Notting Hill Carnival Strategic Review - Intelligent Space

• an acknowledgement from each trustee of their sole and exclusive responsibility and
duty to act in the best interests of NHCT;
• the appointment of independent legal advisors;
• training in board governance for trustees;
• a commitment to keep the Charity Commission fully informed of the board’s actions
and where appropriate to seek advice and guidance on any contentious issues;
• taking all necessary steps to secure and protect the assets of NHCT;
• the appointment of an independent chair to oversee and support the trustees
throughout the programme of reform; and
• the creation of an interim Carnival Arts Advisory Group (complete with terms of
reference), with membership comprising of the elected representatives of the five
Carnival Arenas. It was agreed that the trustees would work in partnership with this
new group so as to ensure the integral involvement of the Arenas in the event
planning and decision-making process for Carnival 2002.
3.31 It is clear that the difficulties experienced by NHCT prior to the Carnival in 2002 had a direct
bearing on its ability to satisfy the conditions of funding placed upon them by various funding
bodies. The Carnival arenas, wishing to have a stronger voice and influence on the decisions
being taken about the Notting Hill Carnival, came together to create a new forum in the shape
of the more powerful Executive Committee of the Carnival Arenas (ECCA). In the first few
months of 2003, the Carnival arenas and ECCA were consulted and played an important role in
shaping the governing documents of a proposed new organisation – London Notting Hill
Carnival Ltd (LNHCL), which was established in May 2003. Each of the arenas elected 82 a
representative to the board of directors of LNHCL, which assumed the mantle of event
organiser for the 2003 Carnival.
3.32 The nature and complexity of the Notting Hill Carnival make the need for effective
management and leadership vital for a successful and safe event. Both the Coopers and
Lybrand report and the Arts Council review pointed to the need to increase the skills base and
expertise of the community-based management structure running the Carnival as an essential
requirement for growth. The need for democratic grassroots community ownership of the
Notting Hill Carnival as well as proper investment and capacity-building in order to underpin
such organisational development and professionalism were also seen as key factors, since its
absence had made successive Carnival organisations extremely vulnerable in times of
difficulty. The Review Group felt that consultation with the Charity Commission in 2002 had
been necessary in order to ensure that the issues of governance that had been raised were
adequately addressed and resolved by all parties. Although in some quarters, the funders had
been accused of ‘interfering’ and attempting to ‘taking over the Carnival’, such accusations,
whilst unfounded, also laid bare the contradictory messages emanating from successive
Carnival organisers and some members of the wider carnival constituency. On the one hand,
both groups viewed public funding as an essential requirement for sustaining the Notting Hill
82 The board of directors for the Company were democratically elected by the five Carnival a renas, and verified by the Electoral Reform
Society in February 2003.
131