---

5 Apr 2005 : Column 389WH—continued

Woodcraft Folk

11 am

Jeremy Corbyn (Islington, North) (Lab): This debate has resulted in enormous interest in the Woodcraft Folk and has come about because more than 100 Members of Parliament have signed my early-day motion asking the Government to restore their very modest level of funding to the national organisation of the Woodcraft Folk. I do not know whether you have personally been involved in the Woodcraft Folk, Mr. Deputy Speaker.

Mr. Deputy Speaker (Sir Nicholas Winterton) indicated dissent.

Jeremy Corbyn : Obviously not. I should explain briefly what the Woodcraft Folk are. That would enlighten the rest of the world and, one never knows, it might persuade more people to join, which would be extremely useful. [Interruption.] Are they left-wing enough? We do not discriminate. The Woodcraft Folk have existed for 80 years. They were founded as a co-operative youth organisation, with a totally volunteer ethos. They seek to develop children's lives in a way that is peaceful, co-operative and at one with nature. Many of the mores and traditions of the Woodcraft Folk come from native American cultures and much of the singing and many of the activities at camps are related to that tradition.

Those of us who have been involved, or, in my case, still are involved, with Woodcraft as active parents and so on, find the camps disturbingly democratic in their operations. When one arrives at a Woodcraft camp with several dozen, if not several hundred, children, dividing them all up into clans or villages and then democratically deciding who is going to do what can mean that professors of philosophy are ordered around by children of primary school age, who decide how they should conduct themselves when doing the washing up and all the other things that have to be done there. So, they are disturbingly democratic organisations and I urge all Members of Parliament who are getting ideas above their station to spend a week at a Woodcraft camp in the summer. It would do them all a great deal of good.

The values of the organisation are, and have been, that it gives a lot of children an opportunity to do things together, to be taken seriously, to understand democratic values, and to value and respect each other. Rather than having a hierarchy, everything is conducted in circles. Some of the debates and discussions are very long, but it means that children begin to understand the responsibilities of decision making and how they conduct their lives.

Dr. Ian Gibson (Norwich, North) (Lab): Does my hon. Friend agree that it is not just the young people who enjoy the Woodcraft Folk, but the parents, guardians and people who look after them? They learn a lot about themselves in that kind of environment.

Jeremy Corbyn : Absolutely. I endorse that. I have been on many Woodcraft camps and one finds skills one did not know one had. One also finds that one does not have a lot of skills that one thought one had before going to the camp. The camps provide that kind of opportunity. They are good for the adults as well.
 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 390WH
 
The whole thing relies on volunteer work and activity. The basis of most of the Woodcraft groups was inner-city communities in the 1920s and 1930s. They were the only opportunity that many working-class kids ever had to get out of slum living and awful physical conditions and go to outdoor pursuit centres. The Woodcraft Folk own a small number of centres around the country and also use scout camps and other people's campsites. The Woodcraft Folk provided that release and that opportunity, and gave the children the values of understanding and respect for other people. We should pay a lot of credit to them for that.

The Woodcraft Folk are not a middle-class ghetto that is run around the rims of the M25 or the north or south circular. They are a national body, which links up closely with international organisations. International camps are held every year and there is a great deal of cross-fertilisation between different groups. For example, we had an enormous international camp at Newark a few years back with 4,000 children from all over the world. It was well run; it was on a large campsite and the whole thing was ecologically sustainable. The whole image was "Sust 'n' Able", to the extent that there was a bicycle-powered cinema, where a group of people sat on bicycles and propelled a generator that provided electricity for the films. Unfortunately, the people became fascinated by the films and stopped pedalling, so the electricity went out and we lost the film altogether. However, all those kids will remember that in a way that they perhaps would not remember something else.

Mr. Bob Blizzard (Waveney) (Lab): I certainly concur that the Woodcraft Folk are not just an urban movement. My own children attended the local group in Lowestoft, and there are still two Woodcraft groups today—one in the rural area and one in Lowestoft. Is the problem that the organisation is not as widely known as it should be? Should we not be using the modest Government grant to make people more aware of the Woodcraft Folk, rather than taking it away? My children benefited from the group, and many more could do so.

Jeremy Corbyn : Absolutely. Those who have been in Woodcraft never forget it, and it is certainly a life-enhancing experience. However, I want to say a little more about the international side of things before I go on to the issue of funding.

International camps provide a real opportunity for young people from all over the world to come together. Woodcraft attempts, through international contacts, to reduce the costs for those coming from poor countries. If African children are coming, for example, we will try to help them out in some way, but if Europeans are coming, they probably will not need helping out in the same way. The camp was an amazing experience for all those children who turned up. Likewise, the delegation sent by Woodcraft to the Johannesburg summit on the sustainable world was an amazing experience for those children. I do not think that they would have had that experience had we not had Woodcraft.

