Advertisement

loader

Talk

Advanced search

Now CABs are Closing. This is Just a War on the Poor Isn't It?

(79 Posts)
Tortington Tue 02-Aug-11 06:24:36

cuts to charities

i think the Big Society lable is a misnoma tbh - i don' think that is the argument at all here. the argument is simply that poor people are getting incresingly screwed, and the govt are taking away any support and therefore right of appeal.

exoticfruits Tue 02-Aug-11 07:00:16

I think that is dreadful-they provide such a good service. I hadn't realised.

CogitoErgoSometimes Tue 02-Aug-11 07:05:59

Unlike government departments, charities still have the option to get extra funding elsewhere. In the spirit of 'big society' I would expect those in charge of charities to be petitioning big business and individuals to make up the shortfall. It is not a 'war on the poor'

TartyDoris Tue 02-Aug-11 14:01:56

Why should the government be funding charities in the first place? Doesn't that go against the whole idea of charities?

wannaBe Tue 02-Aug-11 14:06:39

they are charities, not government organisations.

EightiesChick Tue 02-Aug-11 14:18:19

That is shit. And I would rather the government funded charities than banks any day.

CeliaDeBohun Tue 02-Aug-11 14:22:35

TartyDoris this article in the Independent explains that a lot of charities do rely on government funding for their survival.

CeliaDeBohun Tue 02-Aug-11 14:24:05

EightiesChick - absolutely. I'd have thought that they had a moral duty to assist charities with funds, if needed, regardless of whether there's any legal obligation for them to do so.

OldLadyKnowsNothing Tue 02-Aug-11 14:26:03

When I worked for Women's Aid, we were almost entirely funded by the local council.

niceguy2 Tue 02-Aug-11 14:42:35

I didn't realise government's provided so much funding for charities. At which point do they become a quango then rather than a charity?

Shame we are cutting funding but then I have to ask why the government were funding them in the first place!?!?!

ilovemydogandMrObama Tue 02-Aug-11 14:47:44

My understanding is that the CAB mainly relies on volunteers, but there is a manager and a few trained staff who are trained in the requisite benefits, employment, housing law, immigration, and some CABs do advise on family matters.

OldLadyKnowsNothing Tue 02-Aug-11 14:51:07

Even CAB volunteers get their travel expenses (at public transport rates) refunded. Then there's office rent, electricity and so on.

ttosca Tue 02-Aug-11 15:15:42

Unlike government departments, charities still have the option to get extra funding elsewhere. In the spirit of 'big society' I would expect those in charge of charities to be petitioning big business and individuals to make up the shortfall. It is not a 'war on the poor'

lol! "Please Mr. Exxon Mobile, could you share a few grand for our local citizens advice bureau?"

ttosca Tue 02-Aug-11 15:18:51

Shame we are cutting funding but then I have to ask why the government were funding them in the first place!?!?!

Charities have always been subsidized and given special status by the state, in the US, UK and all Western states. They receive subsidies, tax breaks and other forms of help.

The state funds them because they are a public good, and because they can sometimes provide a service at a reduced cost compared with an entirely state-run and state-funded operation.

ttosca Tue 02-Aug-11 15:19:39

So, Tory apologists: where is your Big Society now?

aliceliddell Tue 02-Aug-11 15:23:48

Big Society = BS

adamschic Tue 02-Aug-11 15:34:43

I think people are generally unaware where the money comes from to run charities. The money comes from subscriptions (if applicable), fundraising, donations, legacies but mostly from government grants to carry out valuable projects on their behalf.

ironman Tue 02-Aug-11 15:52:09

Not one person who voted for the Tories should be apologisingconfused. Only those who voted Labour, they got us into this mess, but it seems it's conveniently forgotten on this site.
It's a shame that funding is cut from CAB's but them it's a shame my libraries closing!
The Bourgeoise/Champagne/Socialists known as the Labour Party could not give a flying fiddle about the poor in society, otherwise they would not have spent all their money on-non jobs, had mass immigration to undercut them and generally shate all ove them. I know who is to blame and it's not David Cameron.
Cameron's making the cuts because they are necessary, otherwise we would be bankrupt. Anyone who has a dig at the tories and votes for Labour should look closer to home.
Posters on here seem (well some of them) full of bile and venom directed towards the tories or tory voters, it's rare to see the same bile spewed out towards Labour supporters, the Labour Party, or others who support them on this site. Strange that?........

adamschic Tue 02-Aug-11 15:55:47

Ironman, so Labour are to blame for the current global economic crisis too are they?

TartyDoris Tue 02-Aug-11 16:02:49

Labour are partially blame for the "global economic crisis" as are all national governments.

They are also responsible for spending like drunken sailors during the boom years.

adamschic Tue 02-Aug-11 16:08:15

So you really think it wouldn't have happened under a Tory government. The money would still have been wasted spent but in other ways.

ttosca Tue 02-Aug-11 18:14:34

How many times must this nonsense be refuted?

The only way New Labour contributed to the global economic crisis is by deregulating the financial sector. This is something which has been going on around the world, as countries try to race to the bottom to attract capital investment.

The fact that this crisis is global in nature should tell you exactly how responsible New Labour are in causing it.

Some facts:

* In 2007, before the financial crisis, the deficit was running at 3%. This is obviously not great, but not a 'crisis' and just above the european average; most governments throughout this century have run deficits - all of them in the past 20 years have.

* Before the election, the Tories pledged to match New Labour spending penny for penny.

* 50% of funding for the Tory party comes from The City. You are fooling yourself if you think the Tories would have regulated the City finance more stringently than New Labour.

Tortington Tue 02-Aug-11 18:20:21

some great posts here ttosca

ttosca Tue 02-Aug-11 18:23:39

Labour are partially blame for the "global economic crisis" as are all national governments.

The problem is we have a global economic system which serves the interest of the big banks and the top richest 5%. The feral elite have acted with impunity, gambling with public money, scamming one another and the public, losing the money, and then using public money to bail them out.

What has happened, in effect, is the the banking crisis has turned in to a sovereign debt crisis. This is because the public have bailed out the banks.

So there has been a massive transfer of wealth from tax payers (the public) towards the banking system, in order to rescue it from its own vices and bringing everyone else down with it.

The people who make the 'there is no money left' argument are typically right-wingers and Tories who have always resisted public spending, and have wittingly or unwittingly fallen in to the mistaken idea that it is huge amounts of public spending which has caused these deficit crises all over europe and the world.

It isn't public spending which has caused this crisis, it's the financial meltdown which caused the crisis. This cost the public hundreds of billions of pounds, caused a recession, caused a loss in tax receipts because of the recession, and put tens of thousands of people out of work.

I'm pissed off too, but blame the right people, for God's sake - it's not that we have too many hospitals in the UK that we have a huge deficit. It's because we rescued the financial system from total meltdown, caused by the gambling city crooks.

Lifeissweet Tue 02-Aug-11 18:32:14

The CAB has long been relied upon to provide financial, debt and legal services to the public impartially and free of charge so that the Government does not need to fund these services themselves. My Mother used to be quite high up in the National Association of Citizen's Advice Bureaux and they used to work closely with the Government so that they would be able to provide specific advice on new legislation (for example, any changes to the benefit system..etc)

Of course the government should be funding this. After all, in the current climate, when there are so many changes going through regarding benefits, pensions and high unemployment, more people need the services that the CABs provide. It is a scandal that their funding is being cut right now when more people need them. I would agree that it really is a war on poor people. If anyone who needs advice (and, let's face it - those who are most proportionally affected by the cuts are the poor) can't afford private financial or legal advice, then where are they going to go? It's just so depressing!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now