we head into what could be the whitest, most male dominated parliament in a generation I don’t think the third sector can sit on its laurels.
This weekend, catching up with reading, I read the Guardian interview with Shirley Williams. She’s a woman I admire. I loved her frank admission that she is always late. I am an offender in that department, much to my husband’s frustration. In my case it comes of having absolutely no sense of time and in trying to do too much. I thought her take on the politics of globalization was spot on; as was her characterisation of a UK unable and unwilling to see itself as part of Europe never mind a wider world; and it was interesting that she confessed that she had been reticent to fight for the leadership in either the Labour Party or the SDP because she was awed by senior male colleagues. She now regrets thinking she wasn’t good enough. I wonder how many women end up saying the same thing. Sadly too many, I suspect.
Monday failed to get out of the stalls as Sam’s chesty bug meant he was too ill to go to school. Chris and I drew straws, as we do whenever the children are sick, and I stayed at home. Sam and I watched the new Star Trek movie which was absolutely fab whilst I kept up with emails, which were dominated by the kerfuffle Acevo (where I am Deputy Chair) leaders are having with Health Secretary, Andy Burnham.
The background is that in September Mr Burnham surprised us all by reversing government policy, in a speech where he announced that the NHS would only consider outsourcing services if they were in difficulty and no public sector provider could be found. This flew in the face of everything government had encouraged social enterprise to do since 2005. It also had the effect of making only the unions happy. The line the papers took (Guardian yesterday, Times today) is that Labour is capitulating to the unions because they are bank rolling their election campaign. I’m not so sure. Fundamentally the search for quality and competative price in the NHS is an unstoppable one, as is the creation of a new generation of public service employees who either work for themselves or private companies. The government knows this, they have been supportive about the move and nothing else has come out since Burnham’s speech, so in my opinion they must simply have been having a bad hair day!
As for the unions, namely Unite and Unison, they think they don’t want social enterprises touching the NHS because the alternative is a status quo. It isn’t. The choice is the third sector or the private sector. Standing still isn’t an option and so far no party spokesperson (with the exception of Andy Burnham) has said it is. I have a Masters in Industrial Relations and I was a union FTO (Full Time Official) both here and in the US for nearly 5 years and it grieves me to find myself in opposition to the labour movement. I firmly believe in employee representation, I have got very cold on a number of picket lines outside garment factories in Kentucky and Pennsylvania, for instance, and I know what I am talking about when I say that social enterprise offers employees as strong a voice as any other organisational model, including that of the public sector, and in no way precludes trade union representation. On the contrary, we welcome it.
Bob - post attack
Shock , horror. Whilst looking after Sam my East Sheen allotment neighbour Ben called to say my site had been vandalised (above). Bob, our handmade and rather beautiful scarecrow, had been pummelled and knocked to the ground and the contents of my shed, including next year’s seeds (I hope it isn’t an omen), had been thrown in the water butt. Poor Bob. I wonder what goes through a person’s head when they are beating up a scarecrow?!
I loved Grumpy Old Women on the Beeb last night. They scoffed at the idea of working mothers “having it all” which I wasn’t so keen on, but then the wonderful Germaine Greer, patron saint of Women with Attitude, told us that the only thing women have all of, is all the work. Love it. India Knight lamented the war between working mothers and so-called stay at home mothers, which I too feel sad about. I think it comes from the natural tendency of women to feel guilty and inadequate. It’s a total waste of energy. I think we should unite against our detractors and defend the right of all women to choose their own paths. I just hope more of us crunch the gravel to top jobs.
Talking of hair, for those who've asked, my hair, post straightening, has perked. After 3 long days looking like the Pardoner in The Canterbury Tales, with hair as “smoothe as a strike of flex” (for which read lank), I’ve now returned to something approaching normality- a blessed relief!
Friday, 20 November 2009
Straight talking
I thought I’d take the time spent in the hairdresser’s chair having my hair straightened (first time ever – hope it doesn’t fall out!) to update you on Social Enterprise Day.
No 10 was fun, bumped into lots of old friends including SEL pin ups Micheal Pyner of the Shoreditch Trust and Campbell Robb, who is leaving the Office of The Third Sector in December to take over as CEO of Shelter. Good for Shelter, but our loss. Campbell has been a great champion of social enterprise and has been particularly effective in developing support for the movement to play a key role in England’s economic development strategy. Sounds boring but makes all the difference to our members, who are crying out for the information, guidance and support provided through things like CapacityBuilders and the Social Enterprise Knowledge Exchange, both of which Campbell has put in place. He will be missed.
At the reception the Prime Minister spoke warmly to the gathered social entrepreneurs, telling us how much he admires what we do. He said he applauded the fact that we are working to make people's lives better. It sounds cheesy but was really nice actually and I think he meant it. I managed to hook up Reed Paget of Belu Water and the amazing Lynn Berry of the massive volunteering organisation WRVS, who is on a mission to make her organisation more environmentally sustainable. WRVS makes and distributes more sandwiches than anyone else in the UK and they also sell a great deal of bottled water, so let’s hope Belu hits the mark. Wholfing a few delicious canapés courtesy of CafeSunlight, Peter Holbrook’s outstanding social enterprise, I headed off...
...to The Guardian conference in Birmingham where I joined the round table delegate discussions. The questions centred on how we can deliver more public services and whether social enterprises can work with the private sector. I did an Anthea to Patrick Butler's (Head of Health, Society & Education at The Guardian), Brucie and we each read out individual table findings. One of the things that struck me was how positive people are on the proposition of working with the private sector, the general consensus being that as long as we negotiate effectively it is absolutely possible. I have been saying this for years and as a result SEL has had several highly successful commercial relationships with the private sector. I had always thought it was controversial and so was fascinated to see that in that auditorium at least, the attitude was very positive.
We then had speeches from Vince Cable of the Lib Dems and Barbara Follett, Under-Secretary of State for the Department of Communities and Local Government. Vince was really interesting, he had clearly thought the issues through for himself and confessed to us all that until he recently met Margaret Elliott from Sunderland Home Care he didn’t really understand was social enterprise was. Having got to grips with it he feels it has a strong future, particularly in delivering local services. In print recently he un-packed the 'big government vs local government' debate, arguing we need local services delivered to national standards - I think he’s spot on. Barbara said ‘social enterprises express what people really feel’, I liked that.
In the q & a Vince threw my question straight back at me, asking what I think government needs to do to better support social enterprise. I said:
1. Government needs to be a better shopper - buying from organisations which deliver real positive social change
2. Existing capacity building support (which Vince had slightly upbraided in his speech) is vital and needs to be continued and developed.
Caught the train with Patrick and Mark Gould from The Guardian, Gemma Hampson of Social Enterprise Magazine and our Matt Jarratt, where we had a good debate over whether social enterprises really will end up running public services on a large scale. We agreed that they could do rather well if the planets align in our favour. Earlier I had chatted to Sophi Trachell, MD of Divine Chocolate and SEL’s co-Chair, who had been frustrated that The Guardian had chosen Social Enterprise Day to report on the collapse of Total Healthcare. I put this to Patrick who maintained that he had done it to put the debate about the future of public services into context: social enterprise can be a winner but it can lose too. Fair enough I think, when Woollies went down no one said that it marked the end of high street retailing.
We sat around some poor chap who looked like he was trying to work. When we got out at Euston I apologised for disturbing him and he said he had really enjoyed the conversation, gave me his card and said he would welcome a further chat about the social impact I mentioned…. everyone is interested in social enterprise, they just don’t know it yet!
As I finish typing I’m presented with the result of the hairdresser’s endeavours. They say it won’t look like this forever... I feel a gin coming on.
No 10 was fun, bumped into lots of old friends including SEL pin ups Micheal Pyner of the Shoreditch Trust and Campbell Robb, who is leaving the Office of The Third Sector in December to take over as CEO of Shelter. Good for Shelter, but our loss. Campbell has been a great champion of social enterprise and has been particularly effective in developing support for the movement to play a key role in England’s economic development strategy. Sounds boring but makes all the difference to our members, who are crying out for the information, guidance and support provided through things like CapacityBuilders and the Social Enterprise Knowledge Exchange, both of which Campbell has put in place. He will be missed.
