Voluntary Groups and Community Centres

Gregory Campbell Excerpts

Wednesday 25th March 2026 Westminster Hall

[Ben Coleman]

I absolutely agree. I am sure that my hon. Friend has fought hard for the Swanscombe pavilion, and it is a great shame that it has closed. I am going to explore the reasons why these things happen in just a minute, but sometimes one thinks that local authorities could be a bit sharper in how they do things and understand the challenges facing us. Some of them are less competent than others—I have no idea whether that is the case in my hon. Friend’s part of the world, but I am sure he is fighting for his local centre.

In a sense, my hon. Friend’s intervention brings me to my next point about the situation not just in his constituency, but right across England. The financial position of community centres across England is stark: net spending on community centres and public halls has fallen by 38% in real terms since 2009, which is a profound erosion of the infrastructure that sustains the life of our communities. I am grateful to the House of Commons Library for providing me with that figure. The Ethical Property Foundation recently ran a survey, talking to community centres and local areas across the country about what was going on, and it has identified five interconnected challenges facing community centres. I think it is worth sharing them, because in the challenges lies the solution.

The first is the insecurity that exists around leasing—the single greatest threat to the sector that the Ethical Property Foundation has identified. Over half of community organisations expect to face lease-related difficulties in the future, because too many are operating on short leases. They have break clauses, unpredictable rent increases, and full repair obligations passed on to them without adequate support. That combination is not simply difficult for them to deal with; it is highly destabilising. Without security of tenure, organisations cannot plan, fundraise effectively or invest in the buildings their communities depend on. We have to realise that many of these organisations are not trying to grow—they are simply trying to stay in the buildings that they already occupy.

That leads me to the second challenge identified, which is access to capital funding. Community centres report that securing capital investment is incredibly difficult—success rates can be as low as one in 20 applications, and the administrative burden is considerable. The most significant barrier is often the lease itself, because many funders require between 15 and 25 years of tenure security before they will invest, and if that does not exist, the organisation does not get the investment. Without that, organisations are effectively locked out of the funding they need to repair, upgrade, or simply make safe their buildings.

The third challenge is the condition of the buildings themselves. Many community centres operate out of ageing, poorly maintained premises. The research by the Ethical Property Foundation shows that 58% of organisations expect difficulties manging their buildings in the coming year. That is driven by rising maintenance costs and a lack of specialist expertise. I have seen at first hand in my constituency that trustees and volunteers are being asked to act as de facto property managers, but they often do not have the skills or support required. That is not sustainable or fair, and it carries a real risk to the communities that these buildings serve.

The fourth challenge is landlord practices and local authority procedures—too often, local authorities compound these difficulties. They include short-term tenancies, delayed decisions, regeneration schemes that leave organisations in limbo and, in some cases, sudden evictions or unaffordable cost increases. The ability to evict a community organisation with minimal notice is an extraordinary power, and it should be exercised carefully, and not without clear criteria, proper justification and meaningful protections for the communities affected.

In the Chelsea part of my constituency, we have a charity called St Mary Abbots Rehabilitation and Training, or SMART for short. Since 1985, it has operated a warm and welcoming centre, supporting people affected by mental illness on their recovery journey. It offers a range of activities and training opportunities, and a popular café. Last summer, the council locked the SMART centre out of its premises without warning and put a dirty great padlock on the gate. There was no alternative provision, nor did the council offer any proper support. It talked about safety grounds, but serious questions remain about the evidence, the timelines and the mitigation offered. Addressing all that was an uphill struggle for SMART, and it felt as though it was in danger of going under. Although a temporary solution was eventually found and reimbursement was agreed in principle, that came only after a prolonged and damaging process during which services were disrupted and vulnerable people were left without support. That should not have happened—it did not need to happen.

Of course, for every bad example, there are many examples across the country of excellent partnership working between community centres and local authorities. That said, the baseline must be raised. Risk should not be transferred to community organisations without the security that they need to manage it.

That brings me to the fifth and final challenge identified by the Ethical Property Foundation—

[Mr Gregory Campbell (East Londonderry) (DUP)]

Hear, hear!

[Ben Coleman]

Well, it is important to set these things out clearly. Underpinning all these things is the absence of a national framework. There is currently no consistent guidance for local authorities on how to support community centres that are managing publicly owned buildings. There are no clear standards on tenancy practices. There is nothing to help the charities do the job that the community needs them to do.

Community centres need longer, more secure leases and fair tenancy practices as the baseline, not as an exception. They need accessible capital funding with processes proportionate to the size and capacity of the organisations applying. They need expert legal, technical and professional support to manage buildings effectively, and a national framework that treats community centres as essential public infrastructure, not as commercial tenants to be managed at arm’s length.

I have three requests for the Minister, each of which is, I hope, practical, achievable and capable of making a real difference to community centres across the country—and may I say how much I appreciate the enthusiasm of the hon. Member for East Londonderry (Mr Campbell) to hear them? First, will the Department for Culture, Media and Sport issue clear guidance to local authorities on the support that should be provided to voluntary organisations managing council buildings, covering both tenancy agreements and day-to-day property management? Too many groups are navigating those responsibilities without any consistent framework to fall back on. That must change.