Two years ago, I attended an international camp in Finland, where there were different philosophies about how children should operate and be treated, respected and so on. That resulted in some enormously long
 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 391WH
 
debates about why the Soviet Union collapsed. Nevertheless, the debates were interesting and the children learned great deal. It was a fascinating experience. We should recognise what Woodcraft has achieved, why it was founded, and how children and adults alike benefit from it.

Mr. Keith Bradley (Manchester, Withington) (Lab): I confirm what my hon. Friend is saying about the international camps, having visited one myself a number of years ago. I commend the work of groups such as the one in south Manchester, based in Withington, and the work of Angela Downing and her team, who do marvellous work for people in the city to foster the aims and values identified by my hon. Friend. We have to ensure that that work continues in areas such as south Manchester.

Jeremy Corbyn : Absolutely. I endorse what my right hon. Friend has said, because the experience of kids from inner-city Britain—who come from poor communities and get that opportunity, that bit of oxygen and that space—is fantastic. One can see those children developing during a few days of having to live and work co-operatively. That is a great achievement.

Mr. Stephen Pound (Ealing, North) (Lab): Before my hon. Friend moves on from the issue of the inner-city constituencies—there is sometimes a perception that Woodcraft Folk are more countryside-based—I want to tell him, as a fellow inner-city urban Member of Parliament, that the opportunity not only to open one's lungs but to open one's mind is absolutely unique in my experience. The work that the Woodcraft Folk do as an element of social inclusion in our city constituencies is absolutely vital and seldom recognised, but never has it been more important than it is now. Will my hon. Friend accept the fact that many of my constituents have looked to the Woodcraft Folk as a window on a wider world and have become far better people because of the Folk, as have the society and community from which they come?

Jeremy Corbyn : That is absolutely so. Many members attended the lobby of Parliament two weeks ago organised by the Woodcraft Folk. A large number of people—hundreds, mainly from the London groups, as we are in London—came to that lobby. It was young, it was exciting, it was vibrant, it was multi-ethnic, it was respectful, it was listening—all that sort of thing, which is what is so good about the Woodcraft Folk.

We tabled the early-day motion and asked for and received this debate because of the issue of funding. The amount of public money that goes to the Woodcraft Folk from local authority youth budgets and from national Government is absolutely tiny. The biggest supporters of the Woodcraft Folk are the parents and the children themselves, who undertake fundraising activities such as jumble sales, just as any other youth group does, to raise money. Help also comes from donations, particularly from the co-operative organisations, which have been generous and supportive of the Woodcraft Folk for a long time. I pay tribute to the Co-operative Wholesale Society, Co-operative Retail Services and all those who have done so much to support Woodcraft over the years.
 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 392WH
 

A number of trade unions have also made donations. My union, Unison, has given money to Woodcraft at various times or helped to support specific projects, such as the international camp that we held in Newark. The Woodcraft Folk rely on volunteer work and participation and voluntary donations for most of their activities.

Mr. Pound : In the interests of further publicity, I remind my hon. Friend that there are also registered supporters, and I am proud to be one. Such a small sum of money—usually about £20 or £30 a year—is extremely good value. Perhaps a few more registered supporters would be appreciated.

Jeremy Corbyn : I would bring out my Woodcraft card to demonstrate my credentials. If I had remembered, I would have worn my Woodcraft shirt—a beautiful bottle green shirt—which would also entitle me to attend the annual gathering. We do not have conferences, meetings or conventions, and we do not meet in Bournemouth, but we do have annual gatherings, which are great fun and, again, democratic.

What brought about all the furore, including articles in The Daily Telegraph and The Independent—one suddenly discovers that many journalists were Woodcraft Folkers and are upset at the prospect of the Woodcraft Folk suffering—was the Department for Education and Skills grant. Over the years, the Woodcraft Folk have received a grant from the Department which has in part funded the work of the head office. The grant amounted to around £50,000 a year the last time it was paid, which is a small amount for a voluntary organisation.

We are in the year of the volunteer and there is nothing more voluntary than most of what the Woodcraft Folk do. We do not have paid workers, other than those who run the outdoor pursuit centres and those at head office. We are not a wealthy organisation. When the Woodcraft Folk reapplied for the grant, they were unfortunately not successful. The money will not be available from next year onwards. That is a great shame, because it will damage the work of head office and weaken the Woodcraft Folk. The failure of that application also sends the unfortunate message to volunteers that they are not likely to receive recognition from central Government.