At the reception the Prime Minister spoke warmly to the gathered social entrepreneurs, telling us how much he admires what we do. He said he applauded the fact that we are working to make people's lives better. It sounds cheesy but was really nice actually and I think he meant it. I managed to hook up Reed Paget of Belu Water and the amazing Lynn Berry of the massive volunteering organisation WRVS, who is on a mission to make her organisation more environmentally sustainable. WRVS makes and distributes more sandwiches than anyone else in the UK and they also sell a great deal of bottled water, so let’s hope Belu hits the mark. Wholfing a few delicious canapés courtesy of CafeSunlight, Peter Holbrook’s outstanding social enterprise, I headed off...
...to The Guardian conference in Birmingham where I joined the round table delegate discussions. The questions centred on how we can deliver more public services and whether social enterprises can work with the private sector. I did an Anthea to Patrick Butler's (Head of Health, Society & Education at The Guardian), Brucie and we each read out individual table findings. One of the things that struck me was how positive people are on the proposition of working with the private sector, the general consensus being that as long as we negotiate effectively it is absolutely possible. I have been saying this for years and as a result SEL has had several highly successful commercial relationships with the private sector. I had always thought it was controversial and so was fascinated to see that in that auditorium at least, the attitude was very positive.
We then had speeches from Vince Cable of the Lib Dems and Barbara Follett, Under-Secretary of State for the Department of Communities and Local Government. Vince was really interesting, he had clearly thought the issues through for himself and confessed to us all that until he recently met Margaret Elliott from Sunderland Home Care he didn’t really understand was social enterprise was. Having got to grips with it he feels it has a strong future, particularly in delivering local services. In print recently he un-packed the 'big government vs local government' debate, arguing we need local services delivered to national standards - I think he’s spot on. Barbara said ‘social enterprises express what people really feel’, I liked that.
In the q & a Vince threw my question straight back at me, asking what I think government needs to do to better support social enterprise. I said:
1. Government needs to be a better shopper - buying from organisations which deliver real positive social change
2. Existing capacity building support (which Vince had slightly upbraided in his speech) is vital and needs to be continued and developed.
Caught the train with Patrick and Mark Gould from The Guardian, Gemma Hampson of Social Enterprise Magazine and our Matt Jarratt, where we had a good debate over whether social enterprises really will end up running public services on a large scale. We agreed that they could do rather well if the planets align in our favour. Earlier I had chatted to Sophi Trachell, MD of Divine Chocolate and SEL’s co-Chair, who had been frustrated that The Guardian had chosen Social Enterprise Day to report on the collapse of Total Healthcare. I put this to Patrick who maintained that he had done it to put the debate about the future of public services into context: social enterprise can be a winner but it can lose too. Fair enough I think, when Woollies went down no one said that it marked the end of high street retailing.
We sat around some poor chap who looked like he was trying to work. When we got out at Euston I apologised for disturbing him and he said he had really enjoyed the conversation, gave me his card and said he would welcome a further chat about the social impact I mentioned…. everyone is interested in social enterprise, they just don’t know it yet!
As I finish typing I’m presented with the result of the hairdresser’s endeavours. They say it won’t look like this forever... I feel a gin coming on.
Thursday, 19 November 2009
Happy Social Enterprise Day!
Celebrations kicked off last night for SEL when I opened our event with the Philosophy Shop and left a packed room poised to answer the big question, “What is a social enterprise?”. I then went off to the official launch of the Women’s Enterprise Taskforce report “Greater Return on Women’s Enterprise” where we heard from the wonderful Alyson Warhurst, Co- Founder and CEO of Maplecroft, a company first into the market with global risk analysis. She went from working from her bedroom to employing 42 employees and working for leading companies like Nokia, Microsoft, M & S and TNT. She told us about the plight of adolescent girls worldwide, how their lack of education and access to finance means a loss to GDP. How they are more likely to get HIV the closer to roads they lived and how in turn the prevalence of HIV affects corporate supply. All of these factors are part of the risk planning large corporates undertake when looking at expanding their operations worldwide. Alyson lives in a very interesting world, although the vagaries of running a business are similar no matter where you are. She told us how slow corporates are to pay their bills, and how important it is to productise data when everyone wants something for nothing. I found her presentation gripping.
The Taskforce was thanked by Lord Davies, the Business Minister, who committed to making sure the recommendations were enacted by Government, something we are confident of because not only is the UK economy crying out for more women in business but also it was Gordon Brown himself who established the Taskforce in 2006 and gave it the job of advising how to increase the quantity, scalability and success of women’s enterprise. Our co-chairs, Pam Alexander and Glenda Stone, thanked all of us and the colleagues who worked tirelessly with us to produce the work, and then we all exited stage left for a celebratory drink.
I left that reception to have a delightful supper with my friend Baroness Glenys Thorton, Minister in the Whips Office. We talked of all things social enterprise and family and had a good catch up. Sadly on the way home my hybrid car fizzled out and I had to fall back on the services of the AA to get me home, but I didn’t let that diminish my sense of having had a good day. However, I’d still like to know what the answer to the big question was?
Today I am off to No 10 for the Prime Minister’s Reception for Social Entrepreneurs, then to Birmingham to speak at the Guardian’s conference on social enterprise, and finally I hope to swing by this evening to the London Early Years Foundation annual Social Enterprise Day Lecture which is always really thought provoking. Whatever you’re doing today have a great day and spare a thought for all of those working against the rising tide of cynicism to make a better, fairer and greener world.
The Taskforce was thanked by Lord Davies, the Business Minister, who committed to making sure the recommendations were enacted by Government, something we are confident of because not only is the UK economy crying out for more women in business but also it was Gordon Brown himself who established the Taskforce in 2006 and gave it the job of advising how to increase the quantity, scalability and success of women’s enterprise. Our co-chairs, Pam Alexander and Glenda Stone, thanked all of us and the colleagues who worked tirelessly with us to produce the work, and then we all exited stage left for a celebratory drink.
I left that reception to have a delightful supper with my friend Baroness Glenys Thorton, Minister in the Whips Office. We talked of all things social enterprise and family and had a good catch up. Sadly on the way home my hybrid car fizzled out and I had to fall back on the services of the AA to get me home, but I didn’t let that diminish my sense of having had a good day. However, I’d still like to know what the answer to the big question was?
Today I am off to No 10 for the Prime Minister’s Reception for Social Entrepreneurs, then to Birmingham to speak at the Guardian’s conference on social enterprise, and finally I hope to swing by this evening to the London Early Years Foundation annual Social Enterprise Day Lecture which is always really thought provoking. Whatever you’re doing today have a great day and spare a thought for all of those working against the rising tide of cynicism to make a better, fairer and greener world.
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
Day 2 of GEW week saw me speaking at a Westminster Briefing to a mostly local authority and social enterprise crowd about success with outsourcing. They were a really interesting lot who challenged both the lovely Nick Temple, from the School of Social Entrepreneurs with whom I shared the platform and I, on what we thought the outcome of the election would be. It’s the first time I have been asked that outright and in public and it made me think. How do I feel? What do I think? Obviously no one has a crystal ball and the widely held view at this point is that it will be a very close race. That being the case it makes campaigning even more important as issues will have to be discussed and parties will have to work very hard for votes.
All three major parties talk about social enterprise although we are starting to see some differences. The Tories have been critical of what they perceive to be Big Government and want more local delivery. A good thing from the point of view of social enterprises many of whom operate at grass roots level, but the spectre of every local authority having to devise its own approach to social enterprise and design its own architecture for outsourcing is one that I question. Similarly although they say good things about social enterprise, the reality is that most of the support structures for social enterprise development come through the same regional development agencies and government offices that they propose to abandon. I think we will need central Government to have a plan, and to set the parameters of expectation into which regional and local players can feed their needs. As Vince Cable said in the Guardian last month, we need public services to be “locally commissioned to national standards.” My hope is that whoever wins the election, this is what we end up with.
Labour on the other hand, have a track record in supporting social enterprise. They introduced the first social enterprise department in Government, in the then DTi, and established the Office of the Third Sector which has been very vocal in its support of social enterprise. However, one of the things we have learnt through the introduction of social enterprise support units inside Government Departments such as Health, is the extent to which some officials and Ministers struggle to get behind the idea. So we will see whether or not it happens. As I said to my audience yesterday, I think the good news is that there will be more contracts out there and social enterprises will be encouraged to go for them. How much success is encountered if the opportunity is not married with enough understanding and support is something that remains to be seen. In any event agencies like SEL will be there to do all we can to maximise the opportunities for our members.
Talking of members we are getting up to nearly 1900 so the 2000 milestone is not long off now. We are starting to plan how to celebrate so watch this space. Already we have the largest social enterprise membership in the UK and 2000 is a number to really conjure with. I hope it helps people realise that behind the rhetoric and despite the recession, our movement is really growing.
