Govt Response to Service Charities

Discussion in 'Charities and Welfare' started by jack-daniels, Oct 26, 2007.

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. quote:
    If the MoD were not to charge for the use of its facilities, this would mean the tax payer subsidising the activities of non-governmental organisations and individuals.

    Am I being particularly thick(entirely possible) in questioning how the tax payer is burdened by the subsidy of a CHARITABLE Trust? Surely there is some kind of tax relief for a charity?

    Also, you'd think common sense would prevail- oh hang on it's the MOD and government nuff said.
  2. What this government spokesthing neglected to say was that whilst it is apparently completely unacceptable for the taxpayer to subsidise NGOs and individuals dedicated to providing succour to those who have served their country, it is completely acceptable to dish out funding to those who have done nothing for our society except perhaps export their undesirables our way.

    The delicious irony is that our troops have been maimed fighting to provide the conditions that have enabled some of these same NGOs to flourish.

    The list below is not exhaustive by any means. Link:

    Civil Society Challenge Fund: Aimed at UK-based not-for-profit organisations working to provide lasting benefits to poor communities and under-represented people in the developing world.

    Development Awareness Fund and the Mini Grants Scheme: UK-based not-for-profit organisations or networks which share our commitment to raising awareness and understanding of development issues.

    Partnership Programme Agreements: Agreements between DFID and influential civil society organisations in the UK which set out at a strategic level how the partners will work together to meet the Millennium Development Goals. Strategic Funding is provided, and is linked to jointly agreed outcomes.

    Governance and Transparency Fund: Targeted principally at not-for-profit organisations. It will also consider proposals which involve local/regional government bodies and certain for-profit groups (particularly those in the media), where their involvement can show to be an integral part of the project/programme. proposal. If you would like to know more about the Fund please e-mail

    Conflict and Humanitarian Fund: Applications for the current funding round closed on 8 February 2007. Information about future opportunities for not-for-profit organisations to apply for funding for work in the areas of conflict prevention, humanitarian assistance and access to justice will be published in summer 2007.

    Humanitarian response funding: Allocated in response to specific emergencies and disasters to not-for-profit organisations, United Nations agencies and the Red Cross Movement.

    Disaster Risk Reduction: After a major rapid-onset disaster, up to 10% of DFID's response funding may be available for Disaster Risk Reduction (DRR) activities including prevention, mitigation and preparedness for future disasters, where this can be done effectively. This is likely to be relevant for sudden onset disasters and will only apply to responses above £500,000. The funding is often managed by the DFID country or regional office. For further information read our Disaster Risk Reduction Policy Paper(657 kb) or contact (+44) (0)20 7023 1476.

    Mine action: DFID funds a programme of global mine action through the United Nations and selected NGO partners. For further information please contact the Security and Justice Team in Conflict, Humanitarian and Security Department (CHASE) on (+44) (0)20 7023 0599.

    Africa Enterprise Challenge Fund: A 7-Year DFID led initiative to stimulate pro-poor growth and create employment in Africa.

    Business Sector Advocacy Challenge Fund (BUSAC): Aims to broaden the engagement of the Private Sector in Policy formulation and implementation in Ghana.

    Emerging Africa Infrastructure Fund: A Public Private Partnership providing long-term debt finance on commercial terms to finance the construction and development of private infrastructure in Sub-Saharan Africa.

    Investment Climate Facility for Africa: Helps lower the cost of doing business in Africa and promote a better investment climate across the continent.
  3. I used to think that I was a fairly intelligent person, but as have read the Govt Response several times and it still makes no sense to me, I can only conclude that I am a thick cnut.
  4. Yup, me to.
  5. :x Zigactly! If the bloody Government fully provided the care, support and living aids required by those who've served their country and as a result ended up physically and / or mentally incapacitated, there would be no need for these charities and ergo no need for fund-raising events which are (logically) often hosted on MoD property. Waiving the 15% would still see the bloody Government effectively getting insurance on the cheap.

    Cnuts the lot of them! :x
  6. What the government fails to understand is that the forces are not the same as civil society and cannot be treated as so. In my day it was called give and take it seems that the government wish to treat forces personnel like civil society when it suits them but wishes to treat the troops differently when it doesn't. So if we are going to treat the troops like civil society how much do you pay someone who will spend large chunks of his service life in dangerous combat operations separated from his friends and family? At the same time you lock them into contracts (if you can call it one) of unlimited liability who needs to give more notice to leave than the most high powered Chief Executive and even then will have a long period of liability for reserve duty. I'm sure this must be worth more than £15K per year!
    To maintain morale this government MUST understand what give and take means in a military context. If they don't this penny pinching attitude will erode morale and it will find it is incapable of of carrying out its foreign policy objectives. It will not attract the numbers and quality of personnel to man its armed forces in order to do so. To maintain morale they need to do much better and understand what motivates the armed forces.

    This tax needs to be scrapped before it becomes yet another issue which breaks the camels back.
  7. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    A sadly typical response.

    They really couldn't give a toss. No matter how little sense the policy makes, as long as they meet their PC goals (or in this case, divide to the lowest common denominater so no-one benefits...that's fair, isn't it?) , that is enough.

    Eejits, the lot of them
  8. Exactly!!