Funding the RAFAC

All,
I wish to raise a purely hypothetical question.
An awful lot of the gripes we have on here are founded in examples such as.

HQAC being understaffed and so slow to process things.
Corps core systems such as BADER needing more TLC than time allows.
AEFs and VGS requiring more support and kit to deliver a truly meaningful solution.
Syllabus training materials out of date or in need of TLC.

Therefore I would be interested in the legal possibility and process required to self fund as an organisation FOR EXAMPLE the following.

5x permanent extra admins at HQAC to cover the Things we really need and want.

5x extra permanent BADER staff including manning the help desk meaningfully.

Provide each and every AEF and VGS with 2 flight Sims. Etc

Have a professional external body rewrite All the syllabus PowerPoints to a modern standard with professional teaching notes.

These are 4 example issues and only 4 example solutions.

NOW
Assuming a future Air Cadet estate of 30000 cadets. If each cadet had to pay an additional ÂŁ5.00 per month on subs direct to HQAC, this would raise ÂŁ1.8m per year.

Easily enough to cover the first 2 and 4th and leaving spare for the 3rd over a period of 3 years or so.
Assuming 10 staff at 25k per year, with NI and tax etc that’s 36k cost so only 360k. Leaves loads to do some real good!

Now would people be prepared to sell this on their units.
Small amount more for a MUCH MUCH better cadet experience.

After all, more staff at HQAC means they can get on with helping Sqns with their admin.

Before anyone says 5.00 Extra a month… blah blah blah.
I have cadets who do scouts ÂŁ24pm
Football ÂŁ32pm
Rugby ÂŁ27pm
Music lessons ÂŁ60pm upwards.

We are cheap!

1 Like

I dont think this is an unreasonable suggestion. In fact i support it. Being devils advocate here one push back that will probably be mentioned is the ammount we ask cadets to buy to participate in activities. I.e. shoes, boots, no 3 dress, AT gear, fieldcraft equipment. Surely if we were going to increase subs there needs to be the infrastructure in place to off set some of that cost. At a minimum providing the uniform we expect them to wear and not expect self purchase.

Perhaps we just go full commercial and point mum’s and dads to cadet direct.
No need to hold all that uniform in gash sizes on each Sqn.
Would give me back 2/3rds of my store for more useful kit.

After all the Scouts and etc other clubs charge a monthly sub and also expect partcipants to buy all their own kit.

Or split the difference.
Blues from RAF.
Greens is self supply but is mandatory purchase?

Yep with a solutiom to buy greens at cost price not the over inflated cadet direct prices

1 Like

Definitly cost price!

Raising the subs to specifically fund these projects raises all sorts of managing public money issues. The money would go into a central pot and would then need to be ringfenced, but would then potentially need to be reallocated to different budgets (e.g. Civil service salaries, insurance and maintainance for the sims) . It would increase the risk of JRs being brought if the specified purposes were not the recipients of the money or if the projects were not carried out effectively or reasonably.

It also raises Bill of Rights issues (which potentially also applies to subs as a whole). Under the Bill of Rights the Crown(or government departments) can not raise taxes or levies without the consent of Parliament. Generally this is taken to mean anything that isn’t a commercial service that could be replicated by an outside body. The question then arises as to whether things like scouts and guides are close enough to the cadet forces to get into this exemption. If not then we would need powers in primary legislation (and then probably an SI) to charge subs. Fees is a really complex area and I don’t really want to open that can of worms but it came to mind when considering this. <\Aries mode >

2 Likes

The mandatory scout uniform consists of 1x shirt.
Cadet uniform:
2x Shirt
1x Woolley Pully
1x Trousers
1x Beret
1x tie
1x Brassard
1x Shoes

That’s just Blues. Add in No3, coveralls, and it gets even worse.

Well let’s compare Scouts and Air Cadets
Scouts in 2017:

  • 475000 young people
  • income of ÂŁ34 million, ÂŁ11 million of which from membership.
  • approximately ÂŁ23 per member

Air Cadets in 2017:

  • ~39000 young people (ATC and CCF RAF)
  • income of ÂŁ1,475,332, of which ÂŁ1.1 million from “Donations & legacies” which I can only assume is membership?
  • approximately ÂŁ28.20 per member.

Of course this is a very basic analysis and probably not accurate.

Sources:
http://beta.charitycommission.gov.uk/charity-details/?regid=1160910&subid=0

My daughter went to brownies 4 years ago and we had to buy our uniform which was really expensive for what it was then pay forntye staff to review for new badges then the badges themselves. I don’t think the cadets pay for much at all from a mum perspective. I think the overall idea.

The problem with this you could see it being squandered given that’s the MO in the public sector, is spend with no accountability and then expect more, this would be non-public money so accounting would need be done to a much higher level than normal for public sector bodies.
There would need to be targets and measurable results and full delivery year on year and IMO full refund if they fail to deliver. With the targets set and managed by the volunteers. Previously and currently leaving HQAC / RAF to manage projects has meant abject failure and or far too much time taken.

Given they are paying for it every parent would need to get a copy of the accounts and HQAC be open to questions and scrutiny, although this should happen with non-public money accounts. HQAC fanny around answering questions from us and due to the rank nonsense people kow tow, parents are not going to be over awed like some in the Air Cadets. You would need a parent based CWC set up to manage this and no interference from 2½/3/4 ringers and 1 big ringers.

