Admit it, you’re either going on a diet, thinking about a diet or have just given up a diet and busy trying to accept your muffin top or your beer belly. If you’re from TOWIE, you’re saving up for liposuction or a gastric band!

This was the opening conversation I had with three LEYF nursery managers from our Dagenham nurseries while we were offered free refills of Coke or Lemonade on tap and our meals came piled high with chips.

Every time you turn on the TV someone is telling you how to eat, exercise or overcome your food issues. From Fat Camp to BBC 2 we’re bombarded with how to stay thin. Did it ever occur to people that we stay thin by eating less and accepting the fate of most women over 35 which is to be constantly hungry and feel guilty when you do eat? I liked the programme Horizon: Eat Fast and Live Longer on BBC 2 which told us to eat what you like 5 days a week but restrict yourself to 500 calories twice a week and not only will you maintain the body of Elle McPherson you’ll also reduce the chances of  high blood pressure, diabetes 2 and a myriad of other illnesses. I was really up for that till I discovered 500 calories is three apples and a bowl of cabbage soup. Peter Kay, in his tour to end all tours, made me cry for laughing as he expounded on his terrace (his fat tummy) and why we shouldn’t shop when hungry because of the high chance we’ll have eaten 4 of the 5 Kit Kats before even reaching the check out. I ignore Kit Kats and head straight to the Curly Wurlys.

So here’s the irony, we who have so many issues with food, are probably overweight and delight in calorific foods, such as chips and wine (although red wine has anti-oxidant resveratrol which makes you more nimble), are responsible for the dietary wellbeing of so many children. Their parents listen to us when we talk of a healthy diet; a balance of carbohydrates, protein and vegetables. We know that small children lack zinc and carbohydrates and need a good tea, we also know that organic milk increases intake of omega three which has huge benefits for children.  We know much more than that, for example:

• 28% of children aged 2 to 10 in England are obese. In London, the highest proportion are in Westminster, 4th are in Tower Hamlets and Kensington and Chelsea, and Lambeth are joint 8th (all places where we have nurseries)
• 34% of children aged 11 to 15 in England are obese
• Diabetes 2 (poor diet induced) is a growing problem in the UK
• Children bombarded as they are by ads for fizzy drinks and fast foods are unable to distinguish between ads and TV content
• A poll done by growingupmilkinfo.com found that 80% of children had eaten pizza and chips by the time they were two and 1 in 1000 parents had never cooked for their children
• The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health is calling on the Government to reduce obesity and ensure that children in nurseries and Children’s Centres are served nutritionally balanced food as well as being able to offer correct and helpful information about food and eating

At LEYF we have been campaigning and even wrote the Standards for a National Qualification for Early Years Chefs. We recognise that the person in charge of the food should have a lead role in understanding what to cook, how to serve it and how best to support colleagues and parents understand about good food.

Despite an overwhelming array of information about food, staff and parents remain confused and obsess about body weight which to some degree misses the point.  We need to grow a body of capable and well informed staff who can give sensible advice, provide us with highly nutritional food, challenge the unhealthy obsessions with losing weight and focus instead on staying healthy by eating sensibly. As my Grandma always said “a little of what you fancy never did you any harm”…it’s when you are eating 5 Curly Wurlys at a go you should start to worry!

I was going to blog about babies and business which hit the headlines last week – namely how the newly appointed pregnant CEO of Yahoo, Marissa Mayer will not take maternity leave and bring her baby to work, and the CEO of Addison Lee, Liam Griffin wants his staff to be able to bring their babies to work. I only hope the babies like being tucked under desks and that proximity to Mum or Dad is sufficient to constitute good childcare.

However, as London has launched the 30th Olympiad at a fantastical and slightly bonkers opening night, I felt it was only right and patriotic to comment on the Olympics – not least the fabulous efforts of all 23 LEYF nurseries to complete our own ‘Olympic torch’ relay.

