RAFA donation

Civilian Committee
12

As an OC, I wouldn’t ask my Civ Com to donate Sqn funds to another charity - especially as those funds were probably raised by something like a bag-pack, where people were donating to my Sqn, not for me to hand it over to another Charity. We sometimes get donations from organisations like the RBL but it is for a specific item, for example, a donation to the new air rifle range, rather than handing over cash.

However, we have done joint fund-raising activities, where funds have been split between us and another charity, but that was made clear at the time, so people knew what they were donating to. We also support things like Wings Appeal and Poppy collecting with Staff & Cadets so donate time rather than money.

2 Likes
13

I would like to know, how providing a donation to RAFA supports the aims of the ATC for which the cadets pay you (Civ Com) to support the delivery of.

It would be different if it was pre-agreed that this bag pack would be split 50/50 however, I’d expect RAFA Support at the Bag Pack…

That £100 could subsidise Camp for 3 or 4 cadets…

14

I have similar views - I don’t give money to a charity to it can give money to another charity with very different objectives.

If an OC wants to raise money for RAFA then it should be done in a standalone way - RAFA collection tins, sponsored event in aid of RAFA, whatever - but when money is raised for/paid to a Sqn for the use of that Sqn, then it’s it’s simply not the OC’s to give away to other organisations.

£100 buys a lot of waterproofs, or rucksacks, or campsite fees, or minibus time.

1 Like
15

When you fundraise, you do so for your own charity, especially where your Cadets are in uniform which will identify the Squadron. Otherwise you need to make it clear to donors, what you intend to do with the money, and if it is for the RAFA, you should have their banners etc available.

The intended beneficiaries need to be identified. That is not to say you cannot help the RAFA fundraise, in the same that the all Cadet Forces give annual support to the RBL Poppy Appeal.

I came across an ATC squadron who had public credit for Air Ambulance support but it seems that it was a Cadet ‘Community project’ and it is not entirely clear that they had made it clear to the public what they were doing.

These options of visible support for other charities are not necessarily within the jurisdiction of the Civcom. Why should the Treasurer need to be involved when the monies collected do not constitute non public funds under ACP10/11. So why should should monies have to be processed through the Civcom bank account.

It also brings into question whether use of GPF funds (via PIPE approval) for Cadet Insurance is appropriate when a) it is was not an ACO activity and b) the fundraising was not for the benefit of the ATC.

The Government has created a separate Fundraising Regulator which the ACO appears yet to acknowledge.

As a Civilian Committee I always believed the intent was to benefit Cadets with support to enable Cadet activity, not to support another Charity even though there may be certain parental links.

If you have so much money then why consider giving it away, would it not be better to consider reducing subscriptions - an obvious indirect benefits to Cadets.

2 Likes
16

how does this work when for instance the Squadron is assisting the local hospital with a summer fete with all proceeds going to the hospital?

background
the situation is there aren’t enough and who there are aren’t fit enough to set up the various stalls, gazebos and the like for the local town hospital (not A&E)
They call in the local ATC unit as a labour force and allow them to hold a stall at the event.

the event is raising much need funds for the hospital, yet the Cadets were in attendance via SMS approval despite only a public platform in the shape of a recruitment stand as a benefit…

this is just one example, i can think of a few more where the ATC unit i have been on has been a labour force assisting another charity…be that at a local fun run, airshow or other
if your taking the view that insurance isn’t valid because the financial benefit doesn’t go to those who but the effort in then that would change the face of ATC community work nationwide

17

I’d ignore him in the main. He spouts off a lot but I’m yet to see any evidence for his claims.

4 Likes
18

I have yet to read anywhere that the ATC is a vehicle for the provision of cheap labour for any event; I have always believed in what the website claims - that it provides activities which offer challenge, excitement and adventure. There is also the bit about air minded young people…. .

Two things have changed since 1941;a) the RAFAC is not a recruiting platform for the RAF (website refers to times of war) and b) the RAF has shrunk to such an extent that opportunities to get up close and personal with an aircraft are now largely confined to Museums.

