BWA – Follow the Silence (Part 3)

BWA – Follow the Silence (Part 3)

If Part 1 followed the money
and Part 2 followed the power,

then Part 3 follows something much harder to pin down.

Silence.

Not a technical silence.
Not an “out of office” silence.
A very deliberate, very prolonged silence.

📧 The Emails That Went Nowhere

Following Part 2, formal written questions were sent:

• to the Chief Executive of the Bangladeshi Women’s Association, and
• directly to the Board of Trustees, by name and by role.

The emails were detailed.
They were polite.
They were evidence-based.
They set clear deadlines.

What came back?

Nothing.

No acknowledgement.
No holding response.
No “we’ll come back to you”.
No trustee engagement at all.

For an organisation receiving substantial public funding, that silence speaks volumes.

🧱 Trustees: The Dog That Didn’t Bark

At this point it’s important to be clear about roles.

Trustees are not decorative.
They are not optional.
They are not there “when convenient”.

Under charity law, trustees are legally responsible for:

• governance
• finances
• assets
• conflicts of interest
• transparency

When trustees don’t respond to serious, well-evidenced questions raised in good faith, that is no longer a communications issue — it is a governance issue.

And yet, the silence continues.

🧾 FOI: When Transparency Becomes Theoretical

Alongside the emails, Freedom of Information requests were submitted to Sandwell Council seeking clarity on:

• funding agreements
• monitoring reports
• assets and disposals
• conflicts of interest

The Council confirmed it does hold relevant information.

But the information was not released.

Instead, the response relied on technical limits and process warnings — effectively saying “yes, the information exists, but no, you can’t see it.”

An Internal Review is now underway.

Transparency, it seems, is available in principle.

🤐 When Silence Starts to Feel Like Strategy

Silence can mean many things.

Sometimes it means confusion.
Sometimes it means delay.
Sometimes it means poor administration.

But prolonged silence — from both trustees and senior figures — after multiple polite requests?
That begins to feel like a choice.

And choices have consequences.

🗣️ A Chilling Side-Effect

There is also an uncomfortable side-effect to silence.

When questions about governance and public money go unanswered, the focus subtly shifts — from the questions themselves to the person asking them.

That is not healthy.
It is not democratic.
And it does not serve the communities these organisations exist to support.

Scrutiny is not hostility.
Questions are not threats.
Accountability is not harassment.

❓ What We Still Don’t Know (Because No One Will Say)

At the end of Part 3, we are left with the same unanswered questions:

• why trustees will not engage
• who is accountable for responding
• when transparency will resume
• whether silence is now the default position

People notice these things.

Some are, to use the local phrase, getting a little Haqued Off.

⚖️ Legal & Accuracy Notice

This blog is based on published records, correspondence, and publicly available information.
No allegation of wrongdoing is made.
Any factual inaccuracies will be corrected upon receipt of evidence.

🎄 Closing Thought

After money.
After power.
After questions.

There is silence.

And silence, in public life, is rarely neutral.

To be continued.

#BWA #BangladeshiWomensAssociation #Sandwell #Tipton #FollowTheMoney #FollowThePower #TheSilence #Governance #Transparency #Accountability #FOI