[gigya src="http://www.flickr.com/apps/slideshow/show.swf?v=71649" width="350" flashvars="offsite=true&lang=en-us&page_show_url=/photos/LEYF/sets/72157630636205872/show/&page_show_back_url=/photos/LEYF/sets/72157630636205872/&set_id=72157630636205872&jump_to=" allowFullScreen="true" ]

I felt morally obligated to watch the opening ceremony – the only time in my life I have done this.  Like the Eurovision Song Contest, I tend to avoid these big blockbuster affairs as they tend to be jingoistic and mawkishly sentimental (a combination that leaves me feeling slightly nauseous). However, this year I along with 27 million others made do with the TV version. Frankly, I would have preferred to be there, as no doubt the music, lighting, fireworks and atmosphere would have added to the whole experience.  (As it happened, I had a friend who miraculously had got a ticket and gave up to date commentary.)

I really liked the involvement of children, and the focus on them as our next generation of sports people was joyful.  I also loved the Chaos Choir, although at the beginning I did wonder whether we had all arrived in Pandemonium. Indeed if this is the City of Hell, I am going to try harder to get to the Pearly Gates. At least now we know why the NHS is always in trouble; the doctors and nurses are all taking dance classes. (No wonder you can’t find a nurse on the wards to plump up the patients pillows, they are all out the back practising their jazz swings and selling the beds to Danny Boyle’s production company.)

I loved the parade which included 204 countries, some of which were new to me.  In fact it was a bit of a geography lesson, as we heard of newly named free countries and so many from the Pacific Islands. Most touching was the representation from those countries which have recently or currently experienced war, civil unrest, hunger, piracy and environmental disasters. Their ambition to attend was heartening. I really hope they get medals.

And wasn’t it fantastic that we have women in every team for the first time? No more room for complacency on the issue of women’s equality across the globe – and such a great way for us to teach our own children not to be casual about what has been hard won! It reminds me of a great film called The Source made in Morocco recently, where women went on strike from their wifely bedroom duties until the men would get them piped water. It was a modern story but the issues and attitudes went back centuries.

I thought Sebastian Coe’s speech was heartfelt too, as he reminded us of the reason for the Olympics: linking sport with culture and education; celebrating the joy achieved from effort and helping build a better world through sport practised in a spirit of peace, excellence, friendship and respect.  It’s a shame more of the athletes and their organising colleagues did not pay more respect to him by listening instead of jumping around, chewing gum and playing with their phones. Role models for the next generation, I hope not.  If anything, that was much more evident from our friends in the military and the beautiful and orderly formation of a respectful Chelsea Pensioner troop. The behaviour of the 1000 volunteers was also praised and will no doubt bring a tear to David Cameron’s eye, as a little bit of his Big Society dream comes alive in London over the next few weeks.

In the end, the Olympics is here and I wonder how many camp beds we will need at LEYF?  Will we be Happy and Glorious like James Bond or will John Milton’s vision of Pandemonium be the legacy? Let’s hope that many people are touched by the harmony that sport can play in developing our modern society and that those young people who lit the Olympian flame will salute the democratic spirit of the Olympics and reflect it in the way they shape the future.

The influence of the modern supermarket on our daily lives is remarkably powerful. We take the big five for granted, rarely questioning  their hold  on how we shop, eat and behave.  Occasionally, we get very worked up about their part in the ruination of the local High St, or the damage they do as they squeeze the life blood out of local suppliers.  It’s trickier to justify this anger though, when they calmly tell us that what they do is designed to improve the customer experience and keep prices low.

So it’s no wonder they hold sway, when the deal is they rule the roost and we in turn acquiesce, only so we can walk into a clean store 24 hours a day and buy a range of food, healthy or otherwise. Personally, I have to own up to describing the whole food shopping experience as Sainsbores.  (No offence Sainsburys!)

While I am not a regular visitor to Tesco, I have always been interested in how Sir Terry Leahy pushed the posh boys out of the way (Sainbury’s and Marks and Sparks) and headed to the top.  I was therefore interested to read his new book Management in 10 Words. How would he describe the business methodology of growing a retail business to number one in the world?