Last night I went to the Minister for London’s reception for London’s leaders and had some good conversations with folk about 2012, cooperatives and working with local authorities. Tessa Jowell gave a rousing speech about how important we all were in helping London to be a world beating city and then promptly left. However I am still chuffed with her because she has come through on her promise to me last week to sort out a meeting between me and the heads for the remaining Olympic contracts to talk turkey on social enterprises and supply. The meeting is scheduled for the 30th and I promise to go out to members soon to ask them what they would like me to address. Top of my list at the moment are the patchy results social enterprises have had in bidding and the continued lack of excitement and understanding of the social enterprise offer.
This morning I had an emergency call about a member who had been chugging along nicely but has had a major local authority contract cancelled with a months notice which in turn has arrested their ability to make the next payment on a business loan they took out to grow the business. Did I know where they could get an injection of finance quickly? Speed is a controversial issue in any financial transaction as what is seen as the consequence of lack of planning puts lenders off. However contract cancellation is classic recessionary stuff as is the miserable domino effect it can cause. I am hunting about for them.
This evening SEL is hosting a fascinating event with The Philosophy Shop to look at the philosophy of social enterprise. The Philosophy Shop is a great social enterprise: they work to introduce philosophy to school kids that would otherwise not be exposed to it. I think that’s a wonderful idea as philosophy is a defining characteristic of a civilised society. Interestingly enough at my son’s school the Head Master teaches philosophy to every boy in the school at some point once every week. It has made my boys think and gives them some outstanding role modelling and a basis to build a belief in social responsibility. Social enterprise is a great topic for philosophical debate as frankly it is all about building a cooperative society that you either believe in or you don’t. The event starts at 1 London Bridge at 6, finishes at 7.30 and is open to anyone. There are drinks to follow and if you are interested just come along. After the kick off I will have to shoot as the Government’s Women’s Enterprise Taskforce, which I have been a member of the last three years, is presenting its findings this evening at the Department of Business Innovation and Skills. I must be there as maximising opportunities for woman is a top priority for me. However, being in two places at once is so characteristic of my week and probably a bit silly.
Its Social Enterprise Day tomorrow so I hope you are doing something fun! If you are part of an event do let us know so we can tell everyone what you got up to.
All three major parties talk about social enterprise although we are starting to see some differences. The Tories have been critical of what they perceive to be Big Government and want more local delivery. A good thing from the point of view of social enterprises many of whom operate at grass roots level, but the spectre of every local authority having to devise its own approach to social enterprise and design its own architecture for outsourcing is one that I question. Similarly although they say good things about social enterprise, the reality is that most of the support structures for social enterprise development come through the same regional development agencies and government offices that they propose to abandon. I think we will need central Government to have a plan, and to set the parameters of expectation into which regional and local players can feed their needs. As Vince Cable said in the Guardian last month, we need public services to be “locally commissioned to national standards.” My hope is that whoever wins the election, this is what we end up with.
Labour on the other hand, have a track record in supporting social enterprise. They introduced the first social enterprise department in Government, in the then DTi, and established the Office of the Third Sector which has been very vocal in its support of social enterprise. However, one of the things we have learnt through the introduction of social enterprise support units inside Government Departments such as Health, is the extent to which some officials and Ministers struggle to get behind the idea. So we will see whether or not it happens. As I said to my audience yesterday, I think the good news is that there will be more contracts out there and social enterprises will be encouraged to go for them. How much success is encountered if the opportunity is not married with enough understanding and support is something that remains to be seen. In any event agencies like SEL will be there to do all we can to maximise the opportunities for our members.
Talking of members we are getting up to nearly 1900 so the 2000 milestone is not long off now. We are starting to plan how to celebrate so watch this space. Already we have the largest social enterprise membership in the UK and 2000 is a number to really conjure with. I hope it helps people realise that behind the rhetoric and despite the recession, our movement is really growing.
Last night I went to the Minister for London’s reception for London’s leaders and had some good conversations with folk about 2012, cooperatives and working with local authorities. Tessa Jowell gave a rousing speech about how important we all were in helping London to be a world beating city and then promptly left. However I am still chuffed with her because she has come through on her promise to me last week to sort out a meeting between me and the heads for the remaining Olympic contracts to talk turkey on social enterprises and supply. The meeting is scheduled for the 30th and I promise to go out to members soon to ask them what they would like me to address. Top of my list at the moment are the patchy results social enterprises have had in bidding and the continued lack of excitement and understanding of the social enterprise offer.
This morning I had an emergency call about a member who had been chugging along nicely but has had a major local authority contract cancelled with a months notice which in turn has arrested their ability to make the next payment on a business loan they took out to grow the business. Did I know where they could get an injection of finance quickly? Speed is a controversial issue in any financial transaction as what is seen as the consequence of lack of planning puts lenders off. However contract cancellation is classic recessionary stuff as is the miserable domino effect it can cause. I am hunting about for them.
This evening SEL is hosting a fascinating event with The Philosophy Shop to look at the philosophy of social enterprise. The Philosophy Shop is a great social enterprise: they work to introduce philosophy to school kids that would otherwise not be exposed to it. I think that’s a wonderful idea as philosophy is a defining characteristic of a civilised society. Interestingly enough at my son’s school the Head Master teaches philosophy to every boy in the school at some point once every week. It has made my boys think and gives them some outstanding role modelling and a basis to build a belief in social responsibility. Social enterprise is a great topic for philosophical debate as frankly it is all about building a cooperative society that you either believe in or you don’t. The event starts at 1 London Bridge at 6, finishes at 7.30 and is open to anyone. There are drinks to follow and if you are interested just come along. After the kick off I will have to shoot as the Government’s Women’s Enterprise Taskforce, which I have been a member of the last three years, is presenting its findings this evening at the Department of Business Innovation and Skills. I must be there as maximising opportunities for woman is a top priority for me. However, being in two places at once is so characteristic of my week and probably a bit silly.
Its Social Enterprise Day tomorrow so I hope you are doing something fun! If you are part of an event do let us know so we can tell everyone what you got up to.
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Global Entrepreneurship Week: social enterprise, misinformation, women leaders and our many, many friends.
This week is Global Entrepreneurship Week and the activities and frivolities were launched with much a do at the British Library yesterday. GEW is a British invention as is the Entrepreneurship Week that preceded it. I remember going to its very first launch, where the then Chancellor, Gordon Brown presided. Since 2004 it has grown magnificently, with 88 countries involved and tens of thousands of events all celebrating entrepreneurship across the world. Social enterprise has its own day in the week, Thursday, so this is a big week for all of us.
The point is to celebrate the drive and inspiration of entrepreneurs and social entrepreneurs, and crucially to encourage those with an idea and burning ambition to take the plunge. As a ‘glass half empty’ country, I think it’s a great idea to get people to look on the up side and celebrate achievement and ambition.
I love being part of a global movement. Last week I met with a delegation from South Africa who were humbling in their interest in the SEL story and have since asked to keep in touch. At present we have direct commercial links with Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, the US and Holland – just some of the countries we have worked with over our 11 year history. When we work with folk from far flung places we always learn as much as we teach.
My high point of the launch event was listening to Dr Carl Schramm, CEO of the Kauffman Foundation and Jim O’Neill Head of Global Economic Research at Goldman Sachs. I could have listened to them all day. They are both brilliant economists and candid speakers with many thrilling insights to impart. They agreed that the UK has already begun its emergence from recession but that data collection was inefficient and behind the times; that the UK is a hot bed of enterprise innovation, just that we’re rubbish at rolling out and scaling up.
They also pointed out that it is enterprise that creates wealth and that recessions are caused by businesses retracting, just as recoveries are characterised by business expansion. We learnt that the BRIC countries (a term coined by Jim O’Neill meaning Brazil, Russia, India and China) are the ones to watch. Carl reminded us that 20 years ago the received wisdom was that China would never embrace capitalism, that Brazil and India were third world economies with limited potential and Russia was incapable of modernising its Soviet approach to the market. Look at ‘em go now. Jim told us that in the last ten years China’s increase in productivity has equated to creating two UK economies and Brazil and India have the fastest growing economies in relative terms in the world with Brazil superseding Italy this year to be No 6. He also told us that the English language is perhaps our single most influential export as it is the language of international business (and I thought we were all going to have to learn Chinese?!)