Secondly, will the Department provide guidance on the circumstances in which a local authority acting as a landlord may issue insecure tenancies or tenancies at will? Thirdly and finally, will the Department publish guidance on the rationale and circumstances under which local authorities may remove community buildings? Communities deserve transparency when spaces that have served them for years are suddenly at risk of closure or disposal. Without clear criteria and a duty to justify such decisions, too many closures happen without scrutiny—as has taken place in my community—and too many communities are left without resource.

These targeted, proportionate requests for guidance and transparency would provide a foundation for a much more consistent, fairer approach to community infrastructure across England. Community centres across our country are a local gem—there is nothing else like them in our areas—and people’s lives are all the richer for them. The Government have the opportunity to give them the boost they need, and I hope they will seize it with both hands.

--- Later in debate ---

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

It is always a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms McVey. I thank the hon. Member for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman) for the opportunity to raise the invaluable work carried out by the voluntary sector in Northern Ireland and my constituency. I have a question not related to the debate: as the MP for Chelsea and Fulham, which team does he support?

I am thrilled to see the Minister in her place, as we all are. We always look forward to her helpful answers, and we thank her in advance. I also welcome the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Old Bexley and Sidcup (Mr French), and say well done to the Lib Dem spokesperson, the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine), who led the debate at 4.30 pm yesterday and is back this morning at 9.30 am.

I always maintain that the people of Northern Ireland are the most charitable, not just in financial giving per capita, but in giving their time and love. I say that honestly and sincerely, having lived in the Ards for all but four years of my life, which gives me a fair notion of how the people are. There is a reason we have the highest number of kinship placements in the UK and why we are world-renowned for our big heart.

I think about some of the things that have shaped us. We do not look back with fondness at the troubles of 30-plus years, but they shaped us in the way we look forward. Having been shaped by our past makes us think of the future we would like to see. That has given us the compassionate spirit to pull together as a community in difficult times. When I see people borrowing church halls to provide Christmas dinners on Christmas day, for example, hear of community volunteers handing out hygiene packs to elderly people in the pandemic, or see children enjoying free classes in local community groups, I know that the community is alive and well in the Ards and Strangford.

[Mr Gregory Campbell]

Does my hon. Friend agree that community centres across the UK step up when Governments do not intervene? There was an example in my constituency just last week. A community group stepped in to host a careers event for local schools because the community was under-represented in a public sector body. Next month, another group in Coleraine is doing likewise. Those are the vital functions that community centres and groups offer across the whole country.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank my hon. Friend for his intervention; it summed up the point I was trying to make about my constituency of Strangford, which is also true of my hon. Friend’s constituency of East Londonderry and all of Northern Ireland, where the community spirit lives and thrives.

In 2024-25, just under 46% of adults in Northern Ireland volunteered formally or informally. If those figures do not tell us about the people of Northern Ireland, nothing will. Those who formally volunteer in Northern Ireland frequently offer high levels of commitment, with 23% volunteering for eight to 16 hours in a four-week period. The average church volunteer in Northern Ireland contributes approximately 13 hours a month. Church and faith-based organisations are the most common type of volunteering in the region, with some 39% of all volunteers identifying that as their primary sector. For a medium-sized church with roughly 120 adults, for example, the annual value of volunteer time is estimated at just under £250,000.

I know that Northern Ireland is very much a faith-based country. We attend our churches and we worship our God in the way He indicates us to do. Through faith-based voluntary groups, the savings for the community, Government, councils and the Northern Ireland Assembly are significant. I look at the churches that put on the Boys’ Brigade, the Brownies and the Campaigners, and see the sheer volume of volunteer hours in place to provide children with a safe place to learn new skills and share in the love of God.

None of those community groups or churches is looking for a pat on the back. They are offering a service; they are doing something above and beyond what people need them to do—but they do it. They are not seeking any form of recognition for giving up their weekends to provide children and teenagers with somewhere safe to meet their friends and hang out. They do, however, need some support to keep the lights on.

I said I was pleased to see the Minister in her place; I know she has absolutely no responsibility for Northern Ireland, so I do not expect her to say what is going to happen there. I just ask that we try to work together across the United Kingdom to help each other. That is what I look for from most debates. We have things back home—our volunteer spirit is one example, with 46% of adults doing volunteer work—that I believe come off the back of our faith.

I am coming to an end, because I am conscious of others who want to speak. With the cost of energy rising, even those groups that are blessed to have their own facilities need more support to provide, not an all-singing, all-dancing programme—although I know they would like to—but warmth, light and insurance. That is where Government need to step in in a helpful way. The hoops that volunteers and churches have to jump through to receive a small amount of funding are sometimes off-putting. Those processes must be simplified and made easier to access.

In this energy crisis, we look to the Minister to consider provision of additional support for the voluntary sector to keep the lights on, keep the elderly and our kids safe, and keep the community knitted together. All that money—every penny—will be well spent.