As for uniform, if it had to be paid for, parents would pay, BUT there could not be changes etc insisted on by the RAF, randomly creating more expense. RAF changes jumper style, oh by the way that’s another £?? that you have to spend, or people with too little to do get too excited.
if parents were paying for it, would they be happy with the run around that we get from supply or getting stung by “rip off”, and similar surplus shops? When they’re not paying for they sort of accept it, not happy, but accepting. Imagine some of the BS we get about contracts not being redone and in effect we the Air Cadets are such a low priority we don’t matter, being told to a parent, meaning they can’t get what they want and are effectively limited to one supplier, who can’t supply. Also ordering. I cannot believe we don’t order uniform, barrack stores etc online and get them delivered to a home address from a central store, not still have to pussy around with forms going through a parent station. Any one can go online any time of the day, look for practically anything from anywhere in the world, see that it was available, pay for it and get it within a few days. Compare and contrast getting a few pairs of trousers, jumpers, berets etc, from stores; send in a form, leave it a couple of weeks to dribble through God knows how many rubber stampers, only to call to arrange to collect and be told various things not available. Why they can’t email us and tell us is baffling, I can’t believe that even the crustiest of old store women and blokes, don’t use email.

When it comes to selling it to parents and the costs of the other organisations. With the other organisations/groups listed they aren’t as anonymous as the Air Cadets with the RAF connection, parents are normally more involved and the parents see the money being used. We knew when one of our daughters and son did athletics and our son played football, there were subs and fees which were quite transparent, unlike the Air Cadets where away from the squadron level, it all becomes very blurred with smoke and mirrors, as such do the people paying ever how our where the money goes?
Ring fencing this money and open reporting as above would be an absolute requirement.

As for employing people it would depend on the salary. Given the current salaries don’t seem to attract the right people, what be considered a reasonable salary £20K to £25K? If so it would actually cost £50K to £55K plus per employee, taking NI, pension etc into account, so for 10 that’s at least a third of the amount gone. How would they be held to account/line managed? Not by the current people I hope.

All very good points.
But I believe all solvable.

I’m really interested in knowing if

  1. People think extra subs would be accepted.
  2. If spending it on central admin projects would make the difference we all now desperately need.

WRT to 2, this is a moveable feast and currently it’s admin, but next year it could something additional and so on and so on. Which comes to 1, in as much as it’s say £5/month this year, but next year they want a rise, maybe additional people and there is something else, such as the IT is now out of date and we need new stuff.

But as I say who controls / manages this? I certainly don’t think, given their track record HQAC / “RAF”/ MOD are the ones to do it. Could anyone hand on heart say that given the recent experiences we’ve had, they could be trusted?

I agree with some of the suggestions personally
However

From my old Sqns point of view then NO
Any raise in subscription would end up with my cadets struggling to pay and attend we already self fund approx 40% of our cadets subscriptions in our sqn.
There is 3 sqns in our wing that are located inside the top list of most impoverished areas.

For those who not too sure what that means in reality.
I have seen parents wear their child FWJs out shopping as they don’t have a coat
Or
Cadets going to get some type of award and wearing their light blue uniform (no beret or brassard) as it’s the best clothes they have

So that is why from a sqn point of view I would be against raising subscriptions

4 Likes

I totally agree with big_g

One of the massive benefits of uniformed cadet services is that in providing a uniform, there is no financial discrimination. It does matter how well off, or not, their parents are, when they are in the provided Blue uniform, they all look the same!

It’s alright for well off families to pay more, but this would restrict our utilitarianism in our approach to membership!

4 Likes

Back to the example of the Scouts, only a third of their income is from subs, the other 2 thirds come from Retail and Charitable activities.

Think of all the extra scout branded kit that young people and leaders buy because bits there and they are encouraged to be proud of, and show off, that they are scouts.
Our RACs and Adventure Centers could be pushed further to offer events hosting and activities to the public and other organisations and parties.

How can they be used by the cadets if they are full of corporate groups?

Same way scouts currently use theirs . . .
Cadet groups get priority in booking space & / or “outside” booking are limited to X hours per week.
We’re talking about how to increase funding for the rafac, of course that should be done without reducing available activities for YP but I suspect our RACs and AT centers do not have close to 100% utilisation.

Can’t comment on RACs, but the two ACATCs are pretty much booked up, apart from a few weeks in the off season!!

RACs and AT centres open to the public would need employed staff and lots of them, although in theory it’s a good idea.

Overall we suffer from being so tightly aligned to the RAF and being a well kept secret, that external investors of any real worth would be put off. There is and has been scope for Air Cadets to seek sponsorship and partner arrangements from all manner of industries and businesses for decades, but the MOD funding and link I feel inhibits this, due to the lack of any financial accountability. Would you voluntarily put money into something where’s there no financial accountability or responsibility?

The GPF IIRC has a few long standing legacies / bequeaths.

Not 100% sure where the money would go though

If a cadet hut is leased the money doesn’t go to the ATC but to the local RFCA. Every year we need to sign a form to confirm no money had been received from letting out huts etc.