Former Nesta trustee Liam Black, who earlier this year said the charity was “forced” to fund the Big Society Network, has denied assertions in a review that his claims are “incompatible with the available evidence”.
Nesta is a grant funder specialising in supporting innovation. It is formerly a non-departmental public body but became an independent charity during the “bonfire of the quangos” – a review of NDPBs carried out early on in the current coalition administration.
Black, a social entrepreneur who has run several businesses, was a trustee from January 2010 until April 2012.
Big Society Network was set up to run a number of projects to grow volunteering and social action. It attracted significant government funding but failed to hit most of its targets. Earlier this year the National Audit Office published a damning report on public funding of the network by the Cabinet Office and Big Lottery Fund.
Nesta gave statutory grants totalling £480,000 to Big Society Network in 2010, without holding a competitive pitch, to help the company set itself up and deliver various projects.
Earlier this year Black tweeted that Nesta was “forced to provide £££ to Big Society Network. Scandalous waste of money.”
‘No evidence’ Nesta instructed by government
In response to the tweet, an internal review was carried out by Geoff Mulgan, chief executive of Nesta, and published in August. The review document said it had “found no evidence of Nesta ever having made a funding decision because it had been instructed to do so by a government minister or official.”
Mulgan said that Nesta had always been “on the receiving end of lobbying and pressure to support individual organisations and projects from people associated with government” and that “this pressure appears to have been particularly intense after the 2010 election, mainly coming from individuals with links to the new government but without any formal authority.”
But he said most of these requests were turned down.
Mulgan wrote that the decision to fund the Big Society Network had been agreed because its activities tallied so closely with Nesta priorities.
“Funding decisions were based on an analysis of the merits, alignment with Nesta’s mission and due diligence. I have found no evidence of Nesta ever having made a funding decision because it had been instructed to do so by a government minister or official.”
‘Made crystal clear we should provide funding’
Black wrote in a blog earlier this week: “You can imagine how relieved I was to read all that in a report by a man who wasn't in the room when the decisions were made”.
He wrote that “during Nesta’s confused and complex transition from semi-quango status to independent foundation… it had been made crystal clear to we trustees that funding the BS Network was one way we could smooth the transition and avoid being tossed onto the bonfire of the quangos”.
He said that Nesta trustees made a decision “that we would hold our noses and make a grant to the BS Network – which did fall well within our funding criteria – and keep our eyes on the big prize of getting free of just this kind of bullshit government interference”.
