Chamber
Plenary, 27 Mar 2003
27 Mar 2003 · S1 · Plenary
Item of business
Great Northern Partnership
I lodged an amendment to the motion and I am delighted that, in her speech, Elaine Thomson referred to the role of the community representatives within the GNP.
I am also delighted that she talked about the healthy roots project. As the former councillor for Middlefield, I had considerable involvement in setting up the project, during Middlefield's previous existence as a priority partnership area. I was the author of the scheme to turn a disused allotment area into what I hope will become a successful community business. Sometimes such projects take time to gestate and it has taken almost eight years for the project to get to the point that it has reached. Nevertheless, it is a welcome development.
I commend the work that the community representatives of the GNP have done. They undertake a huge amount of work for the areas that they represent. I know most of the people in Middlefield, having worked with them for quite some time. I pay tribute to Paula Mann, Paul Calder, Helen Holland and Ernest Chapman, who are the community representatives, and to Councillor Kevin Stewart—they all champion the Middlefield area. Their counterparts in Fersands, Printfield and Alexander/Hayton in Tillydrone also do sterling work for their communities.
However, their work is handicapped by the policies of the Executive. Some members might be disappointed by my saying that, particularly as this is to be the last debate in this parliamentary session. However, my experience of the SIPs and their predecessor organisations is that they are used as cash cows by councils and other agencies. Before the GNP starts work each year, it has to pay 2.5 per cent of its grant—a little more than £20,000—to Aberdeen City Council in support charges. Furthermore, this year it will have to spend in excess of £200,000 out of a total grant of less than £900,000 to pay for its support team. The moneys for the support team and the council payments, which swallow up almost a quarter of the grant, are not being used to deliver any services to the communities, and the worst is yet to come.
Earlier, I talked about the GNP being used as a cash cow. I would be happy if the money were being used to enhance services in Middlefield, Printfield, Fersands and Alexander/Hayton, but it is often the case that the GNP subsidises city-wide services, which should be funded from the mainstream budgets of the council or other agencies. I am happy to give some examples of that.
The safe and sound project aims to improve the quality of life of disadvantaged children. The project is provided with £20,000 from the council, sure start Scotland and Grampian Primary Care NHS Trust, and £6,000 from the GNP. Representatives of the GNP assure me that, although it provides 23 per cent of the money, the GNP areas do not get 23 per cent of the services. Other areas that do not pay for those services get the bulk of the support from that money.
The children's services training and assessment centre receives about £140,000 from various sources and almost £28,000 from the GNP. As part of the Scotland-wide work of the Aberlour Child Care Trust, its aims are to provide opportunities for training and qualifications in working with children and families. Although that is admirable work, the funding for other areas of the city comes from mainstream funding, whereas the funding for the GNP work comes from the GNP's budget. Why is that?
The GNP is set to give £5,000 to the business support group, for which other funding will come from mainstream sources. The GNP is set to hand over £30,000 for early intervention schemes in education. In reality, that money should come from mainstream funding. I could give a whole series of examples.
SIPs are supposed to enhance services in socially excluded communities. Elaine Thomson highlighted exactly why the GNP is needed in Middlefield in her constituency. However, the money is being used to support services across the board within the city. Many of the activities that the GNP's resources are being used to supplement should receive mainstream funding.
I am also delighted that she talked about the healthy roots project. As the former councillor for Middlefield, I had considerable involvement in setting up the project, during Middlefield's previous existence as a priority partnership area. I was the author of the scheme to turn a disused allotment area into what I hope will become a successful community business. Sometimes such projects take time to gestate and it has taken almost eight years for the project to get to the point that it has reached. Nevertheless, it is a welcome development.
I commend the work that the community representatives of the GNP have done. They undertake a huge amount of work for the areas that they represent. I know most of the people in Middlefield, having worked with them for quite some time. I pay tribute to Paula Mann, Paul Calder, Helen Holland and Ernest Chapman, who are the community representatives, and to Councillor Kevin Stewart—they all champion the Middlefield area. Their counterparts in Fersands, Printfield and Alexander/Hayton in Tillydrone also do sterling work for their communities.
However, their work is handicapped by the policies of the Executive. Some members might be disappointed by my saying that, particularly as this is to be the last debate in this parliamentary session. However, my experience of the SIPs and their predecessor organisations is that they are used as cash cows by councils and other agencies. Before the GNP starts work each year, it has to pay 2.5 per cent of its grant—a little more than £20,000—to Aberdeen City Council in support charges. Furthermore, this year it will have to spend in excess of £200,000 out of a total grant of less than £900,000 to pay for its support team. The moneys for the support team and the council payments, which swallow up almost a quarter of the grant, are not being used to deliver any services to the communities, and the worst is yet to come.