I hope that the Minister can give us the hopeful news that the Government are prepared to consider the decision again and sit down further with Woodcraft Folk national officials—there was a meeting yesterday—to discuss how to support them in the future. Above all, I hope that the Minister will make a clear declaration that we welcome, support and admire the work of the Woodcraft Folk, in that it develops fully rounded individuals in our society.

I meet children who come to my Woodcraft Folk group. I visit other groups and occasionally show them round Parliament. They ask a lot of questions. They are questioning young people, making a contribution. Surely that is what we are all about. Some of the kids on Woodcraft camps are not easy to deal with; they are very difficult kids. They come from a difficult environment or family background, and have been given an opportunity, a space—above all, respect—by the ethos
 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 393WH
 
of Woodcraft. That is something that we should all encourage. I would be grateful if the Minister told us how she got on in her meeting with the Woodcraft Folk yesterday. How many letters of support for Woodcraft has she received in the past few weeks, in addition to the 100-plus signatures on my early-day motion? Above all, can she give us some hope that the Woodcraft Folk will continue to receive financial support from central Government so that their head office can continue its important work? Will local authorities be encouraged, through their youth budgets where appropriate, to fund equipment for camping, meetings, activities and all that sort of thing?

I conclude by quoting a parent in my constituency, who has written to me at length. She says:

"Why do I bother to volunteer? The time that I have been working as a volunteer for the Woodcraft Folk I could have been being paid for the equivalent time on a teacher's salary, as that is my profession, at which I am successful and enjoy. I am increasing the amount of work that I am taking on in primary school, but I am finding it very hard to let go of what I am doing with the Woodcraft Folk, and these are some of the reasons why: there are enormous benefits to mine and other people's children; they are confident to mix with a broader range of people, and thus better prepared for their future responsibilities. They learn skills, gain insight and knowledge, develop positive attitudes . . . Benefits to the adults, parents and families: Adult members are able to develop friendships at the same time as their children, working collaboratively with other parents".

Anybody who has brought up young children will know that it is a joy and a wonderful experience, but it can be quite isolating. However, if one is in a collective organisation with other parents who are doing the same thing, one can feel good about it and develop firm friendships. My correspondent continues:

"The Woodcraft Folk could expand to include more children and parents as members. However the benefit of what goes on in the groups goes much further than to only those people. We know that the attitudes that have been developed in the groups will spread in to all aspects of the community".

I hope that the Minister will give us some good news and will recognise that we need the Woodcraft Folk. We need those values, that strength and that voluntary effort. We need that joy, and we need the recognition of central Government to develop it further.

11.18 am

The Minister for Children, Young People and Families (Margaret Hodge) : I congratulate my old friend, the hon. Member for Islington, North (Jeremy Corbyn), on securing the debate, and all who have joined him.

Let me say something about the scheme under which the Woodcraft Folk submitted an application. In the past eight years, we have, throughout the Government and particularly in the Department for Education and Skills, massively increased our support for the voluntary and community sector and greatly expanded the funding available for the scheme. It runs in a three-year cycle: £9 million was allocated for 1996 to 1999, whereas £21 million is available for the cycle for which we have just allocated money, so we have more than doubled the funding available to voluntary youth organisations.

To pick up on what my hon. Friend said, many, if not all, the organisations offered what the Woodcraft Folk offers. I should not like any hon. Member to go away
 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 394WH
 
with the idea that the money was not allocated to worthwhile organisations that do the two things to which my hon. Friend alluded. The first of those is to work with disadvantaged children to ensure that they can participate in society, either through activities or by expressing a voice. That is done by Children's Express, the Children's Society, the British Youth Council, Barnardo's and a number of other organisations—I could go on. They are all organisations that hon. Members would wish the Government to support. The second is to depend on volunteers. Woodland Folk is not the only organisation that depends on volunteers. All the organisations that were successful in this year's funding round use volunteer activity to contribute to supporting youth activity and engagement, and to providing stimulating and enriching experiences for young people and teaching them the sense of civil responsibility that will enable them to participate in society when they grow up.

Let me explain how we approached this year's funding round. Through the "Every Child Matters" Green Paper, we have embarked on a radical transformation of children's services. We want everything that we do to meet the five outcomes that children told us, in a consultation exercise, were important to them. In reconfiguring services for children, we reconsidered how we should provide Government support to the voluntary and community sector. As a result, we published a funding strategy document in December 2004, which set out for consultation the principles for funding the sector on which we thought we should go forward.