And excuse me, but other than the provision of facilities and uniform being funded by the Taxpayer, it is very clear that everything else comes from donors - in most instances parental subscriptions

Chapter one of ACP11 clearly states the purpose and objectives of the organisation which derive from the Royal Warrant, but nothing about fundraising.

Unlike the MSSC, the RAFAC does not get an MOD Grant in Aid, and therefore what is not covered by central funding, has to be met by the Civilian Committee, who’s purpose is to raise, manage and apply those funds to meet the requirements of the Royal Warrant.

One cannot count Wings as being a significant part of this process as they just seem to soak up some of Squadron funds, but do not openly make it known how they spend the money - they then deem themselves unaccountable to the original donors. There is one case of a Wing having a quantity of PCs donated by a major IT provider, and Squadron Committees were then expected to part with money if they wanted one of these machines.

I agree that the more money you have, the more can be achieved, and that is then down the availability of sufficient CFAVs; it is somewhat sad when one hears about thousands of pounds being raised through grants etc and being used in line with the application to Awards for All, only to find that the ATC is so appalingly bad at man management, that there is an exodus of staff such that all the kit provided for the benefit of Cadets, now sits unused. If this was tax payers funding igt wouold be subject to investigation, but not with the ACO where no-one is held accountable.

Incubus is correct, in his reference to RAFA, the purpose and intent has been identified, but as I said HQAC has yet to appreciate that they need Fundraising guidelines.

And in response to those who want me to quote specifics, I think that this is hardly the forum -

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/66586/response/167081/attach/html/5/FOI%2030%2003%202011%20094108%20001%20Enclosure%207.pdf.html

this FOI dates from 2011 and shows that the ACMB has been in existence since 2011, that it is monitoring social media, making it much easier to control and project a positive image.

19

i am not sure you have answered my question…

in fact i am sure you have not provided an answer to my question…

3 Likes
20

I think that the answer is “Do what you think is right”. If you are fundraising, you must be clear where the funds are going, otherwise that could be fraud!!
If you are assisting in your community for a raised profile, this is a decision your unit makes.
My unit assists in car parking for our local fireworks display (all covered by paperwork!) and we get the use of a room for our Annual Awards night! Quid pro quo, but no monetary benefit!

1 Like
21

are you answering the OP or my query??

22

He very rarely says anything that isn’t having a pop at anyone who does not support his peculiar view of how we are governed & run. (Ie not by the Sqn Chair).

2 Likes
23

I am a bit like a politician - answer a question using with another question.

However do what you think is right is also not the answer. To be precise, there should be guidelines on what is or is not acceptable practice. The fact that you may have submitted paperwork is purely a mechanism to ensure Cadets are recovered by insurance - a formality not necessarily an endorsement.

Has anyone ever had a PIPE turned down I wonder?

As I see it, in line with a requirement to acknowledge fundraising guideline, surely the ACMB, which controls all the rules, should issue guidelines on what is or is not good practice rather than leave it to local discretion.

If things were clear there would be no need to ask on an open forum, but given that no-one has answered my own questions about the ACMB, it would appear that forum members clearly dont know all the answers.

Maybe you should ask your Civcom, but as ACP10/11 are not easy to interpret, I would feel without experience they are as much in the dark as you are.

My point is that you have sufficient reason to get official clarification which should then be made available to everyone.

24

But in many ways this is how squadrons get donations. Take car parking as a for instance. I’m on a organising committee for village events and our annual fete relies heavily on the Scouts (I don’t get the cadets involved as it would mean I wouldn’t be able to enjoy the day) to do car parking and help out, for which they get a handsome donation. Without them it would be more difficult to run.
Then there are all the charity collections including Poppy and Wings, that cadets only seem to be involved in because they are in clothing linked to the military and the organisers either don’t have their own people willing to get off their backsides or aren’t set up that way, thinking here of HFH, who I’ve understood how or why they exist, except for the need of a certain headline grabbing PM in the early 00s. Cadets in these are cheap labour.
Whenever we do these things it comes under the "citizenship’ heading, which I fully endorse as I think we have too many people willing to just sit around and do sod all in the community and moan when things stop, as there aren’t enough people willing to give up some free time. So if a couple of cadets get involved in local groups a few years on and what we’ve sort of instilled in them is why, so much the better.
I have had quite frank chats with my RAFA and RBL branch on the lack of members involved in collecting. I accept that many are getting older, but I know they never did it when they weren’t so old and there are younger ones who don’t do it.
So cadets cheap labour yes, just like so many youth groups who don common clothing.

