[cma-l] FW: CMA Council - CR Fund priority

Sun Aug 1 17:18:42 BST 2010

Dear All

The chitter chatter, nitter natter rumbles on with regards to the Community
Radio Fund. I put observations on the board to this and with reference to
other things, I notice that sometimes it instigates a little bit of response

.. however, one thing is always very noticeable 

.. no one ever
answers the queries or the observations made ???

I don’t ask everyone to agree, in fact, there could be the possibility that
no one agrees 

. But at least --------------- as John Mcenroe shouted
on Court One      ‘’ answer the question *********** ‘’

Canalside’s situation is quite simple 

. I couldn’t give a monkey’s cuss
how great or how small the Fund is, unless it is DOLED OUT fairly and
equally !      We are as a brotherhood putting the cart before the horse,
with someone suggesting a few weeks ago that this thing should be judged on
how good the application is ??      there is bound to be huge differences
between all the stations with reference to ability ‘to tick boxes’
do people not think that most Community Radio persons are sick to the back
teeth of grant panels, committees, form filling, time wasting 

 instead
of getting on with what we are supposed to be doing.

What is the point of the Community Radio Fund being put up to 20 million !
(‘’hey let’s push the boat out’’)        if Pure, All, Wythenshawe,
CheshireFM, Moorlands etc get a slice of it and Canalside doesn’t ??!
( I picked these stations at random guys as they are near to us)
the whole thing is pointless.

Phil talks about things being difficult to administer 

 we make them
bloody difficult to administer !                       as I have said, one
clerk, one calculator, £20 million divided by 217 Stations =  about 90 odd
grand me thinks? (dunno’)        it’s a damn good job I ain’t the clerk,
maths was never a strong subject, nor to was English come to think of it 
..
as the Meerkat says ‘’simples eeeek’’                             it really
isn’t difficult, as the way in which we are approaching this at present is
dangerous and it could cause rifts 

 let’s hope not. We need to be
together fending off the Beeb and the Commercial boys, not squabbling

 some may say, we’re not squabbling, the ones who are getting the
money certainly ain’t squabbling 
 after all, they don’t need to ? do they ?

To round this up, the fund in it’s present form is a waste of time as far as
Canalside is concerned.

1)       It isn’t enough

2)       It isn’t distributed fairly

Add the two up and this equates to = shambles

Regards

Nick

  _____  

From: cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk
[mailto:cma-l-bounces at mailman.commedia.org.uk] On Behalf Of Phil Korbel
Sent: 31 July 2010 10:57
To: Steve Buckley
Cc: cma-l at commedia.org.uk
Subject: Re: [cma-l] CMA Council - CR Fund priority

hi all

thanks for some smart thinking there Steve...  yes we must take that small
comfort from the govt response but also must not be under any illusions
about how vulnerable the Fund is - meagre as it is.

I really like the idea of asking for the fund to be used as seed corn for
more fund raising - a trust model perhaps - and the Govt would seek to see
that in the hands of a registered charity I'd imagine.  The idea of asking
stuff away from Ofcom would also appeal to the Govt I'm sure. There is
certainly a discussion to be had about the use of ERDF and other EU sources
to match - but with the real danger that it wd cost too much to
administer...

Knowing how utterly overstretched the CMA is there cant be alternative to
the sort of approach that Steve suggests and we've got to get moving now -
so that every MP in our reach is not just contacted but frog-marched to
Osborne's door in good time for October's Comprehensive Spending Review.

Count us in!

best wishes,

Phil

On 30 July 2010 21:08, Steve Buckley <sbuckley at gn.apc.org> wrote:

Dear Phil and all

I want to share a few thoughts with you and CMA Council regarding the
CR Fund and following the response from the government to the
petition that I initiated last year.

First, in reading the government statement, while I am sceptical of
DCMS commitment or ability to progress in raising funds from other
departments, it does seem to me there are some significant positives:
(1) that, despite the change of government, it is consistent with
previous (Labour) government statements recognising the value of the
sector and accepting that there is merit in finding additional
funding from other government departments to support CR social
benefit; (2) it also reinforces the DCMS policy of funding the CMA.

On the other hand it is clear that in the present climate even the
existing meagre level of the Fund is not guaranteed to continue after
the completion of the Comprehensive Spending Review. In this context
it seems to me there should be three broad lines of response:

1. We (the sector itself, the CMA and our allies) need to vigorously
not only defend the Fund's existence but to continue to call for its
increase from 2005 levels to a level commensurate with the Everitt
Report and the present and future scale of the sector.

2. The campaign needs to build significant grassroots mobilisation,
that articulates with the CMA's efforts but is not dependent on the
CMA's core resources. Its should be in parallel to and reinforce the
policy dialogue with DCMS. This might take the form of a CR Fund
action group/network that involves people from both within and
outside CMA staff and Council.

3. There is a need also to inject some fresh thinking into the
development of the Fund. In the long term of course it should be
extended to other community media. In the medium term it could be
better taken out of Ofcom and established as a 'co-regulatory' entity
with an objective to lead in raising funds from other sources in
addition to the DCMS support. The Canadian experience is instructive
in this respect - where the fund was set up by a group of CR sector
activists. Initial funding came from the private sector with CRTC cash
later.

I'd welcome feedback from the CMA Council and others on these suggestions.

Best wishes

Steve Buckley
Sheffield Live! 93.2 FM
www.sheffieldlive.org

At 17:17 29/07/2010, you wrote:
>Dear Members and friends
>
>Just to say that the Council of the CMA are due to meet in London this
>Saturday and although we have a full agenda of important issues facing the
>organisation and the wider sector I wanted to let you know it was happening
>and to ask that if there are any burning issues you would like to flag up
>for our attention please let me know via this list.   I cannot guarantee
>they will be discussed in detail this weekend but can guarantee as always
>that they will not be ignored, that they will inform our thinking and be
>responded to as soon as practically possible.
>
>Best wishes
>
>Phil
>
>Phil Shepherd
>Chair of Council
>Community Media Association
>c/o Engine Room
>52 High Street
>Bridgwater
>Somerset TA6 3BL
>
>philshep.wordpress.com
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>
>cma-l mailing list - cma-l at commedia.org.uk
>
>Community Media Association - www.commedia.org.uk
>_______________________________________________
>
>To manage your mailing list subscription please visit:
>http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l

_______________________________________________

cma-l mailing list - cma-l at commedia.org.uk

Community Media Association - www.commedia.org.uk
_______________________________________________

To manage your mailing list subscription please visit:
http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/cma-l

-- 
Phil Korbel
Director
0161 237 5454

Radio Regen is a community, media and urban regeneration charity 
A company limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales No.
3753832 
Registered office: 12 Hilton Street, Manchester, M1 1JF 
Registered Charity No. 1077763 
www.radioregen.org
www.communityradiotoolkit.net

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20100801/695dd086/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00013.txt
URL: <http://mailman.commedia.org.uk/pipermail/cma-l/attachments/20100801/695dd086/attachment.txt>