You may have read about four parts of the UK being up for £50M of National Lottery funding – the catch being that they have to compete again on a ITV televised debate.
Doesn’t that just seem wrong? We pay, or give the contact to, a large corporation in order for them to hire experts and have processes about how to devolve this ‘Lottery Money’ to the best causes, but instead of that they use the exercise as an advertising stunt.
Instead of democracy, or meritocracy, there’s another payday for the TV companies, the phone companies, there’s people feeling pressured and at least three communities feeling cheated.
“It won’t be as sexy as Strictly Come Dancing, but this is going to change whole communities,” said Sir Clive Booth, chairman of the Big Lottery Fund.
Does it have to be sexy, couldn’t it just change the communities, couldn’t it be targeted to do the most good?
At The Birmingham Post
@bounder on twitter
flickr
Facebook
You Tube
tumblr
CoComment
Everything I Do
One Comment
Yeah. There are four good causes, each apparently worth £50M.
I’m not sure that £12.5M would do each of them much good, but it would be more than a lot of worthy projects get. But the fact that this is a very public £50M purse means that it’s going to be much more difficult for the funders to change their minds in a year, and this is possibly why holding a TV vote is better than asking the experts. The political masters will be unable to play a shell game with the award.
3 Trackbacks
[...] is that there’s an online and telephone vote, and one of four projects gets all the dosh – I’ve mentioned that I don’t much like the system, but if it has to be this way I think the Black Country [...]
[...] a disclaimer, I don’t like the idea that such important work should be hijacked for publicity purposes (or left to chance by phone [...]
[...] goes all Black Country it’s Not S**t, despite this earlier post railing at regen [...]