They were so optimistic about the UK’s future economic performance and with Jim’s record of being one of the most public forecasters of the recession, that cheery proposition was good to hear.
I then got into a back and forth with Peter Jones from Dragon’s Den who, amongst other slightly off message contributions, including the continuance of an obviously long standing animosity held against our Chair for the morning, Simon Jack from BBC Breakfast, told the audience of his concern over social entrepreneurs being a bad risk for banks. He said he had recently been told by an unnamed bank that 54% of their bad debt was exposed to social entrepreneurs, who in Peter’s opinion had been able to remain within their loan agreements because they knew little about running businesses. I challenged him on this, gob-smacked that any bank had lent so much to social entrepreneurs as their failure to lend is one of our problems. I said that I thought leading social entrepreneurs like Sophi Tranchell from Divine and Mark Sesnan from GLL would be concerned to hear their credibility as business people questioned in such a way. He came back with the assertion that he thought society needs more social entrepreneurs but that the majority need additional support in developing their business ideas. Frankly I think that’s true of all business people, regardless of whether they operate in social enterprise.
I then spoke to Lord Davies, the SME business Minister from BIS to congratulate him on highlighting the need for more women’s businesses. We are so behind other countries in seeing more women establish their own businesses, even Italy who has relatively more women running their own show than the UK. I told him that of SEL’s 1900 members 54% are led by women - social enterprise once again leading the way.
The cause of women in business is close to my heart and so I was delighted to be asked to attend the Precious Awards for women of colour in business and leadership last night. SEL sponsors their Ethical Business Award which I was asked to present. The event itself was fabulous, with the most stunning collection of glamorous women I have ever seen.
I was hopelessly underdressed lacking an evening frock and jewelled shoes, but kept my head up as I announced that the lovely Lola Atkins of EWAV Works had been awarded Ethical Business Woman of the Year. Lola and her team work with young people to train them in media and broadcasting. She told me of some inspiring work she was doing at the moment in partnership with SERCO with young offenders inside Youth Offending institutions. The kids they were working with had really switched on to the technology and creativity and some had expressed an interest in perusing their new skills into a career when they were released. Lola was hoping for more contracts from SERCO, and I am sure getting the award can only be a good thing in achieving that ambition.
I am speaking at a Westminster Briefing at the Commonwealth Club on social enterprise and successful contracting this afternoon, followed by attending a reception at Government Office hosted by Tessa Jowell for London’s leaders, so it’s all go.
Happy Global Entrepreneurship Week!!!
The point is to celebrate the drive and inspiration of entrepreneurs and social entrepreneurs, and crucially to encourage those with an idea and burning ambition to take the plunge. As a ‘glass half empty’ country, I think it’s a great idea to get people to look on the up side and celebrate achievement and ambition.
I love being part of a global movement. Last week I met with a delegation from South Africa who were humbling in their interest in the SEL story and have since asked to keep in touch. At present we have direct commercial links with Japan, Vietnam, Malaysia, the US and Holland – just some of the countries we have worked with over our 11 year history. When we work with folk from far flung places we always learn as much as we teach.
My high point of the launch event was listening to Dr Carl Schramm, CEO of the Kauffman Foundation and Jim O’Neill Head of Global Economic Research at Goldman Sachs. I could have listened to them all day. They are both brilliant economists and candid speakers with many thrilling insights to impart. They agreed that the UK has already begun its emergence from recession but that data collection was inefficient and behind the times; that the UK is a hot bed of enterprise innovation, just that we’re rubbish at rolling out and scaling up.
They also pointed out that it is enterprise that creates wealth and that recessions are caused by businesses retracting, just as recoveries are characterised by business expansion. We learnt that the BRIC countries (a term coined by Jim O’Neill meaning Brazil, Russia, India and China) are the ones to watch. Carl reminded us that 20 years ago the received wisdom was that China would never embrace capitalism, that Brazil and India were third world economies with limited potential and Russia was incapable of modernising its Soviet approach to the market. Look at ‘em go now. Jim told us that in the last ten years China’s increase in productivity has equated to creating two UK economies and Brazil and India have the fastest growing economies in relative terms in the world with Brazil superseding Italy this year to be No 6. He also told us that the English language is perhaps our single most influential export as it is the language of international business (and I thought we were all going to have to learn Chinese?!)
They were so optimistic about the UK’s future economic performance and with Jim’s record of being one of the most public forecasters of the recession, that cheery proposition was good to hear.
I then got into a back and forth with Peter Jones from Dragon’s Den who, amongst other slightly off message contributions, including the continuance of an obviously long standing animosity held against our Chair for the morning, Simon Jack from BBC Breakfast, told the audience of his concern over social entrepreneurs being a bad risk for banks. He said he had recently been told by an unnamed bank that 54% of their bad debt was exposed to social entrepreneurs, who in Peter’s opinion had been able to remain within their loan agreements because they knew little about running businesses. I challenged him on this, gob-smacked that any bank had lent so much to social entrepreneurs as their failure to lend is one of our problems. I said that I thought leading social entrepreneurs like Sophi Tranchell from Divine and Mark Sesnan from GLL would be concerned to hear their credibility as business people questioned in such a way. He came back with the assertion that he thought society needs more social entrepreneurs but that the majority need additional support in developing their business ideas. Frankly I think that’s true of all business people, regardless of whether they operate in social enterprise.
I then spoke to Lord Davies, the SME business Minister from BIS to congratulate him on highlighting the need for more women’s businesses. We are so behind other countries in seeing more women establish their own businesses, even Italy who has relatively more women running their own show than the UK. I told him that of SEL’s 1900 members 54% are led by women - social enterprise once again leading the way.
The cause of women in business is close to my heart and so I was delighted to be asked to attend the Precious Awards for women of colour in business and leadership last night. SEL sponsors their Ethical Business Award which I was asked to present. The event itself was fabulous, with the most stunning collection of glamorous women I have ever seen.
I was hopelessly underdressed lacking an evening frock and jewelled shoes, but kept my head up as I announced that the lovely Lola Atkins of EWAV Works had been awarded Ethical Business Woman of the Year. Lola and her team work with young people to train them in media and broadcasting. She told me of some inspiring work she was doing at the moment in partnership with SERCO with young offenders inside Youth Offending institutions. The kids they were working with had really switched on to the technology and creativity and some had expressed an interest in perusing their new skills into a career when they were released. Lola was hoping for more contracts from SERCO, and I am sure getting the award can only be a good thing in achieving that ambition.
I am speaking at a Westminster Briefing at the Commonwealth Club on social enterprise and successful contracting this afternoon, followed by attending a reception at Government Office hosted by Tessa Jowell for London’s leaders, so it’s all go.
Happy Global Entrepreneurship Week!!!
Friday, 13 November 2009
Just when I thought the energy around social enterprise had reached a high, things are hotting up. David Cameron in his Hugo Young Lecture on Monday night and Tessa Jowell, Minister for the Cabinet Office yesterday have said their parties will make social enterprise central to the very core of future Government service delivery.
Labour plans to encourage mutuals like Central Surrey Health and Sunderland Home Care Associates as replicable models, whilst the Tories intend a broader commitment to encouraging community groups to take control of key services. Labour refer to a ‘John Lewis’ style public service, with employee control at the heart.
All very encouraging; I have little doubt for example that had postal workers been owner employees of the Post Office this autumn, the strikes which crippled and conceivably destroyed our national postal service would never have happened.
However, many of these ideas still need to be worked through. Andrew Lansley, the Shadow Health Secretary, has also been discussing the idea of an “easyCouncil” as in a no frills service along the lines of EasyJet airlines. It’s worth noting that John Lewis is a social enterprise, and EasyJet not; at EasyJet the employees are certainly not in charge, and arguably the model would fall down if they were.
We know social enterprises can thrive when they work directly for Government, for example with leisure trusts, which now outrank the private sector in terms of their market share of public leisure service delivery. In that space we have market leaders like GLL big enough to compete to manage the Aquatic Centre at the 2012 Games.
But of course not everyone likes social enterprise. It appears some people really hate it. Unite leaders have been particularly busy lately publishing pamphlets trying to frighten workers with talk of social enterprise as the ‘Trojan Horse’, privatisation through the back door and the possibility of City style pay and bonuses for executives. This nonsense culminated at the end of last week with a printed ‘report’ that highlighting the salaries of some Third Sector leaders. My mum always warned me about the dangers of launching missiles from inside the green-house; with a combined salary and benefits deal of £308,374 the joint General Secretaries of Unite, Derek Simpson and Tony Woodley should keep schtum in my opinion.