Personally I don’t see what this would have to do with the ACMB, given they are not civilians, but feel they experienced and knowledgeable enough about every facet of the Air Cadets and perfectly placed to dictate to all corners of the organisation how the organisation operates. Imagine the furore if a squadron commander was to set their own guidelines on fundraising.
But as we don’t have an independent purely civilian element free from uniformed interference at the top levels we are stuck with them. The situation should be that the Air Cadet Council is a purely civilian affair with one ex-officio uniformed individual sitting in and this Air Cadet Council decided Civ Comm policy.

I do think that all levels of the civilian side above squadrons should be responsible for it’s own fund raising and not pilfering.

25

If you could all restrict your whining about the ACMB to the ACMB thread (started by Aries for that purpose) that would be very much appreciated.

As far as I can tell, the ACMB has nothing to do with RAFA donations, but I would be happy to argue the toss on the aforementioned thread.

2 Likes
26

Your query!:grin:

27

Like a politician, deflect the question as you can’t answer it because you don’t have a clue what your talking about but try and blame someone else ???

It would be good to get a concise answer and point rather than rants against the ACMB

2 Likes
28

The frustrating thing is that Aries probably has a valid point to a degree about the operation of civilian committees in accordance with relevant legislation but its lost in the pseudo-legal babble and tin foil hattery

6 Likes
29

in which case you’ve not understood my query and oddly i agree with Aries it is not the answer

if there were truth, as suggested by @Aries, that the use of GPF funds for Cadet Insurance for an event which had no benefit to the organisation, indeed by its very nature was direct benefit for another charity then it should not occur - how then would it work for less obvious situations, as i offered, Marshalling at a local fun run, directing traffic for an airshow/other event??

the case of “do what i think is right” would mean i would be directly going against policy each time i stepped out of the Squadron compound as funds and insurance would not be used as they should be.

in reality yes we do what we think is right, but if the suggest by Aries is true (insurance isn’t valid) then we shouldnt even consider these events - which is twoddle as Units up and down the country do

although i cannot find the reference now (the closest I have is ACTO011 but it isnt the long list i was expecting8) there is a list in an ACP/ACTO/similiar of approved Cadet activities and events. that is the list that needs considering i see no benefit in having a second one.

although you acknowledge not answering the question, i am not sure what your follow up question is.
unless you consider “has anyone ever had a PIPE turned down” question - i have, but for holes in paperwork, which were perhaps updates or minor edits to RAs or admin orders.
do you mean to ask, has anyone been banned from attending an event by the CoC because of what the activity was or who it benefited?
i know of no examples of that, and i would expect the CoC to adopt the list as indicated previously.
if it is classed as an approved event and the paperwork is in place, crack on!

*ACTO011 does indicate what events GPF and insurance covers which answers @Aries original question

30

So for the events my unit takes part in, my HQ demands a copy of the other organisation’s insurance is submitted with the PIPE, so I presume that would be the first recourse for any claim, rather than Cadet Insurance.

I do agree that HQ needs to take a very hard look at everything Cadets do and ensure that there is cover, especially as ignorance is no excuse in eyes of the law. The list of activities is not exhaustive enough. But who should take on this task?

1 Like
31

From my involvement in things outside the ATC, no one today can run an event without insurance, unless they have extremely deep pockets want to run the risk. For one of the things I’m involved in we have to supply an event management plan which has to include RAs and PLI and someone has to go to a meeting at the council.

In the ATC we’ve had to get PLI from organisations for years. You are right in that this ensures any claims etc are through the organisers and not the ATC.

HQAC puts the onus on squadrons to get PLI from event organisers, which can a PITA.