WHEN a massive source of funding for charities and communities was revamped and renamed, the idea was to spread the wealth more wisely.
Yet, instead of providing more equality across the Capital, the new Fairer Scotland Fund has left voluntary organisations in some of the city's poorest areas under threat of closure or cutbacks.
Some opponents are going as far to say they are pump
ing money into wealthy areas that don't even need it.
The most striking example of how what was previously the Community Regeneration Fund has hit deprived communities is in the Forth ward.
In previous years, the old North Edinburgh area was given around £2 million a year, but under the new Fairer Scotland budget Forth receives half of that.
Once the mathematics is done – North Edinburgh took in more areas than Forth now does, including Drylaw – it is estimated that the loss of funding for the community is around £800,000.
That means organisations helping the vulnerable and elderly like the Pilton Equalities Project, and those working with youngsters, such as the Granton Youth Centre, face a massive shortfall in funds they expected to get for the rest of this year and what they will receive in the future.
Some can cope and will have to make small adjustments, but some have revealed they may have to close altogether. On top of council cuts earlier this year, this has come as a hammer blow for the area's voluntary sector.
Former Forth councillor and PEP manager Elizabeth Maginnis, who died suddenly at the weekend, was a staunch opponent of how the new fund was redistributed and consistently warned of the hole it would leave in what are some of Scotland's poorest communities.
When details of it were announced she said: "It is bound to lead to job losses in the area . . . this latest news can only mean one thing – more job losses across the voluntary sector."
Her colleague Councillor Norma Hart, who represents Liberton/Gilmerton, has tagged it the Unfairer Scotland Fund. She explains that the way the money is redistributed has changed radically in a way that harms Edinburgh's most vulnerable people.
The council decided the best way to distribute the cash was to spread it amongst the poorest five per cent in every area, whereas previously the most deprived parts of the city received all of the funding. This means that for the first time more affluent wards like City Centre and Almond are getting money they never used to receive at the expense of less well-off areas.
However, it has been argued that this system is flawed because the bottom five per cent in the richer wards are still better off than the bottom 15 or 20 per cent in, say, Forth ward.
The purpose of the awards is primarily to fund initiatives in early intervention, health inequalities and employability.
The redistribution of wealth is not the only criticism facing the fund. The Edinburgh Partnership – a body made up of various representatives and heavily influenced by the council – decided on the three criteria for the allocation of cash. And this, say critics, leaves many other areas uncovered.
A lack of consultation with the voluntary organisations that live or die by the fund was one of the main problems.
Cllr Hart said: "We have serious misgivings about the Fairer Scotland Fund and its impact on some of our most vulnerable citizens. City-wide projects will receive funding at the expense of local projects when research suggests that the opposite works best.
"The three priorities of early intervention, health inequalities and employability have been imposed by the Edinburgh Partnership, so already the neighbourhood partnerships have their hands tied.
"What about projects currently providing services for the elderly, or adults with learning difficulties? Don't they count any more?
"Inadequate consultation meant nobody was even asked these questions, let alone given answers."
However, the way the fund is spread out has been defended right from the very top.
Council leader Jenny Dawe pointed out that it is not just the local authority which is involved in choosing who gets what, with other agencies such as NHS Lothian, the police and the Edinburgh Voluntary Organisations Council also included.
She says in her latest leader's report: "There has been much discussion on this matter over the last few months, but misinformation and distortion of the facts has created a great deal of disquiet and unnecessary anxiety.
"I feel it is important to record the facts to allow a better understanding of this initiative. FSF is a new fund that replaces seven previous funding streams at national level. It is not a replacement for the Community Regeneration Fund.
"The (new) index identifies areas and pockets of deprivation across the city, not only in areas which have traditionally been identified as disadvantaged."