Actually when I read the Unite piece, I wonder if I was alone in thinking how poorly paid some of the CEO’s of some of the largest Third Sector bodies are. These organisations are highly complex with large turnovers, numerous staff, and important work with society’s most vulnerable people. Top jobs calling for top people, private sector comparisons are ridiculous and mischievous, no one is getting mortgage relief, and there is no bonus culture.
Social enterprise can do much to turn this sorry state of affairs into an opportunity. We can help people think about new and better ways of working. After years of targets and micromanagement we can offer people the hope of self determination and an ability to be creative in their work again. But we are not about exploitation, services on the cheap or privatisation through the back door. I was delighted that ACEVO CEO Stephen Bubb questioned David Cameron on Monday, on whether the Tories plans for the Third sector meant services on the cheap. Cameron said no, let's hope he meant it.
Social entrepreneurs need time and investment to build our capacity. We need Government departments to recognise where more research and investment needs to be made. This means following through on the long awaited review of the national economic development strategy, as public spending is analysed and rationalised they will need strategies to replace the current delivery modes, and with the right support and investment the third sector can really deliver.
I have nearly 1900 members all chomping at the bit to roll their sleeves up and get stuck in. Yes we need investment; you can’t expect social entrepreneurs to remortgage their houses (Although sadly some of them do) to finance companies they do not own, in order to deliver public services. The local bond is an interesting idea; for sure the tax breaks Government are looking at are long overdue, as is the Social Investment Bank, which will invest our vast reserves of unclaimed banking assets into social and community initiatives.
We need good, fair contracts that acknowledge the extraordinary social impact of social enterprises, like sterilisation products from the social enterprise Clarity, and we need unions that work with us, acknowledging that many of the people who set up and work in social enterprises are existing or potential union members, and many social enterprises.
I believe much of the hostility towards social enterprise is generated by confusion over whether it represents a John Lewis or EasyJet. Social Enterprise is the former, and with more research and further working through of policy, this will become very clear. Human beings aren’t good at change and there is a boat load of it on its way. In such situations so-called early adopters are the ones that thrive, and I know of no other community than mine with so many early adopters in its ranks. Public services run as employee owned mutuals will be the public services of the future, and it’s a future I want to be part of.
Labour plans to encourage mutuals like Central Surrey Health and Sunderland Home Care Associates as replicable models, whilst the Tories intend a broader commitment to encouraging community groups to take control of key services. Labour refer to a ‘John Lewis’ style public service, with employee control at the heart.
All very encouraging; I have little doubt for example that had postal workers been owner employees of the Post Office this autumn, the strikes which crippled and conceivably destroyed our national postal service would never have happened.
However, many of these ideas still need to be worked through. Andrew Lansley, the Shadow Health Secretary, has also been discussing the idea of an “easyCouncil” as in a no frills service along the lines of EasyJet airlines. It’s worth noting that John Lewis is a social enterprise, and EasyJet not; at EasyJet the employees are certainly not in charge, and arguably the model would fall down if they were.
We know social enterprises can thrive when they work directly for Government, for example with leisure trusts, which now outrank the private sector in terms of their market share of public leisure service delivery. In that space we have market leaders like GLL big enough to compete to manage the Aquatic Centre at the 2012 Games.
But of course not everyone likes social enterprise. It appears some people really hate it. Unite leaders have been particularly busy lately publishing pamphlets trying to frighten workers with talk of social enterprise as the ‘Trojan Horse’, privatisation through the back door and the possibility of City style pay and bonuses for executives. This nonsense culminated at the end of last week with a printed ‘report’ that highlighting the salaries of some Third Sector leaders. My mum always warned me about the dangers of launching missiles from inside the green-house; with a combined salary and benefits deal of £308,374 the joint General Secretaries of Unite, Derek Simpson and Tony Woodley should keep schtum in my opinion.
Actually when I read the Unite piece, I wonder if I was alone in thinking how poorly paid some of the CEO’s of some of the largest Third Sector bodies are. These organisations are highly complex with large turnovers, numerous staff, and important work with society’s most vulnerable people. Top jobs calling for top people, private sector comparisons are ridiculous and mischievous, no one is getting mortgage relief, and there is no bonus culture.
Social enterprise can do much to turn this sorry state of affairs into an opportunity. We can help people think about new and better ways of working. After years of targets and micromanagement we can offer people the hope of self determination and an ability to be creative in their work again. But we are not about exploitation, services on the cheap or privatisation through the back door. I was delighted that ACEVO CEO Stephen Bubb questioned David Cameron on Monday, on whether the Tories plans for the Third sector meant services on the cheap. Cameron said no, let's hope he meant it.
Social entrepreneurs need time and investment to build our capacity. We need Government departments to recognise where more research and investment needs to be made. This means following through on the long awaited review of the national economic development strategy, as public spending is analysed and rationalised they will need strategies to replace the current delivery modes, and with the right support and investment the third sector can really deliver.
I have nearly 1900 members all chomping at the bit to roll their sleeves up and get stuck in. Yes we need investment; you can’t expect social entrepreneurs to remortgage their houses (Although sadly some of them do) to finance companies they do not own, in order to deliver public services. The local bond is an interesting idea; for sure the tax breaks Government are looking at are long overdue, as is the Social Investment Bank, which will invest our vast reserves of unclaimed banking assets into social and community initiatives.
We need good, fair contracts that acknowledge the extraordinary social impact of social enterprises, like sterilisation products from the social enterprise Clarity, and we need unions that work with us, acknowledging that many of the people who set up and work in social enterprises are existing or potential union members, and many social enterprises.
I believe much of the hostility towards social enterprise is generated by confusion over whether it represents a John Lewis or EasyJet. Social Enterprise is the former, and with more research and further working through of policy, this will become very clear. Human beings aren’t good at change and there is a boat load of it on its way. In such situations so-called early adopters are the ones that thrive, and I know of no other community than mine with so many early adopters in its ranks. Public services run as employee owned mutuals will be the public services of the future, and it’s a future I want to be part of.
Tuesday, 10 November 2009
Social enterprise: a brighter future for schools?
If people on NHS waiting lists are going to be able to be treated privately, as we learnt this morning, will the parents of children where local schools are either oversubscribed or well below National standards be able to do the same?
Last night with a degree of trepidation my husband and I attended St James Independent School for Senior Boys in Twickenham, to hear how our eleven year old Sam, new to the school in September, was getting on. Our Sam is wonderful; full of smiles and enthusiasm, who, as an example, spent last Saturday afternoon walking up and down a freezing Sheen High Street dressed as Sponge Bob Square Pants, handing out leaflets for a car wash that raised £280 for victims of the recent hurricane in the Philippines, a typical act of ebullient selflessness. Sam was also born with profound hearing difficulties which, though now largely behind him, have brought the speech, language, comprehension and fine motor skill developmental delays familiar to the parents of many deaf and partially deaf children. It can make kids erratic, fidgety and a challenge to teach.
Sam has always been full of beans, but his academic success has never matched his potential, until now it seems. He left his last school, a good primary, bouncing along the bottom of the class, which he must have hit with sufficient momentum to propel him to the middle of his new class. Last night his teachers spoke of his enthusiasm and application, his imagination, dedication and success. He has won the Geography prize and been elected to the school council. At one point my husband and I looked at each other thinking the same thing, wow!
We also started to think, why is Sam suddenly doing so well and why can’t every child benefit from what is a first rate education? This brings me to the point of this blog which is that I have wondered for a long time why parents of school age children, particularly those of us in London, have not taken to the streets in protest. I am not in the least bit surprised that some are trying to work (or as the Government has started calling it “game”) the system. What choice do people have? The brutal truth is there for all to see. Some boroughs like mine, Richmond, have great primary schools and some truly awful secondary options. Other boroughs have both primary and secondary schools operating well below national standards. Frankly I know of no parent who feels content that their local state provision is good and easily accessible.
In a recent editorial in The Economist we were told that “the government has spent years pushing the notion that parents can choose what schools to send their children to, but house-price premiums (often 20% or more) near good ones effectively restrict access to the better-off.” Only faith groups seem exempt. How is it that faith schools can be selective, sustain standards and be state funded? How can Tiffin School for Boys and Girls in Kingston have a uniquely onerous selection process that sees 95% of applicants rejected and yet also be state funded? Why are parents driven to the extremes of faking residency and religious conviction to get their kids into schools where A’s and B’s are more common than scuffles in the corridors? What is going on?