For starters, I was surprised by his use of warm words – such as loyalty, culture and values. You would think Tesco was set up to save the world, not sell crisps. However, he is clearly a Tesco man, through and through. Passionate and obsessive leaders all have that in common. I met someone who works in Compliance at Barclays last year, and I asked her what was Bob Diamond really like?  She said he really seemed to be a Barclays man. He also talked about culture and values, as you will have read in my last two blogs.  In his own words:

Strong values underpin successful businesses.  They give managers a sheet anchor, something that holds their position and keeps them from being smashed on the rock when caught in a storm. Values govern how a business behaves, what it sees as important, what it does when faced with a problem.” (P 109)

Leahy was clearly a man with a big vision and a habit of doing things quickly. He says that intention is never enough and plans mean nothing if they are not effectively enacted.   He commented on his time at the Co-Op, at being frustrated by the length of time the democratic management processes took to make decisions. I am sure many others recognise the danger and destruction that slow and complex, unclear decision making can wreak on a business – especially one with growth ambitions.

Interestingly, we have introduced a decision-making model at LEYF known as ‘RAPIDs’ (courtesy of the excellent work from our SBT partners Bain & Company) to ensure speedier decisions.  It is something that also affects a culture; we want a culture of speed and intelligent response, not processes that actually work against the success of the business.

For me, the main thrust of Terry Leahy’s book was that it was all about the customer. You need to understand your customers and give them what they want.  It’s the only way to get loyalty, which in turn means a steady stream of income. For him, the Clubcard was key to his success, because it gave Tesco more direct access to customer’s data and better ways to talk to them.  The customer conversation became critical to the culture of the new Tesco, and meant they could provide the right products in the right places at the right price. It’s certainly the key lesson I have learnt from his book.

Whether you have read the book or not, what are your thoughts on the importance of  the customer experience? Is the customer always right? And what’s the best way to learn from them. Let me know below.

Unsurprisingly, there is not a single LEYF nursery that hasn’t been joining in the Jubilee Celebrations this week in one way or another – some have even written directly to the Queen to share with her what they’ve been planning!

This fascination with the Queen as Head of State interests me particularly, not least as I come from a Republic. Like so many still today, I have to admit to liking all the incredible pomp and ceremony that Royalty tends to instantly bring to liven up otherwise ‘regular’ events; a parade with State carriages, uniforms of the Horse Guards and all the old fashioned glories of an ancient monarchy is truly a sight to behold. That said, I am probably less accepting of what one Londoner recently described as all the hangers on..

The Queen elicits the respect of so many, partly at least because of her acceptance and application to her duties, described as someone who understands her role and takes it seriously. Bringing a certain gravitas without arrogance or condescension to the role, she is described as warm and friendly – and is certainly able and willing to engage with the public. She also seems humble in the way she accepts her role, and never tries to overstep the mark.

In Ireland the only president that I ever took any interest in was President Mary Robinson (1990 – 1997), our first female President.  She came as a woman who had already got a reputation as a barrister and human rights campaigner, and was widely seen as a transformative figure who revitalised and liberalised a previously conservative, low-profile political office. And her like has never been seen since.

So what can we, as female leaders in other fields, learn from such women, who have so successfully managed to secure the support, attention and respect of the general public? Is it simply that they take their responsibilities seriously? How is this manifested more than with any other leader? When Aspire Leadership recently surveyed more than 300 global business leaders, they found that both men and women alike consider women better leaders. And, perhaps even more surprisingly to the die-hards of the boardroom, it turns out that women with children make the best leaders of all. It surely must come down to those typically ‘female’ behaviours, so once maligned as a woman’s Achilles’ heel in the workplace-behaviours – such as consensus, building, teamwork and clear communication. Hurrah!

As future leaders of our society, I asked some of the little girls in our nurseries what they think of the Queen. Apparently…

She sits on a throne…She is really beautiful…She is really nice…She wears a nice dress…She has a big parties…Lots of people like her.”

Surely a great start for any leader: be nice, look nice and act nice.

I am very pleased to be able to represent LEYF as a member of Professor Cathy Nutbrown’s Expert Panel. The Panel is examining the standard and range of qualifications for those working in Early Years settings.  It’s a hot topic and one that needs calm, rational and measured consideration.  It’s also an issue that powerfully demonstrates that rhetoric and good intentions don’t always translate well into practice, and no solution will be perfect.  And it further requires a steady and pragmatic hand which Cathy certainly has.

