Cuts 'destroying big society'

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by stinker, Feb 7, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. I have a couple of questions / points regarding this headline and article seeing as its top of the BBC website.

    BBC News - Cuts 'destroying big society' concept, says CSV head

    How does giving 470 million to charities make them independance from state money - surely this creates dependance.

    My other point: There are approx 170,000 charities in the UK, ( How many charities are there? | National Council for Voluntary Organisations ). No doubt most were set up with good intentions but now are a bit like quangos have outlived their usefulness and consume most of their donations on running costs, therefore depleting the much needed funds for those in need.

    Is it time we had a bonfire of charities?
     
  2. Bouillabaisse

    Bouillabaisse LE Book Reviewer

    So a woman who's career has revolved around extracting govt money (and council money is government money) and been rewarded handsomely for doing so criticises the new government because they won't be giving so much. If they're charities why are they state/council funded at all?

    And the "Big Society" is a Big Pile of Pants, soiled, and not in a good way
     
  3. There are certainly one or two which are being used as vehicles for tax evasion, look at this for example:

    http://www.tonyblairsportsfoundation.org/sports/


    Lots of money going in, but very little paid out. Income £430K disbursements £73K.
     
  4. What's worse it has charitable status
    Blair has a £5 million per annum lifestyle, he could afford to fund the foundation out of petty cash :-x

    Yes, and the Charities Commission should be overhauled too!
     
  5. dizzy.chick

    dizzy.chick Clanker Book Reviewer

    I work for a charity now that has no state funding and it is in the minority. There is a big problem with service delivery charities where over time they have become dependant on this revenue stream. I dont think the issue is so much that the money is being withdrawn, we all knew it was coming, the issue is that Charities are being expected to do so much more- this is a huge increase in what is expected of them but with less and less funds be these donations or public money.
    Most charities are already very efficient with back office functions so it is hard to see how they will manage to take on more with less in the kitty.
     
  6. If the aims and purpose of the charity is worthy, it will get enough funding from private donors and collections to function.

    FAR too many 'charities' are nothing of the sort and are merely a tool to avoid tax.
     
  7. Very true, many are big businesses look at the income on the charity commissions website.
     
  8. Or doing something the state wants doing but is a cheaper option than doing it itself or getting a private company to do it.
    lot of homeless projects and other care providers fall into this.
    the so called "voluntary" sector
     
  9. Anyone who walks through Westminster nowadays has to beat the 'Charity Muggers' (Chuggers) off with a stick.
    These are young, enthusiastic and otherwise unemployable media studies and surfboarding graduates who are on commission for the number of well meaning citizens they can sign up for direct debits for the charity of the week that is employing them.

    Now, I have no objection to Joe Citizen giving up some time to wave the collecting bucket around (I do it myself on occasion) but these mercenaries really annoy me. If they think that their charity is deserving of money, then instead of badgering me for it, take out the facial piercings, get a haircut, have a wash, get a job, and then they should feel free to hand over their own wages.

    Simples?
     
  10. Its too easy to forget that charities used to perform the functions that are now in the hands of local government, childrens homes, old peoples homes and most of the elements of what we call "social services" were once performed by voluntary organisations. IMHO they did a much better job then than these so called "professionals" do now, and with significantly less resources.

    If you want an example to compare it with, just look at hospices.
     
  11. I think your find thats a touch rose tinted glasses tbf and a lot of small goverment bullshit.
    hospice's work well but always struggle for cash Funding Boost For South West Hospices | News | NHS South West
    and do get some nasty evil tax payers money.
    The idea that welfare and social care can be delivered donations and the generous rich is libertarian bullshit.
    strangley they never suggest defence should go the same way (ok some american gunnuts theink the should have the right to own apaches and main battle tanks etc.)
     
  12. The transfer of child services and protection from amateur but rather worldly wise matronly ladies of a certain age in the 60's to a class of bright young 'professionals' with Degrees in child psychology and childcare but often barely out of nappies themselves was not exactly a stellar sucess, was it?
     
  13. better than leaving them in the hands of priests though.
    massive change in society and expectations
     
  14. You aren't denying that despite being run as charities, hospices are the epitome of care, with extremely dedicated staff, and despite receiving some cash from NHS resources are very well run. How did we survive before the NHS was created? Not everyone died at 30 because there was no state healthcare system! If you let the state run anything the first thing that is created is an empire of bureaucracy, just look at the NHS over the past 15 years for an example of waste and bureaucracy.
     
  15. in a word bollocks the US spend way more per head on healthcare and still fail to provide a universal service.
    hospices are small things doing one thing very well. Scale up to the size of a large hospital and suddenly you need adminstrators and managers possibly not as many but some.
    trusts and the internal market etc were all bullshit ideas. The idea of targest was a good one just not thought through enough.
    I happen to like the nhs as do many people who have to use it can't see bupa running it any better.