The truth is parents have no choice at all. Your children go to the school closest to you and that is that. If it’s good then congratulations, you’ve won the lottery. If it isn’t, move. If you can’t move because, like us, you still have children in a good primary school but your local secondary is a war zone then dig deep and get ready to join the growing ranks of us who never meant and really can’t afford to privately educate their children.
Still, I am hopeful. This month Social Enterprise London is publishing a fascinating report for CfBT on social enterprise and extended services in schools. In conducting the report we found many of extended services offered in schools already being provided by social enterprises. These were “...community focused businesses which trade to address social or environmental need. At their heart is the objective of meeting social challenges whilst achieving financial sustainability – a powerful principle in tough economic times.” We found that schools which harness the unique community focus of social enterprise “develop innovative relationships with the local community,” building stronger links to families and local community groups.
These and other key findings lead us to consider whether the positive impact of social enterprise on extended services could be deepened if schools themselves are created as social enterprises, through governance models such as parent or employee owned cooperatives or borough and community based joint initiatives. I think this is something worth exploring. To this end SEL are planning a conference in the New Year that will look at the report and give a voice more generally to the growing army of parents and social entrepreneurs looking for change, thinking creatively and willing to take responsibility.
I think we now have a once in a generation opportunity to actually tackle the divide between state and private. Why is the latter so often better? I don’t think its facilities. Both of our local state schools, Shene and Christ’s (A Church of England school) have had millions spent on them. Similarly I don’t believe that the quality or commitment of teachers is in any doubt: the staff we met at Shene and Christ’s seemed dedicated and able.
In my view the issue is the degree of parental and thereby child commitment to the school and its ethos that is lacking. It seems to me that in many state schools the bargain being struck is between the school and the child, whereas in a private school it’s between the school and the parents. This makes the child’s complicit behaviour a given and allows the parents to assume the schools commitment to the child’s progress. The parents have to subscribe to the school ethos, not just endure it. Big difference.
Yes, all very well for the middle class and therefore by popular definition pushy, I hear you say, but many of the parents I have met at St James are people for whom the fees are an extraordinary sacrifice, most had not gone to private school themselves. I didn’t meet a single pushy parent, just kind, involved ones dedicated to their children’s progress.
I think a new parent-centred approach to schools could offer hope. I think everyone should be able to send their children to a good school without having to re mortgage, downsize, move, take 2 jobs or rob a bank, even if they live in London. We should all be sending our children to schools that, like St James, take children of mixed ability and achieve 94 % in GCSE grades A to C (as St. James did this year).
I don’t think we should have to move out of London as so many are doing to hunt down a good school, and I don’t think we should demonise parents who are bending the rules to get a good education for their children if the alternative is sending a child to a school where violence and mediocrity have become the established norms. The state needs to take responsibility for those social black spots and offer parents real choice. Perhaps we should be given the budget the state allocates to educating our children, and be allowed to spend it where we choose, pooling resources to establish real community schools. In the same piece in The Economist they concluded that, “the opposition Conservatives, who are likely to win power next year, have a more constructive idea. Inspired by examples in Sweden, they want to give parents government cash to create and run entirely new schools. It remains to be seen whether those with the energy to game the admissions system are up for the bigger challenge of running a school of their own.”
Of course, an awful lot of parents do not have the luxury of time to be able to devote to taking active responsibility for their children’s schooling and sadly, some children do not have the parents or carers who care enough to bother about the quality of their child’s education, although I think they are fewer in number than is commonly believed. I’m not naïve about the depth of these issues, but I’m also optimistic: I passionately believe that the vast majority of children in the UK have parents who care deeply about their schooling (illustrated by the so-called gamers), and that schools which are run as social enterprises, with parents, teachers and local communities in control, will be to the benefit of all children, regardless of their background.
I think given the opportunity by whomever wins the election, parents will jump at the opportunity to enlist social entrepreneurs and community leaders to build schools we can all be proud where our children are safe and can thrive. This isn’t about state versus private; this is about good versus bad.
In the meantime the ON’s will be holidaying in a caravan and doing a DIY Christmas complete with homemade gifts, still all good character building stuff, and after last night I can honestly say, it’s worth it.
Last night with a degree of trepidation my husband and I attended St James Independent School for Senior Boys in Twickenham, to hear how our eleven year old Sam, new to the school in September, was getting on. Our Sam is wonderful; full of smiles and enthusiasm, who, as an example, spent last Saturday afternoon walking up and down a freezing Sheen High Street dressed as Sponge Bob Square Pants, handing out leaflets for a car wash that raised £280 for victims of the recent hurricane in the Philippines, a typical act of ebullient selflessness. Sam was also born with profound hearing difficulties which, though now largely behind him, have brought the speech, language, comprehension and fine motor skill developmental delays familiar to the parents of many deaf and partially deaf children. It can make kids erratic, fidgety and a challenge to teach.
Sam has always been full of beans, but his academic success has never matched his potential, until now it seems. He left his last school, a good primary, bouncing along the bottom of the class, which he must have hit with sufficient momentum to propel him to the middle of his new class. Last night his teachers spoke of his enthusiasm and application, his imagination, dedication and success. He has won the Geography prize and been elected to the school council. At one point my husband and I looked at each other thinking the same thing, wow!
We also started to think, why is Sam suddenly doing so well and why can’t every child benefit from what is a first rate education? This brings me to the point of this blog which is that I have wondered for a long time why parents of school age children, particularly those of us in London, have not taken to the streets in protest. I am not in the least bit surprised that some are trying to work (or as the Government has started calling it “game”) the system. What choice do people have? The brutal truth is there for all to see. Some boroughs like mine, Richmond, have great primary schools and some truly awful secondary options. Other boroughs have both primary and secondary schools operating well below national standards. Frankly I know of no parent who feels content that their local state provision is good and easily accessible.
In a recent editorial in The Economist we were told that “the government has spent years pushing the notion that parents can choose what schools to send their children to, but house-price premiums (often 20% or more) near good ones effectively restrict access to the better-off.” Only faith groups seem exempt. How is it that faith schools can be selective, sustain standards and be state funded? How can Tiffin School for Boys and Girls in Kingston have a uniquely onerous selection process that sees 95% of applicants rejected and yet also be state funded? Why are parents driven to the extremes of faking residency and religious conviction to get their kids into schools where A’s and B’s are more common than scuffles in the corridors? What is going on?
The truth is parents have no choice at all. Your children go to the school closest to you and that is that. If it’s good then congratulations, you’ve won the lottery. If it isn’t, move. If you can’t move because, like us, you still have children in a good primary school but your local secondary is a war zone then dig deep and get ready to join the growing ranks of us who never meant and really can’t afford to privately educate their children.
Still, I am hopeful. This month Social Enterprise London is publishing a fascinating report for CfBT on social enterprise and extended services in schools. In conducting the report we found many of extended services offered in schools already being provided by social enterprises. These were “...community focused businesses which trade to address social or environmental need. At their heart is the objective of meeting social challenges whilst achieving financial sustainability – a powerful principle in tough economic times.” We found that schools which harness the unique community focus of social enterprise “develop innovative relationships with the local community,” building stronger links to families and local community groups.
These and other key findings lead us to consider whether the positive impact of social enterprise on extended services could be deepened if schools themselves are created as social enterprises, through governance models such as parent or employee owned cooperatives or borough and community based joint initiatives. I think this is something worth exploring. To this end SEL are planning a conference in the New Year that will look at the report and give a voice more generally to the growing army of parents and social entrepreneurs looking for change, thinking creatively and willing to take responsibility.
I think we now have a once in a generation opportunity to actually tackle the divide between state and private. Why is the latter so often better? I don’t think its facilities. Both of our local state schools, Shene and Christ’s (A Church of England school) have had millions spent on them. Similarly I don’t believe that the quality or commitment of teachers is in any doubt: the staff we met at Shene and Christ’s seemed dedicated and able.
In my view the issue is the degree of parental and thereby child commitment to the school and its ethos that is lacking. It seems to me that in many state schools the bargain being struck is between the school and the child, whereas in a private school it’s between the school and the parents. This makes the child’s complicit behaviour a given and allows the parents to assume the schools commitment to the child’s progress. The parents have to subscribe to the school ethos, not just endure it. Big difference.