Before anyone gets excited about being called an expert, the actual reality of being on a panel is that you are expected to do some work and research an issue or two.  At the last meeting, I agreed to examine the question of whether it is necessary for those entering the profession to have a grade C in GCSE Maths and English. In order to do it justice, I sought some support from my friend Sue, who put her considerable research skills to good use finding out whether or not having these grades leads to better teaching of the subjects, higher thinking skills and greater ability to apply abstract concepts in a range of situations. I also needed to know that if having a Grade C was essential, could we get everyone up to that standard through Continuing Professional Development (CPD), and would it create barriers to potential apprentices, trainees and other staff from diverse communities.

What we found was that although research from OECD and EPPE tells us that higher qualified staff offer a more reliable predictor of better quality – with a more positive impact on children’s future learning and development as a result – there is little data to securely support the correlation between the levels of formal qualifications in literacy and numeracy among Early Years practitioners and children’s achievements. The best we could find was the Millennium Cohort Study which stressed the links between quality of provision in a setting, the level of qualifications of the staff and the Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS) analysed by subject, concluding that…

Continued priority needs to be given to strengthening the non-graduate early years workforce, who continue to make up the majority of staff. All practitioners need to have a clear grasp of how children’s understanding of mathematics develops; they need to be comfortable with mathematical language and able to support children’s play as outlined in the previous section on effective mathematical pedagogy.” Milleniun Cohort Study

The most interesting findings emphasised something our tutor for Key Skills previously said, namely how the psychological barrier people have created about Maths is often the greater hurdle to them getting a grade C.  I recently saw this in action among a group of otherwise experienced LEYF staff who needed to get a grade C in Maths as part of their degrees; the level of anxiety this generated, despite us providing specialist workshops, was such that even a chocolate fest could not reduce the waves of panic in the room. (Not even the promise of our favourite Curly Wurly!) The lack of enthusiasm for Maths, often acquired from poor teaching, creates a self perpetuating cycle which flies in the face of the Williams Review(DCSF 2008a) which found that…

One of the distinctive features that support high quality mathematical learning includes practitioners’ enthusiasm for, understanding of, and confidence in, mathematics.” Williams Review

For those of us running nursery businesses, the lack of mathematical confidence has greater implications, given the need to grasp Maths in action through an ability to understand and manage occupancy, staff deployment, pricing and basic income and expenditure; all critical skills needed to keep the business going.  (Sadly, I have seen far too many nurseries slip into disaster because of the manager’s inability to read the numbers.) And I know this statement will send Hitchcock shivers down the spines of some LEYF staff, in fact I’m sure most would much rather sit through the Director’s Cut of Psycho in a dark room on their own than do the books.

But if we see our job in Early Years as being the educators of the youngest children, and therefore needing to inculcate in them positive attitudes about Maths and literacy (especially Maths), then we have to look at the bigger picture and the costs to society. The CBI Education and Skills Survey 2011 reported that employers found widespread weaknesses in the core skills of their employees, with almost half reporting problems with literacy and numeracy. KPMG estimates that the cost to the public purse each year from failure to master basic numeracy skills is up to £2.4 billion.

So what to do? Luckily I am not Cathy Nutbrown, and my task was to merely present ideas and information, whilst Cathy gets to analyse and draw a conclusion.  Still, she is ably assisted by our Civil Servants, who I am sure have all the relevant C grades. In the meantime, I suggest we all ensure we have regular planned Maths activities, lots of Maths in the routine and that we practise our timetables while we do our Pilates.  If all fruit fails then watch Dara O Briain’s School of Hard Sums (formerly called ‘Dara O Briain’s University of Practical Mathematics’) where humour and numbers mix. Why not? Have a laugh, do a sum!

On 6 January,  Irish women – especially those in Cork – celebrate Little Women’s Christmas (Nollaig na mBan).  It is the last day of Christmas and the men are expected to take over the running of the house while the women, especially mothers, party. Instead of partying, I started to think about the current role of mothers in our post feminist society.

Back in the 1970’s I joined the feminist movement with all the zeal of youth. I had left an economically bankrupt Ireland and an oppressive place for young women. I was eager to experience a city where women were keen to overcome the gender inferiority expressed so beautifully in the seminal book The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir (1949).

