NFSP00001079
NFSP00001079
Grant Framework agreement meeting 1OD 29 July GT< MJ< IP< PH< PB< DM
Went through 22/7 Draft page by page.
General impressions — unacceptable in current form. Cannot be released to anyone in current form
and may be not even when tidied up. POL want too much control in the affairs of NFSP, OTT on
planning and reporting and reviewing with POL having a right of suspending or ending payment at
every stage.
Annual payment is meant for day to day running of Fed, equivalent to subscription income. Has to be
treated differently from specific project grant payments. Should be paid on basis of general aims and
ambitions, left in our control, subject only to high level review to see if we are operating within
articles and regulations of new organisation. Audited accounts should be sufficient to satisfy POL and
if we build a reserve so be it, there is nothing built in for inflationary increases over the 15 year term.
Specific project grants should be subject to more planning, agreement and scrutiny/review but
within reason. As it reads we are responsible for overspends but have to return underspends. Should
there be scope for us to make a legitimate profit. 2 types of project — development of Fed eg
Subpostmaster or more in nature of payment for services eg training function. May have to be dealt
with differently.
Agreed we need to set out our red lines, those things we would like changing if possible, those we
are not bothered about too much, those we are prepared to accept, those we need to take legal
advice on.
Need to consider if this is a commercial contract and therefore can be exempt from FOI questioning
30 July Camden
Discussion on tactics re SC. Day 1 will be pick an option day 2 will be discuss in detail and pass or
reject by 2/3rds whole package. Cannot be go back and renegotiate. If rejected effectively requires
dissolution. Framework will probably have to be shared with EC but not with SC (although may leak)
but on day it is as is, also MOU and articles are as written although may evolve in time. We are
getting closer and closer to tipping point of lack of influence, and POL getting closer to completion of
NT. If CWU is rejected our biggest bargaining chip is gone!
Red Lines
Pp1 D & E Annual plan is subscription income treated differently
Pp3 Representative org, 50%
Accounting for money and held on trust, separate accounts etc.
Pp4 Purpose Annual Plan switch to aims and ambitions as in Articles
Pp4 4.14.2. Membership & membership services must be paid for by POL and for all, albeit
individual can decline.
Rest of 4 becomes redundant if annual plan ditched.
5.1 change wording to support Spmrs but not to actively be detrimental to POL
NFSP00001079
NFSP00001079
5.6 we have never agreed an end date of 2018 (implies compulsory conversions)
5.7 do not agree principal of clawback
Cl 6, 7 & 8 all need re-writing by lawyer as we do not agree principal of annual plan and control of
spend.
17 whole clause needs review. Must include reference to mediation. Must include a period of
continued payment if terminated so we are not cut off without a future or time to secure one. 3
years?
Preferences
Free membership from a fixed date
Simplified calculations ref balance above subscription income up to that date.
CI 9 simplify project funding application / review.
Cl11 11.1 too detailed scrutiny of spending
General principle of overspend our fault underspend to be returned — not fair.
C112 too controlling needs re-writing. Separate accounts, on trust, no transfers, no pay to EOs, no
capital purchases.
Cl13 over the top, some reporting and review acceptable for specific grants but not this.
14.1 14.2 14.3 needs removing 14.4 14.5 ok
15 needs re-writing — some elements acceptable but this is OTT. Need help of legal
Schedule 2 needs re-write
Schedule 3 Grant Cttee. Needs slimming down too much admin
Query 6 monthly change of chair.
For legal advice
Pp2 confidential information
6 do we need separate document for annual funding or just separate section in single
document?
cl17.8
cl18
Cl 22 re licensed materials
Cl 23 confidentiality
NFSP00001079
NFSP00001079
Cl 25 Data Protection implications, if things go wrong what can we use?
Cl 29 insurances
C131 Mediation process under CEDR does it arrive at a binding solution?
36.2 advice on requirement.
General Consider strategic direction for NFSP not just react to POL document. Draw up own
document to go back to POL with, and have comparisons for future discussions. Get general legal
advice on prospective document.
Discussion about how to start up field team from project money, what they might do, basis of
employment and responsibility. Qualification and required training.
Discussion about possible expansion of Network with limited access points and possible effect on
outcome of SC.