Yes, all very well for the middle class and therefore by popular definition pushy, I hear you say, but many of the parents I have met at St James are people for whom the fees are an extraordinary sacrifice, most had not gone to private school themselves. I didn’t meet a single pushy parent, just kind, involved ones dedicated to their children’s progress.
I think a new parent-centred approach to schools could offer hope. I think everyone should be able to send their children to a good school without having to re mortgage, downsize, move, take 2 jobs or rob a bank, even if they live in London. We should all be sending our children to schools that, like St James, take children of mixed ability and achieve 94 % in GCSE grades A to C (as St. James did this year).
I don’t think we should have to move out of London as so many are doing to hunt down a good school, and I don’t think we should demonise parents who are bending the rules to get a good education for their children if the alternative is sending a child to a school where violence and mediocrity have become the established norms. The state needs to take responsibility for those social black spots and offer parents real choice. Perhaps we should be given the budget the state allocates to educating our children, and be allowed to spend it where we choose, pooling resources to establish real community schools. In the same piece in The Economist they concluded that, “the opposition Conservatives, who are likely to win power next year, have a more constructive idea. Inspired by examples in Sweden, they want to give parents government cash to create and run entirely new schools. It remains to be seen whether those with the energy to game the admissions system are up for the bigger challenge of running a school of their own.”
Of course, an awful lot of parents do not have the luxury of time to be able to devote to taking active responsibility for their children’s schooling and sadly, some children do not have the parents or carers who care enough to bother about the quality of their child’s education, although I think they are fewer in number than is commonly believed. I’m not naïve about the depth of these issues, but I’m also optimistic: I passionately believe that the vast majority of children in the UK have parents who care deeply about their schooling (illustrated by the so-called gamers), and that schools which are run as social enterprises, with parents, teachers and local communities in control, will be to the benefit of all children, regardless of their background.
I think given the opportunity by whomever wins the election, parents will jump at the opportunity to enlist social entrepreneurs and community leaders to build schools we can all be proud where our children are safe and can thrive. This isn’t about state versus private; this is about good versus bad.
In the meantime the ON’s will be holidaying in a caravan and doing a DIY Christmas complete with homemade gifts, still all good character building stuff, and after last night I can honestly say, it’s worth it.
Thursday, 5 November 2009
Social enterprise got a good press today at the ACEVO Annual conference. It was standing room only to hear Francis Maude, Tessa Jowell, Hilary Armstrong former Cabinet Office Minister and Patrick Diamond tell us about the future. Both Francis, Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office and Patrick who is Head of Policy Development for No 10 made special mention of social enterprise. Both went out of their way to map out the opportunites particularly in public service reform. Tessa mentioned HCT in her speech and when I came back to her on 2012 and social enterprise she offered to work with SEL on an event where social enterprises could set out their stalls to 2012 contractors. She said that £1 billion was about to go out, so watch this space!
Coming away from the conference I am struck by how many people don't realise how much our world is going to change next year. This troubles me. I think all bets are going to be off. Numbers are going to count like never before like how many jobs you can create or units you can sell. Contracts are going to be tight and despite the Conservatives commitment to maintaining grants, a good thing in my opinion as so much of the wonderful VCS rely upon them, still I don't believe they will increase in volume. Nothing will, other than potentially the distress caused by cuts. In conversation after the plenary Hilary told be that she felt there was still a job to be done to convince the Treasury that social enterprise had anything other than a bit part to play. Time to role the sleeves up again and get in there I think. It is for that reason that conferences like ACEVO's are critical for all of us to get into the zone, to hear what the politicians are thinking and planning and start drawing up our campaigns, I have my Winston Churchill monocle in as I speak, appropriate given the weekend brings us Rememberence Day.
Earlier on this week I had lunch with Stephen Bubb the CEO of ACEVO and Gordon D'Silva the Founder and CEO of Training for Life. One of the things Gordon told us was that over 25% of TfL's beneficiaries had come to them from the Armed Forces and often the streets. I know from colleagues working in the homeless world like Jeremy Swain at Thames Reach, who got a great name check from Hilary today at the conference, that the number of folk on the streets who are ex-service is shockingly high. How great a price do members of the armed forces have to pay in our name? If they survive the battlefield how far from a hero's welcome is a wet cardboard box on a cold street.
As we wear our poppies this weekend and observe the silence as I always do having, like too many, lost members of my family in both the First and Second World wars (My Grandfather lost his three brothers in the 1st) I will think of those who are being blown to bits in Afghanistan and the men and women back home traumatised, unable to readjust and forgotten by all but the social enterprises and charities trying to help them.
Coming away from the conference I am struck by how many people don't realise how much our world is going to change next year. This troubles me. I think all bets are going to be off. Numbers are going to count like never before like how many jobs you can create or units you can sell. Contracts are going to be tight and despite the Conservatives commitment to maintaining grants, a good thing in my opinion as so much of the wonderful VCS rely upon them, still I don't believe they will increase in volume. Nothing will, other than potentially the distress caused by cuts. In conversation after the plenary Hilary told be that she felt there was still a job to be done to convince the Treasury that social enterprise had anything other than a bit part to play. Time to role the sleeves up again and get in there I think. It is for that reason that conferences like ACEVO's are critical for all of us to get into the zone, to hear what the politicians are thinking and planning and start drawing up our campaigns, I have my Winston Churchill monocle in as I speak, appropriate given the weekend brings us Rememberence Day.
Earlier on this week I had lunch with Stephen Bubb the CEO of ACEVO and Gordon D'Silva the Founder and CEO of Training for Life. One of the things Gordon told us was that over 25% of TfL's beneficiaries had come to them from the Armed Forces and often the streets. I know from colleagues working in the homeless world like Jeremy Swain at Thames Reach, who got a great name check from Hilary today at the conference, that the number of folk on the streets who are ex-service is shockingly high. How great a price do members of the armed forces have to pay in our name? If they survive the battlefield how far from a hero's welcome is a wet cardboard box on a cold street.
As we wear our poppies this weekend and observe the silence as I always do having, like too many, lost members of my family in both the First and Second World wars (My Grandfather lost his three brothers in the 1st) I will think of those who are being blown to bits in Afghanistan and the men and women back home traumatised, unable to readjust and forgotten by all but the social enterprises and charities trying to help them.
Wednesday, 4 November 2009
MP expences reform has unexpected benefit for women
Following todays announcement about the reform of MP's expences, we are finally seeing a debate emerging about parlimentary business hours. Due to the axe now falling on domestic arrangements that allow MP's to debate into the night the suggestion is being made that instead, wait for it, they might be better off working during normal office hours, like every other legislature in the world. Radical.
This will make the lives of those with families a great deal easier and might have the added bonus of attracting more women to politics, women who have things to say and issues to further but would like to see their families too. All good in my view.
This will make the lives of those with families a great deal easier and might have the added bonus of attracting more women to politics, women who have things to say and issues to further but would like to see their families too. All good in my view.
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
Another one bites the dust
To my great sadness Gaby Hinsliff, political editor of the Observer wrote this week of her resignation, due to the impossibility of balancing family and ‘the big job’. Just like the miserable ending to Allison Pearson’s novel ‘I Don’t Know How She Does It’, we learn that, in short, she just can’t do it anymore.
She’s not alone. Adele Blakeborough MBE, who was until recently Chief Executive of CAN (Community Action Network), a pioneering social enterprise that supports community development, has downsized her working life to spend more time with her children. Whilst she feels it’s time for her girls to see more of their mum, she told me "things at the top have to change. I think even the biggest jobs can be done by CEOs who want to be home for the school holidays." As the mother of three young children and a CEO for the last 18 years, I do not want to know that it is not possible to be a good mother and at the top of your game in the workplace; I’m ambitious to be a good mother just as I am to fulfil myself through my career, and the two are not mutually exclusive.
My lot are 9, 11 and 13. For the last 14 years I have juggled breast feeding and board meetings, playgroup and public speaking, school events and strategic planning. Not easy but like all life experience, you can make it work for you. I have learnt to be ruthless in prioritisation, planning is second nature, I make every moment count, and having children gives you an exemplary ability to empathise with the human condition, a good thing in any leader.
My kids also give me a direct stake in the planet’s future, which makes my commitment to social enterprise and the environment all the more urgent. I have no intention of handing them a planet in a worse mess than the one handed to me, frankly it’s the least I can do. Sophi Tranchell MBE, CEO of Divine Chocolate agrees, she told me: "When you have children you become increasingly concerned about the world they will grow up in. In that context working for a social enterprise makes sense as you make a living whilst helping to create the world you would like your children to live in. Added to this social enterprise should and often does offer genuinely family friendly working.”