So I came to London and became a feminist,  buying my monthly Spare Rib, reading Betty Friedan, Marilyn French, Nancy Friday, Anne Oakley and  anything published by Virago Press as well as frequenting the Irish Women’s Group in Stoke Newington and the South London Women’s Centre.  I was excited by the prospect of gender and economic equality.  I absorbed the principle that the personal was political, and I marched on the night rally to Reclaim the Night. It took a while for me to become uneasy with some aspects of feminism – including motherhood, divorce, boys and men, childcare and poor women. I realised, somewhat slowly, that the price we would paid for our so called equality could be very large and self-destructive.

So now that we have the vote, divorce, jobs, training and contraception why do I still have the same powerful sense of uneasiness, especially about our role as mothers? Maybe it’s because I know that pay is not guaranteed to be equal, because women suffer from such sexist pension laws, childcare remains the predominant responsibility of women, domestic violence is increasing and because many young women have confused sexual independence with laddishness.

As a female leader in a female dominated sector, where the majority of our customers are women, I feel we should lead a debate on the role we expect mothers to play in today’s society. Even more so, since women are suffering more severely in this economic disaster – with a higher proportion losing their jobs and pensions, whilst at the same time facing the challenge of keeping their families out of poverty. Their jobs are not for extras; the majority of all homes now depend on two incomes. In a report Families Experiencing Multiple Disadvantage: Their Use of and Views on Childcare Provision (Speight, Smith, Lloyd; 2010), the authors found that 62% of poor parents would like reliable childcare to go to work. And if women are to work once they become mothers, they logically need to find good childcare. But this course of action is complicated and tainted by the societal confusion about what we want for our children.

It is noticeable that countries which have had a meaningful philosophical debate about what they want for their children have a much healthier attitude to motherhood. Christine Lagarde, the first female CEO of the IMF was interviewed by the Financial Times recently. In the article, she claims to have never worried about leaving her children while she worked, thanks to the very good nursery at the IMF, adding how she liked to hear the sound of children in the building.  Instead, she says that she was most honoured when her child told her how proud he was of what she was doing. It is a very positive interview and one I wish we could have more of here in the UK.

By contrast, here in the UK we remain twisted up in guilt and confusion about how to do the right thing by our children.  The national attitude ricochets from describing motherhood as a saintly vocation to blaming all mothers – especially single mothers – as the cause of all our social and economic woes (too many women working, no jobs for men or we don’t know what our children are doing because we are always out).

So, in celebration of Little Women’s Christmas 2012, let’s start this week by thinking through our post modern, socially constructed feminist approach to being the mother of a child under 5 in 2012. And before anyone says Dads matter too, I know they do; but right we need to spend some quality thinking time examining our attitudes to motherhood as a first step in a renewed analysis of what we want for our children, the family and the future. It will lead to us to consider a myriad of aligned issues – including what is good quality childcare, what does early childhood education mean for us, and should our children be in school at 4.

Visiting our Eastbury nursery the other day, I met Grace who is a LEYF parent currently completing her Early Years Professional Qualification while on placement in the nursery. As someone with a view from both sides, I was interested to hear that what she wanted was to be able to develop a meaningful career, knowing her child is getting the best care in her nursery. Not so different to her feminist sisters in the 1960s – or is it?

Let me know what you think in the comment box below. In the meantime, I look forward to engaging with you on this and many other ideas throughout 2012.

 I read in this week’s Third Sector magazine that Kevin Carey chair of the RNIB told the  Charity Finance Directors Group that the charity sector tended to be “ conservative, comfortable and self-satisfied”.  I laughed out loud or LOL as my daughter would say. I remembered the first Charity CEO gathering I attended and I was bowled over by exactly that feeling.  I had got used to the gatherings of social entrepreneurs, a more loud-mouthed, challenging group but comparing the experience was like Pop versus Funky-House. This was confirmed by our charming Head of Finance who came back from a Finance Directors Conference incredulous at the lack of urgency and innovation that permeated the experience.

