to vow never to collect for Christian Aid ever again.

[bogwobbit]

Nothing to do with the charity, which I think is an excellent one, but jeez people in this country are soooooooo miserable.
I can understand why people for various reasons can't or don't want to give to a specific charity and I can appreciate (especially after reading some other threads on this topic and by the way yes, all you people who complain about people daring to knock on your door collecting for charity, are unreasonable and imho quite selfish) that not everyone likes to be asked on their doorstep (very nicely in my case) if they would like to donate but why do people have to be so rude and smug and downright horrible about it. It's almost as though NOT giving to charity is some kind of positive personality trait. Funnily enough the nicest, most generous ones are the little old ladies who quite possibly can least afford it.

So after spending five hours of my time, trudging through the rain and the hail and the wind in freezing temperatures after a full day at work, never again!! Rant over but jeez, another nail in the coffin, for my faith in humanity :)

"Christian Aid employs some shockingly aggressive people to call at the front door"

They're not employed, they volunteer. I'm sorry you got someone rude though

Well if you don't donate to them, they won't match your funds - and in any case you've said you wouldn't usually donate to a Christian charity, so what's the problem? The funds will only be matched for causes the public have chosen to give to, no more, no less. CA haven't changed just because they dared to apply for this government scheme. They're still, as you put it "a decent organisation who do genuine and sincere good works".

Absolutely, & good luck to them. I hope they make good use of whatever donations are freely given to them, although I abhor the chugging, 83p in the pound isn't great & I personally certainly don't want to pay for anyone's 'worship resources'.

But every time someone who is not me donates to them, they get my money too, under this scheme. I think that's dodgy, frankly. That's the problem.

The government spends money on many things which individuals don't like. I have no interest in the Olympics but have to accept that the government has decided to spend £2.375 billion on them.

The government has a charity budget to spend. It has decided to support charities by mirroring how much the public values them, by the exact extent of the donations they've given. If you want to have a say in how the government's aid/charity money is spent, then donate to a fund-match charity of your choice and then the government will pay towards what you have chosen. You donate, you get to help choose. Otherwise the government will just choose themselves with no regard for the public's statistical preferences.

No, because if we all donate to another charity on the matched funding list, as long as someone (i.e. not us) donates 5 million to CA, CA get our 5 million tax. So we donate, but don't get to choose that that 5 mill shouldn't go to CA. It's such a flawed system.

I'm certainly not going to lose sleep over it, Trestle - I'm happy with the charities I do donate to, which I regard as worthier & more effectual, & which aren't hoofing someone else's money to match mine whether they like it or not.

I'll add it to quite a long list of 'things the government spends my money on against my wishes', but it's definitely not going to be in the Top Ten - as I said, I've no actual quarrel with CA - I just wouldn't see them as the most effective aid provider available if overseas aid is where one wants one's money to go.

So what system of allocating government aid funds would you suggest?

"Also, how much of my two quid in my envelope paid for 'worship resources'? What kind of literature would this be? Would I want to pay for it?"

Growlithe the worship resources are a way of inspiring people to want to do something to help those in poverty. They educate people as to how they can make a difference. It's things like a set of pictures from Kenya which could be used as part of a service, or Sunday School material for young people to find out how people in Ghana are tackling malaria. It's likely that these resources will stimulate more interest in Christian Aid and its work, so it's an investment.

I think they need to talk to experts in the field & make proper grown up allocation of aid budget decisions, as our elected representatives, not cop out by fund matching.

Most of us bumble along dropping our spare change in a tin or sponsoring next door's daughter's bikeathon or bunging a quid at the nice Scouts bagpacking in Sainsbos, alongside maybe having a direct debit to a charity we have personal reasons to support. I'm doing a school assembly for my own pet charity tomorrow morning.

It's not an effective funding formula for government aid funds, which (should) work on a very much larger & better organised scale.

I think fundamentally (& I must admit I'd not given it a great deal of thought before tonight), 'charity' and 'government aid' mean very different things as far as I'm concerned.

I'm not saying Christian aid should not exist. I'm saying the government should not give taxpayers money to it when they could give it to oxfam. I agree that I am uncomfortable with the whole concept of government money going to charities when most of the problems are caused by government policies.

I think the "we are a christian country" thing is spurious. Only a minority of the population are Christian, out of those there are some who object to the idea of Christian aid. The queen and prime minister are Christian. The government is meant to represent the people who are not significantly Christian.

Trestle I looked at the CA website last night and I was a bit when I saw that the 'worship resources ' included daily prayers and orders of service, with the CA message embedded. This does not to me seem to be the best way to spend the charities advertising budget. Its a limited audience isn't it? It could also be seen as a direct guilt trip to recruit fund raisers. I also say again, if this was done in the ame of Islam instead of Christianity, would it be seen as acceptable?

As for a better way of distributing the government aid fund, could the Department for International Development not just allocate the funds to identified charities, and then give it to them, instead of this pratting about saying 'well if the public give this then we'll give that'?