One of the many things I do is sit on the Government’s Women’s Enterprise Taskforce. For the last three years we have focused on women’s businesses and how to support more women who want to go it alone. Whilst the Government, encouraged by the Taskforce, has brought in multiple measures like loans and targeted business advice the truth is many women in the UK are still struggling to see the wood for the trees. What is holding us back? I would argue role models, clear political leadership and money. Women need to know that it’s possible and even preferable to be a working mother. I love being treated all day as an individual, worthy of respect for my substantial experience and education, not just as someone’s mum, carer or wife. I think my enhanced self esteem actually makes me a better mother.
Politicians need to be careful, women vote and they notice when their lives are taken for granted. For all these years I have paid tax on my salary and then tax for our nannies. The current tax allowances are prohibitively complex for small organisations like mine and the actual benefits to the individuals are negligible. Enough with this voucher nonsense, why can’t I simply claim the money I spend on childcare and nurseries against tax? I truly believe that if men had to afford childcare in order to work, then this would have been sorted out years ago.
The world of social enterprise provides some inspiring role models. As CEO of Social Enterprise London, an organisation with over 1800 members that encourages and supports the development of the social enterprise movement in the capital, I know a little about what inspires people to enter the world of ethical trading. Many of those people are woman, in fact when I look around my board I see June O’Sullivan CEO of London Early Years Foundation, providing top notch childcare to some of societies most vulnerable young people, Kathryn Smith, Board Director of the Co-Op Group and Sophi Tranchell, mentioned above; all working mothers, all at the top of their game. In fact nearly 50% of our members at SEL are women – a great many of whom are mothers, all of whom are meeting society’s most pressing challenges through social enterprise.
So we have the role models, but there's work the social enterprise movement can do in providing the political leadership. We can lead the way in employment strategies that support those with caring responsibilities, like flexible working hours, job shares and the promotion of part time work. Nowhere is this being achieved better than at Women Like Us, a social enterprise which recruits women returning to work after a career break into part-times roles at every professional level. Co founder, Karen Mattison tells us “what we are really about is helping women not to trade their skills in return for flexibility. If you have reached a certain level, you shouldn’t have to trade down.” I agree, nuts to that. We have worked hard to get where we are and demanding more support from our employers should come long before giving up.
'So what about the recession' I hear you ask? Surely all of this is of diminished importance compared to the business of getting everyone back to work. Well no frankly; those of us who have chosen to produce the next generation of tax payers have a right to work as well. I think the Observer as an employer should hang its head in shame. Gaby Hinsliff was outstanding at her job and if she felt that she couldn’t go on holiday with her family without risking dropping everything to return because a Minister once again wants to grandstand, then something is wrong in the state of Denmark, and it’s not Gaby’s commitment to coverage or childcare that whiffs.
I could moan about the schools that assume you have nothing better to do than drop everything because they have rescheduled sports day with 48 hours notice thus clashing with a crucial meeting at the Cabinet Office, or the fact that Brownies, Scouts, Drama School, Art Club, Tennis, Rugby, Football, Judo and Swimming all email me alone even though they have been equipped with the e-mail addresses of both my husband and myself. I could roll my eyes at the male dominated system of evening drinks, dinners and events where so much of the real business is done. But I won’t; partly because this isn’t entirely a gender argument, I’m well aware that male carers find it extremely tough to balance home and work responsibilities; but mainly because I love my job and my kids and I chose this life and can imagine no other. I want the same for my daughter and all girls who choose the North Face; it’s a harder climb but the view from the summit is second to none.
She’s not alone. Adele Blakeborough MBE, who was until recently Chief Executive of CAN (Community Action Network), a pioneering social enterprise that supports community development, has downsized her working life to spend more time with her children. Whilst she feels it’s time for her girls to see more of their mum, she told me "things at the top have to change. I think even the biggest jobs can be done by CEOs who want to be home for the school holidays." As the mother of three young children and a CEO for the last 18 years, I do not want to know that it is not possible to be a good mother and at the top of your game in the workplace; I’m ambitious to be a good mother just as I am to fulfil myself through my career, and the two are not mutually exclusive.
My lot are 9, 11 and 13. For the last 14 years I have juggled breast feeding and board meetings, playgroup and public speaking, school events and strategic planning. Not easy but like all life experience, you can make it work for you. I have learnt to be ruthless in prioritisation, planning is second nature, I make every moment count, and having children gives you an exemplary ability to empathise with the human condition, a good thing in any leader.
My kids also give me a direct stake in the planet’s future, which makes my commitment to social enterprise and the environment all the more urgent. I have no intention of handing them a planet in a worse mess than the one handed to me, frankly it’s the least I can do. Sophi Tranchell MBE, CEO of Divine Chocolate agrees, she told me: "When you have children you become increasingly concerned about the world they will grow up in. In that context working for a social enterprise makes sense as you make a living whilst helping to create the world you would like your children to live in. Added to this social enterprise should and often does offer genuinely family friendly working.”
One of the many things I do is sit on the Government’s Women’s Enterprise Taskforce. For the last three years we have focused on women’s businesses and how to support more women who want to go it alone. Whilst the Government, encouraged by the Taskforce, has brought in multiple measures like loans and targeted business advice the truth is many women in the UK are still struggling to see the wood for the trees. What is holding us back? I would argue role models, clear political leadership and money. Women need to know that it’s possible and even preferable to be a working mother. I love being treated all day as an individual, worthy of respect for my substantial experience and education, not just as someone’s mum, carer or wife. I think my enhanced self esteem actually makes me a better mother.
Politicians need to be careful, women vote and they notice when their lives are taken for granted. For all these years I have paid tax on my salary and then tax for our nannies. The current tax allowances are prohibitively complex for small organisations like mine and the actual benefits to the individuals are negligible. Enough with this voucher nonsense, why can’t I simply claim the money I spend on childcare and nurseries against tax? I truly believe that if men had to afford childcare in order to work, then this would have been sorted out years ago.
The world of social enterprise provides some inspiring role models. As CEO of Social Enterprise London, an organisation with over 1800 members that encourages and supports the development of the social enterprise movement in the capital, I know a little about what inspires people to enter the world of ethical trading. Many of those people are woman, in fact when I look around my board I see June O’Sullivan CEO of London Early Years Foundation, providing top notch childcare to some of societies most vulnerable young people, Kathryn Smith, Board Director of the Co-Op Group and Sophi Tranchell, mentioned above; all working mothers, all at the top of their game. In fact nearly 50% of our members at SEL are women – a great many of whom are mothers, all of whom are meeting society’s most pressing challenges through social enterprise.
So we have the role models, but there's work the social enterprise movement can do in providing the political leadership. We can lead the way in employment strategies that support those with caring responsibilities, like flexible working hours, job shares and the promotion of part time work. Nowhere is this being achieved better than at Women Like Us, a social enterprise which recruits women returning to work after a career break into part-times roles at every professional level. Co founder, Karen Mattison tells us “what we are really about is helping women not to trade their skills in return for flexibility. If you have reached a certain level, you shouldn’t have to trade down.” I agree, nuts to that. We have worked hard to get where we are and demanding more support from our employers should come long before giving up.
'So what about the recession' I hear you ask? Surely all of this is of diminished importance compared to the business of getting everyone back to work. Well no frankly; those of us who have chosen to produce the next generation of tax payers have a right to work as well. I think the Observer as an employer should hang its head in shame. Gaby Hinsliff was outstanding at her job and if she felt that she couldn’t go on holiday with her family without risking dropping everything to return because a Minister once again wants to grandstand, then something is wrong in the state of Denmark, and it’s not Gaby’s commitment to coverage or childcare that whiffs.
I could moan about the schools that assume you have nothing better to do than drop everything because they have rescheduled sports day with 48 hours notice thus clashing with a crucial meeting at the Cabinet Office, or the fact that Brownies, Scouts, Drama School, Art Club, Tennis, Rugby, Football, Judo and Swimming all email me alone even though they have been equipped with the e-mail addresses of both my husband and myself. I could roll my eyes at the male dominated system of evening drinks, dinners and events where so much of the real business is done. But I won’t; partly because this isn’t entirely a gender argument, I’m well aware that male carers find it extremely tough to balance home and work responsibilities; but mainly because I love my job and my kids and I chose this life and can imagine no other. I want the same for my daughter and all girls who choose the North Face; it’s a harder climb but the view from the summit is second to none.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)