 Stepping out of the Charity wardrobe into the Narnia land of social enterprise is not easy and will take more than just re-branding a charity as a social enterprise. The clue in the term is enterprise and that means having a viable business to trade in order to run a viable social business which makes a profit. The profit has got to be used not just to improve the internal business and give more to existing customers but to reach into the heart of the community and do something more, new and innovative so the impact ripples way beyond your front door.

 Last week I presented at a number of conferences.  The benefit of going to conferences is to hear new things, think about what you do and whether it could be better, bump into colleagues you haven’t seen for an age and get all the gossip and meet new people and form new relationships. Two pieces of information shared last week worried me; the fall in nursery places alongside the slow return of child poverty. Is there a link? Yes, because we know that decent, affordable childcare has been one very good way of getting families out of poverty.   The recent Ofsted report says that there are 1,715 fewer providers with a net loss of places to the tune of 53,666. This could be significant once we drill down and answer questions such as whether the places were in poor neighbourhoods, whether they linked to places where there has been higher levels of redundancies among professional couples, whether the growing debt among parents damaged nursery cash-flow and saw the demise of the business or if the insufficient NEF (a loss of 98p per child per hour as an average to nursery businesses) was the final nail in their coffin. No doubt, the Daycare Trust will provide us with one of their useful analysis which highlights the impact for parents.  The failure of a business is a blow, the failure of businesses in areas of poverty is a disaster and leaves a greater trail of devastation including unemployment, reduction of money flowing in the local economy and a moral blow to an area and a community which is often fragile and vulnerable.

 Welcome, to the complex quasi childcare market. Take heed all those charities which think becoming a social enterprise is just a step away.  If you want to be a social enterprise then realise the importance of your business skills and ability to manage within a volatile market where failure affects not just you but generations of children and families.

Alongside the delight of being Chief Executive of LEYF, I am also chair of Paddington Farm Trust.  Established as a charity 20 years ago and now operating as a social enterprise, the Trust provides farm holidays and educational activities for people living in poor urban areas (people more typically disadvantaged by poor physical health, mental illness, economic pressures or simply life circumstances).  The farm itself is based in Somerset and was donated to a group of far-seeing community activists from Paddington at the end of the reign of the GLC; Big Society already successfully at work back in the 1980s.

So this weekend, my fellow trustees and I worked on the annual strategy; and most importantly focused on how we can make up the shortfall from losing our grant which previously made up 12% of our income.  On top of that, we are equally unsure how many of our regular visiting groups (themselves supported by their local authorities) will cease to visit.

Whilst a holiday may well be seen as a luxury in these austere times, supporting the fragile wellbeing of lonely, elderly poor people, those coping with mental or ill health and those recovering from drug and alcohol dependency (not to mention children of all ages from ugly concrete inner city estate) is critical.  Many of these people are already suffering the consequences of a lack of early intervention and have seen their lives unravel by circumstances out of their control.  Few of us are ever more than a few small steps away from disaster; we all try to organise our lives to avoid it, but some have no margin in the face of such overwhelming obstacles.  Last year’s Marmot Report confirmed the five key indicators which could help predict future health: life expectancy, disability-free life expectancy, child development at five, young people out of work and households on means-tested benefits. The report examined local authority data and found inequalities in all areas, leading the government to announce a desire to improve the health of the vulnerable. Quite right; so don’t limit their chance of having a holiday with such huge benefits, from better health to learning new skills.

Back at LEYF, we have always taken a group of up to twelve children to the farm for five days without their parents. The holidays have been universally successful, and the benefits to children and their parent(s) huge. We have never had to come back early and the trust between parents, children and staff has been wonderful; a very clear example of Big Society in action.  Recently, however, we have found it harder to get parents to agree to the ‘risk’ of allowing their children to go on such a break.  Caught between guilt and anxiety, they have reluctantly rejected the offer – not least worried they will be seen as bad parents if anything goes wrong.  Is it any wonder?  Today’s parents are constantly scrutinised by the press, the government and statutory agencies – and so many have lost their self-confidence to do what feels right for them and their children.  In addition, they are operating within an invidious horribleness (again perpetrated by mainstream media), that adults who work with children are closet paedophiles who, given half the chance, would harm their sons or daughters. The shocking truth is that actually children are at much greater risk of harm from within their own family.  What we really need is to put more faith in the fortitude of warm, trusting individual relationships as the basis for more positive human relationships in general.