Earlier, I talked about the GNP being used as a cash cow. I would be happy if the money were being used to enhance services in Middlefield, Printfield, Fersands and Alexander/Hayton, but it is often the case that the GNP subsidises city-wide services, which should be funded from the mainstream budgets of the council or other agencies. I am happy to give some examples of that.
The safe and sound project aims to improve the quality of life of disadvantaged children. The project is provided with £20,000 from the council, sure start Scotland and Grampian Primary Care NHS Trust, and £6,000 from the GNP. Representatives of the GNP assure me that, although it provides 23 per cent of the money, the GNP areas do not get 23 per cent of the services. Other areas that do not pay for those services get the bulk of the support from that money.
The children's services training and assessment centre receives about £140,000 from various sources and almost £28,000 from the GNP. As part of the Scotland-wide work of the Aberlour Child Care Trust, its aims are to provide opportunities for training and qualifications in working with children and families. Although that is admirable work, the funding for other areas of the city comes from mainstream funding, whereas the funding for the GNP work comes from the GNP's budget. Why is that?
The GNP is set to give £5,000 to the business support group, for which other funding will come from mainstream sources. The GNP is set to hand over £30,000 for early intervention schemes in education. In reality, that money should come from mainstream funding. I could give a whole series of examples.
SIPs are supposed to enhance services in socially excluded communities. Elaine Thomson highlighted exactly why the GNP is needed in Middlefield in her constituency. However, the money is being used to support services across the board within the city. Many of the activities that the GNP's resources are being used to supplement should receive mainstream funding.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Sir David Steel):
NPA
Our final item of business this morning is the members' business debate on motion S1M-4020, in the name of Elaine Thomson, on the Great Northern Partnership ...
Motion debated,
That the Parliament commends the work done by the Great Northern Partnership (GNP) in Aberdeen; notes that the GNP plays an important role in improving quali...
Elaine Thomson (Aberdeen North) (Lab):
Lab
I am pleased to introduce the debate today, which is almost our last debate.The Great Northern Partnership is one of 48 social inclusion partnerships that we...
Brian Adam (North-East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I lodged an amendment to the motion and I am delighted that, in her speech, Elaine Thomson referred to the role of the community representatives within the G...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
Please move to a close.
Brian Adam:
SNP
I am just about to do so, Presiding Officer.Rather than duplicate the administrative functions of other public and voluntary sector agencies, we could better...
Mr Tom McCabe (Hamilton South) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the motion and I congratulate Elaine Thomson on securing a debate on SIPs as the first session of our Scottish Parliament draws to a close. It is d...
Richard Lochhead (North-East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
What a joy it is to follow Tom McCabe's positive contribution. However, it is a pleasure to speak in today's debate. The first members' business debate in th...
Mr McCabe:
Lab
The member seems to be making an argument for refining social inclusion partnership funding, yet the SNP's policy is to abolish such partnerships. Which is t...
Richard Lochhead:
SNP
Brian Adam has outlined the SNP's position. My point is that organisations such as the GNP cannot even get access to the funding that is currently available ...
Sarah Boyack (Edinburgh Central) (Lab):
Lab
I am happy to congratulate Elaine Thomson on securing the debate. I think that I replied to the first members' business debate in the Parliament so it is pro...
Brian Adam:
SNP
Will the member take an intervention?
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I will when I get into my discussion.Many communities in my constituency in Edinburgh, which is one of the most prosperous cities in the United Kingdom, expe...
Brian Adam:
SNP
We probably agree on the analysis of the source of the problem but we disagree about the solution. Will Sarah Boyack comment on the proportion of the funding...
Sarah Boyack:
Lab
I think Brian Adam misunderstands the purpose of SIPs and the way in which they operate. I have yet to be lobbied on that issue, although voluntary organisat...
The Deputy Minister for Social Justice (Des McNulty):
Lab
One of the number of points that Brian Adam got wrong in his speech was his claim that this is the last debate. I understand that there will be a further deb...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
Modesty prevents me from commenting on that.
Des McNulty:
Lab
I begin by pointing out that this is the final members' business debate. I know that the Presiding Officer and Tom McCabe were very much involved in setting ...
Brian Adam:
SNP
I readily acknowledge that that is the intention. In as much as success has been achieved, the SIP programme has been a success. However, will the minister d...
Des McNulty:
Lab
I will deal later with that issue, which is important in considering the transition that lies ahead as SIPs move towards community planning.It is important t...
Brian Adam:
SNP
Will the minister give way?
Des McNulty:
Lab
I will finish my point.
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
Technically, the minister is in his last minute.
Des McNulty:
Lab
We are progressing links so that the experience and skills that have been gained through the way in which the SIP has worked can be shared. We want to develo...
The Presiding Officer:
NPA
I close the last members' business debate of this Parliament.
Meeting suspended until 14:30.
On resuming—