(It’s a question sometimes heard being asked on site, and so here are some reflections on the point.)

Why do the Council want all sites to be self-managed, if achievable?
Over a decade ago, there were severe cuts in central government funding for Councils (although the position’s eased somewhat recently), and they simply can’t afford to do all that’s needed to keep sites in a well-managed, fully-tenanted condition, whether that be the physical work in clearing neglected plots, facilities maintenance etc., or the interpersonal work of showing prospective tenants plots etc. (Sue let around forty plots last year, and each appointment involved typically half-a-dozen emails before the hour-or-so long meeting.)
Cardiff have one Allotments Officer to deal with all the sites in Cardiff, which host over three thousand tenants, and it’s self-evident, that any one of the above duties applied across them all would be beyond their capacity.
The Council offer guidance for gardeners, who want to set up an Association to manage their site. The Guide contains a model Constitution for such Associations, and it’s unlikely that the Council would approve one if it differed markedly in its objectives and organisation from that. (For instance, by promoting the use of the site, or part of it, for purposes which relegated those defined by the various Allotments Acts. Those who’d like to change the Constitution for PPAA, which closely follows this model, should bear this in mind, therefore.)
What are Associations able to do better, or that the Council can’t do at all?
Examples include:
- On-hand maintenance, at short notice, at weekends, and on public holidays, of water facilities and gate locks etc. Volunteers may well – as does PPAA – have the skills to do these things free-of-charge too, whereas the Council would have to organise a paid contractor with a waiting time perhaps of weeks or even months. In the case of a failed gate lock – as usually happens a few times each year – this could be too long a period of severe inconvenience, or of compromised site security, or of both.
- Far closer day-to-day vigilance, arising from detailed site knowledge, leading to improved security, and to prompt action over matters such as fly-tipping.
- Availability of volunteers to co-ordinate manure deliveries from Cardiff Riding School. (This is now essential, as the Council no longer remove the manure for the School.)
- At-will benefits, e.g. the provision of communications facilities, such as a site-dedicated website, social media account, etc. The Council couldn’t offer these at all.
- Subject to available volunteers, the capacity to stage plant sales, and to offer other desirable facilities, such a site shop, space in a communal poly tunnel, and so on.
- One-to-one, unhurried, personal discussions with prospective tenants, allowing them to be given the most suitable plot for their intentions from among those available.
- Freedom to devote some effort to parallel beneficial work, e.g. in enhancing whatever environmental and ecological benefits the site might be capable of offering. (PPAA are currently growing several dozen long-flowering, pollinator-attracting shrubs, for planting in suitable places around the site, and maintain vigilance for invasive species, among other such work.)

PPAA are – like most other Associations – very short of volunteer time, and they’d like to be able to do more. At present the post of Chair’s vacant, and it’s therefore filled at meetings on an acting basis. The Council have nominated Sue as their representative for contact. She deals with lettings and emails, but the long list of duties now asked by the Council for Site Reps means that other aspects of this role are shared, and the Council Guide explains that this is quite accepted and normal.
What would happen if the Association were dissolved?
- All the above services and facilities would end where the Council didn’t provide them, or revert to their procedures and waiting times where they did.
- There’d be no further availability of any personal contacts on site for action on any matter or for referral, that is, no transitional arrangements, and all queries would be subject to the Council’s discretion as to when to reply, or whether to reply at all.
- The site would lose its annual Grant of over £5,000, and PPAA would also have to return its credit balance of typically £15,000, as the PPAA Constitution is silent on the matter.
- Plot lettings would become very sporadic, leading to a rapidly-increasing number of neglected and untidy plots. In turn this would very likely attract the attentions of property developers – or their influential friends – who could claim that the site was failing as allotments, as has happened in many places around the country.
The position of PPAA Committee is quite fragile, and vulnerable to disruption, mainly owing to the small number of volunteers. It’s for this reason, that good attendance at Annual General Meetings is of the utmost importance for everyone on the site. There’ll be more on this topic as the date – yet to be arranged – of the AGM approaches.

PPA Website Team