I left the farm more determined than ever.  And then listening to Radio 4 on my way back, an interview with Francis Maude MP challenged him with the findings of a survey in the Independent on Sunday, proclaiming that while 67% of people had heard of the Big Society, 41% thought it was a cover up for cuts to public sector services.  Is this right?

I had just been on the farm with a bunch of volunteers like Steve, who is designing and building an outdoor classroom from trees in our coppice, which in turn were planted by volunteers from BTCV.  None of them needed encouragement to give their time so generously; they already wanted to give something back to society.

Despite its social enterprise business model, the farm is under pressure because we simply don’t know if we can rely on some of our regular customer groups. LEYF is also facing cuts in contracts for children in need, leaving us nearly one million pounds short this year. But will these cuts affect our attitude to Big Society – or will it simply make us more enterprising and determined; angry and more relentless in our fight for what we believe to be human rights?  It’s hard to say right now, but while I am surrounded by people who are altruistic and unselfish, my spirit remains uplifted and I will continue to find ways to overcome the inhibiting attitudes and self-fulfilling prophecies of the doom and gloom brigade.

Related articles

• Cameron not for turning on plans for Big Society (independent.co.uk)
• PM launches Big Society fightback (bbc.co.uk)
• Cameron’s “big society” relaunch repeats old errors (newstatesman.com)
• Have no doubt, the big society is on its way | David Cameron (guardian.co.uk)

There was a book reviewed in Charity Times recently called The Art of Raising Money by Ian Bruce which caught my eye, as I had spent the week at events which were all about raising money.

The glitziest was a silent auction held by Kids Company, a charity set up by the colourful Camilla Batmanghelidgh.  It is an organisation that we have begun to work with, since many of the children who are failed by society in their early years end up the very troubled young people that Camilla and her team try and help later on.  We saw an immediate link and I think our connection will be constructive given her positive, can do attitude. She has captured the interest of the celebrity and the well to do, which is one stream of her fundraising strategy.  In this instance, Paul Whitehouse charmed and amused the audience and his guest (me!) all evening, as well as making a generous secret contribution via a hand-held machine.

Compare this to the rather tiring and less exotic conversations we had with other organisations in the same week – about expressions of interest, procurement processes and complicated anonymous portals to become a preferred provider in order to bid for a contract. No doubt, Kids Company is doing this also but having a lively, humorous approach was actually quite uplifting.

Using humour to make a point is being taken to its extreme in Russia at the moment, with activists challenging the authorities by antics they may well have learnt from Borat.  The Russian authorities have shown little sense of humour, but the world’s press has cottoned on.

Rather than the current see-saw of storming Millbank or quietly accepting a fate of cuts and economic hardship, I do wonder if we should start a campaign of humour as a means of positive activism.  I have to say, on Paul’s performance the other night, I would very much enjoy a view of Big Society from the Fast Show.

The Daycare Trust Conference yesterday was the site of another announcement by our new Minister Sarah Teather MP.

With growing confidence and assurance, she wrapped her message in cashmere and presented it to the audience in a way that was relatively soft and attractive.  The message was that the Sure Start grant would be an Early Intervention Grant, the CWDC would go back into the Department and there would be no more commitment to having a QTS in a Children Centre.

Maybe, many of us agree with her about some of her changes – and hence the audience reacted quietly. Or maybe the lack of fine detail had people scratching their heads about how these changes would be interpreted in reality. Biggest question would be whether sustainability funding, quality and access funds remain in the Early Intervention Grant.

The rhetoric of early intervention was strong and no right thinking person could argue with this – especially as two of my favourite research authors Ian Sinclair and John Bennett took to the stage afterwards to reinforce the message from economic and quality perspectives. John Bennett from OECD always brings the European view which is a helpful benchmark.

I think our charming colleague from the DfE went home rather tired, having had to try and respond to all those seeking an answer over their nutritious lunch.  In the meantime, for those of us in the PVI sector, as the saying goes:  be careful what you wish for…

Related articles

• Sarah Teather says families in poorest areas no longer guaranteed full childcare (telegraph.co.uk)