First, we wanted to fund organisations that have the "Every Child Matters" outcomes at their hearts and build their services around the needs of children and young people. Secondly, we wanted to support national infrastructure, which is relevant to the Woodcraft Folk. Thirdly, we wanted to support innovation, because if we are to transform children's services, we should look for new ways in which to deliver them and to help us put children at the heart of things. Fourthly, we wanted to      consider organisations' commitment to the participation of children and young people, which is at the heart of everything we do. Many of the organisations that we funded were able to achieve that.

I understand the disappointment of the Woodcraft Folk in having their funding bid turned down, but I assure my hon. Friend that that is in no way a criticism of their work. I have known of that organisation and its contribution for a long time, and of its link to the co-operative movement and the philosophy that underpins it. I welcome that contribution—as I do the contribution of other voluntary organisations working in the sector—in promoting the well-being of children and their participation in society, and in providing the sort of enriching activities that will help their development and support them in achieving their potential.

Some 160 organisations bid for funding this year. We could have run a closed shop scheme by simply asking organisations that had previously received funding to repeat their funding applications, but we consulted the voluntary and community sector—specifically voluntary youth organisations—and said that we wanted to open the territory so that all organisations could bid against the criteria that we set in relation to the "Every Child Matters" agenda. It was with that
 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 395WH
 
concurrence and consultation that we opened up the scheme. However, the fact that 160 organisations bid meant that there was strong competition.

We published a clear set of objectives and criteria against which we would judge the bids, including how the proposed outcomes of the work that the organisations wished to carry out linked to the "Every Child Matters" outcomes. Having published the criteria and having agreed with the voluntary sector to open the scheme to all voluntary organisations, which I think hon. Members would agree is fair, we assessed the schemes. We used a fair and transparent process to assess all bids against criteria that we made public in our application guidance.

Unfortunately, the Woodcraft Folk bid was not successful when judged against those criteria. I suggest that hon. Members read their application, which I hope they will make available to them. Again, I stress that that does not mean that the organisation does not do splendid things and does not have a very important contribution to make, but if we publish criteria, if we want an open and transparent system, and if we have a fair competition, it is inevitable that some organisations will fail and others will succeed.

By doing things this way, we were able to fund organisations that hon. Members would want us to support. UNICEF, which did not succeed in obtaining funding before through the grant scheme, received funding for the first time. So did the YMCA and organisations such as The Wildlife Trusts and Youth Music Theatre UK. I could cite others. Some organisations that did not succeed in obtaining funding are as worth while as the Woodcraft Folk.

Mr. Blizzard: Notwithstanding what the Minister says, does she accept that any voluntary body that has received a grant from the Government or from anyone else for many years needs a period of notice before that grant is withdrawn or before it is unsuccessful with another bid? Suddenly being cut off is as bad as losing the money itself. Surely phasing and timing are important.

Margaret Hodge : Having spent part of my life working in the voluntary sector, I know that one spends
 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 396WH
 
far too much time securing funds and then worrying about losing them. That is part of the inequality in the way in which we as a nation fund all parts of the voluntary sector. I am not quite sure what the answer is. The system is better than it was when I worked in it because people tend to receive three-year funding instead of one-year funding, which gives much greater security. When I worked in the voluntary sector, we received funding for a year and did not know until the 11th month whether we would receive it the following year. People grappled around for new money. Funding is insecure, but that is part of living in the voluntary sector world. It is tough.

Mr. Andrew Love (Edmonton) (Lab/Co-op): Will the Minister give way?

Margaret Hodge : With the greatest respect to my hon. Friend, I will move on because I have only three minutes left in which to strike a more positive note, which is what I believe hon. Members want me to do.

As I said, the insecurity of funding is a general problem. We do, however, want to support the Woodcraft Folk. We want them to succeed, as they make a contribution, although they failed to convince those who assessed the competition that they were as good as other organisations that submitted bids.

I met the Woodcraft Folk yesterday to see how we could support their work and help them. I stress that the grant is £50,000 against head office costs of about £250,000, but funding is almost £1 million overall. So it is not a huge element in the organisation's overall funding, which I believe my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing, North (Mr. Pound) accepted. Most of the contributions come from families and children. No doubt my hon. Friend and others would not mind seeing their contribution doubled if it had a funding crisis.

We want to help the Woodcraft Folk by seconding a member of our staff to them for 12 months. We hope to get on with that rapidly. We also hope that that member of staff will be able to support the central organisation by helping it to look for new ways of diversifying the funding streams that it receives so that it secures long-term funding and continues to provide the experience that all hon. Members have welcomed.

Sitting suspended until Two o'clock.

 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 395WH
 

 
5 Apr 2005 : Column 397WH
 

---