Managed by the Royal Society for Nature Conservation, the Community Recycling and Economic Development (CRED) programme is offering grants of between 50,000 and 300,000 for social enterprise recycling groups.
But, for fear of unfair lobbying by community sector groups anxious to obtain their share of the funds, the decision has been taken to keep the names and interests of people on the panel confidential.
The decision not to name the judging panel is in contrast to the transparent approach taken by the government for a panel which had a similar task for local authority bids. The panel of recycling and waste experts for DEFRA's 140 million recycling fund for local authorities was named (see letsrecycle.com story). But now, the panel giving out the 35.2 million for the community sector remains shrouded in secrecy for fear of unfair lobbying by the community groups.
The CRED programme this week declined to reveal who is on the judging panel awarding the money. Louise Owens, manager of the CRED programme said: “We don't really publicise those on the panel, because we don't want individuals being lobbied by applicant projects.”
Ms Owens said that the decision on where the money goes is taken by the CRED programme's consortium of partners – the Community Composting Network, Community Recycling Network, CREATE UK, Environment Agency, Furniture Recycling Network, Local Authority Recycling Advisory Committee, London Community Recycling Network and Waste Watch.
“They decide the policies,” she explained, “they oversee and manager the CRED programme. It is the CRED consortium who decided where the money is going, and their details have been made public.”
Lack of transparency
But Ms Owens admitted that it is the judging panel that assesses the individual applicants to decide “whether they meet the criteria laid down by the consortium”.
Some senior recycling experts have aired concerns to letsrecycle.com over the potential for conflicts of interest. However, Ms Owens denied that by not revealing who is deciding on the individual projects, there was any lack of transparency.
“The CRED programme has been set up to ensure that it is entirely independent,” she said, adding: “It's the same for other lottery funds.”
The Community Recycling Network, a leading member of the CRED consortium, told letsrecycle.com that the process of giving out public money has to be transparent. But in this case, CRN accepted that the names of the CRED judging panel couldn't be disclosed.
Emma Hallett, general manager at the CRN said: “I think the process of giving out public money has to be transparent, but (the judging of the CRED fund) has to be through the consortium. The judging panel work within the guidelines set by the consortium, so they are working within the set criteria already established.”
Privacy
Ms Hallett said that the process of giving out money to community recycling groups through the CRED fund was transparent to CRED consortium members, but she emphasised there were concerns that making the names of the judges known to the public would threaten the privacy of the judges.
She said: “This process is clear and open to everyone on the CRED consortium. The panel names aren't publicly known so there's no chance of people being lobbied. I don't know the exact process, but I'm sure there are processes for conflicts of interest to be made known.”
She added: “The process has been established and agreed by the New Opportunities Fund, and it is they who have to protect the public interest and they have been very thorough.”
Register for free to comment