Makes no sense for the 'gvmt' to give to any charities, at home or abroad - if tehy are charities they should be self -funding. In the event of an acute catastrophe overseas, of course a one-off assisatnce can be given ( tho' is is better given as practical assistance eg tents/food - money is no use in that situation)

Looking at all the countries that match aid funding is linked to, do you really expect the government has representatives in each country to decide what to spend the money on, spend it, monitor it etc etc now that would be a waste of administrative resources.

Maybe it is better for matching funding to go to organisations already working in that country who have the "administrative organisation" in place and who can spend it more efficiently than the government would directly. If you read the matching funding information, each organisation has to apply for it, so the aims and countries are reviewed by experts at the DIFD and have to be approved before it is provided. So its not really a cop out.

For everyone who is querying the government doing matching funding, do you gift using gift aid? I bet a lot do, I know I do especially where I give through DD. If so, my tax pounds are being given to charities that you choose, not me. Given that this is not based on applications, I bet it is more than matching funding in total. To be honest, so long as it is a registered charity I don't really care, it is doing good for someone whether I agree with it or not.

MrsGuy, what do you think buys the tents, er money?

Gift Aid is the claiming back the actual tax I have aid on my donation, and so it is slightly different. I have no problem with the government using charities on the ground to 'outsource' their aid, I just don't like this new idea of 'we'll only give it if the public give the same' - at a time when many are hit by recession so are short of cash anyway. I also didn't like David Cameron appearing on the last Sport Aid thing to announce this matched funding, like he was giving it out of his own pocket rather than it actually coming from defined government aid funds. It smacked of a pathetic publicity stunt to me.

I know what gift aid is, but it is still provided by the government and reduces the amount to spend on other things. Same source of funding really.

Yes, it was a publicity stunt, but aren't they all. Thats another AIBU.

I'm an atheist but don't have a particular objection to money going to religious charities provided they are using the money to help people rather than to proselytise. (I know some do - I think the Salvation Army has form in this respect - but I'd always assumed that Christian Aid was doing pretty good work in helping people in poverty.)

Don't be fooled into thinking "little old ladies" can least afford it.

I know lots of "little old ladies" socially, through my late grandma and because I live in a very expensive area that generally only pensioners can afford to live in!

The "little old ladies" are the only people who have any money to spend on anything. I can't even bring myself to say "not all old people are poor" because I don't know any who are!

Bit late to the party, but that's all I have to say in response to the OP!

This weekend was spent in London. DD, DH and I.

On our arrival we walked out of the tube at Sloan Sq and there were about 6 soldiers (Gren Gds) with H4H buckets - some of their Regt were doing a charity event that day. We happily slung our change at them and carried on. They hadn't asked for anything, just smiled and said hello whilst carrying the buckets.

At which point a lady collecting for Christian Aid came and rattled her tin at us (and I hate that). I said, very politely "Sorry love, I've just given them all my change" and went to walk on. She said "Well I take notes". I was a bit surprised but said something like "Uh huh, well no, sorry" and she said, "Oh so you'd rather give money them would you? Why don't you get some change" and pointed at a nearby stall.

It was all quite embarassing really. I'd said no, but she was so pushy. Actually stood in front of me blocking my way. DH found it all quite funny, but of course DD kept asking why we hadn't give the lady money. I very nearly told the woman to fuck off - which would have been completely out of character for me.

(she was annoying but not as bad as the NSPCC chugger who, when I said no, said "Don't you CARE about children then?" whilst pointedly staring at DDs pram - feckin arse)

Christian Aid helps the world's poorest people, they help people of all faiths or none equally. They don't proselytise, evangelise, give out Christian literature, make any attempt to spread Christianity at all.

The worship resources are aimed at churches in this country as a means of raising the profile of CA within congregations. They are usually free to download and are used by churches, Sunday Schools, youth groups and the like. Many of them are educational resources which can be used in different settings to teach kids about fair trade, water resources etc. There are also resources for school assemblies that look at similar issues. The resources aren't designed to convert anyone, just to raise the profile of the work CA does and the situations that people find themselves living with.

Can I just say that if anyone has had an aggressive or unpleasant collector round they should make a complaint because we are not supposed to behave like that at all. All CA collectors are just volunteers from local churches who aren't given any training. we are all supposed to be polite, gracious and cheerful and thank everyone whether they choose to give or not, we are not supposed to badger or harangue folk or bang repeatedly on their doors. and we absolutely shouldn't be pressurising people to give.

Shinyrobot, CA collectors shouldn't be evangelising at all or trying to get you to go to their church/youth group whatever. This kind of thing is what gives CA a bad name and gives people the wrong impression about the work we do. Again, maybe think about complaining, possibly to the church in the first instance.

"Can I just say that if anyone has had an aggressive or unpleasant collector round they should make a complaint"

Agree :) It's a shame if a few people are giving the charity a bad name.

"if this was done in the ame of Islam instead of Christianity, would it be seen as acceptable?"

Yes, why not? I'd encourage anyone who was fundraising for the poor. If a Muslim came round collecting for a similar charity I'd probably donate.