The hidden agenda of the meeting was to allow yet again a handful of self-styled organisations to offer themselves as the representative, face and the aspired one-voice of the BME voluntary sector and manipulate others to achieve this aim.

MODA was among a number of BME groups individually invited to attend "a national summit for BME voluntary and community sector" at NCVO on 21 October 2005. The declared purpose of the meeting was “to discuss how best to develop and improve BME national infrastructure and to input views on this to ACU’s current strategic review.” But the hidden agenda of the meeting, as it has become a routine structural ingredient of such meetings, was clear from the way the meeting was organised and managed. The representative of the Confederation of Indian Organisations said that their network has existed for over 30 years and the same ideas about BME infrastructure have been around without a tangible result. Others challenged the very idea of one voice for the BME voluntary sector as a precondition for a real financial support for BME infrastructure regionally and nationally. One voice is an impossible idea in this age of diversity and decentralisation. Why has such argument never been forward in relation to the mainstream voluntary sector?

The hidden agenda of the meeting was to allow yet again a handful of self-styled organisations to offer themselves as the representative, face and the aspired one-voice of the BME voluntary sector and manipulate others to achieve this aim. A steering committee had already been established. Exclusive control structure and mechanism were already in operation.

MODA's experience

MODA's director Dr Kamal Rasul commented on the very valuable and illuminating results of the conclusions of a study about the degree of involvement of BME voluntary sector in Compact, presented to the meeting by Shamsher Chohan of Compact Working Group. She identified a number of facts:

That majority of BME groups were not aware of Compact; that those aware of it did not understand its benefits; that lack of resources prevented participation; that always few selected groups are identified as representing the BME voluntary sector, which leads to inevitable exclusion and preventing any meaningful participation and representation. Dr Rasul suggested that the same thing happens in all so-called consultations and participation strategies. The majority of BME groups do not even know what is going on while a number of selected groups grab whatever is there to be grabbed in their names. He referred to what the Chair of BME Sub Group, Caryl Agard said about ensuring participation of both infrastructure and frontline organisations. He gave an example about MODA’s experience as a grassroots BME infrastructure agency. He said (contribution edited): This is at least the fifteenth meeting I attend since the idea of ChangeUp came along. I attended a national conference in Birmingham, presented two interactive seminars, in the process of setting up a BME co-ordinating partnership body, both seminars were attended by representative of ACU, and I attended over 7 meetings with other London-based BME infrastructure organisations. This process was funded by the early-spend progarmme. Yet when everything was finalised and a new co-ordinating body called PILLAR was born, it was ignored and not supported to continue its work. Over £50,000 taxpayers money and all our efforts were wasted. Then representing MODA I attended London Region’s ChangeUp Consortium meetings. To ensure the inclusion of BME sector it was decided that a BME subcommittee be established but this then changed into a so-called equalities subcommittee. In fact this was a travesty of equality, it was in fact an anti-equality group. It was set up in its structure and operation to serve pre-existing power structures and mutual-interest alliances and ensure the exclusion of anyone outside them. Dr Rasul said to prove to the ChangeUp that MODA was a grassroots organisation, MODA organised a partnership meeting attended by 48 migrant and refugee community groups who democratically discussed their problems and aspirations and fully supported MODA’s plans. After that MODA was asked by ChangeUP to apply for funding for its ICT project, but it was the only application resisted and rejected by few people calling themselves equalities committee. He added that in the same way that Compact study has shown it’s the entrenched self-interest of those groups and structures who present themselves as representing the BME sector which prevent wider participation .Yet these self-styled groups are not known by the majority of BME community organisations.

Dr Rasul’s question: if the aim of this meeting is participation and not yet another act of manipulation, why have you already set up a steering committee and controlling structures? - was not answered by the organisers. In fact the Chair intervened twice to prevent him complete his comments.

Back