to be utterly ashamed and disgusted with this. Food banks iced buns and Weetabix.

[carernotasaint]

i found this article really upsetting. I cannot believe that we have come to this.
As the athletes and dignetaries arrive for the Olympics i cannot muster any enthusiasm for it. I also couldnt help noticing the attitide of some of the people running these banks. Comments about people "not being able to get up early" and the fact that they are happy to hand out iced buns (which are of no nutritional value but lets fact it you"d eat them if you were bloody hungry) and then saying that Weetabix is a bad idea because it soaks up too much milk I have never felt so ashamed to be British.
www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jul/18/food-banks-on-hand-outs

The Open Democracy article the OP links to is really interesting www.opendemocracy.net/ourkingdom/mel-kelly/well-trousered-philanthropists-tory-party-chums-and-food-parcels-for-poor . it basically says that the organisation that is advising the government to cut benefits and emergency loans is the same one advising churches to set up food banks for when those people become destitute.

I worked for a very big food bank in the US and the research they do found that giving people balanced food boxes was one of the most wasteful ways to distribute food. Far better was to set up a supermarket style system where people in need could "shop" from the food available. Because most people do have some resources of their own, but can't stretch all the way from one week/month to the next. So they take what is available from the food bank and then buy the gaps. Trying to come up with a package of food for people is a bit humiliating - full of things they don't like or don't know how to cook (or don't have the facilities for). This is especially true in diverse areas.

Fruit and veg is good for people, pretty expensive, and regularly available for distribution if you have systems set up well, so it is a great thing to give out. But you do need good systems in place to get it to people before it goes off.

The food bank I worked for had arrangements with local commercial markets and supermarkets to collect food that was past it's selling best first thing in the morning and then distributed it to people in need or charities running soup kitchens the same day. Very efficient because this is food that would have gone off otherwise and so cost the donators nothing, but it was still good to eat. They did the same with dairy products, taking things past sell by date by one day and getting them to people that same day. They had a whole list of date ranges for when food was actually good to eat outside of printed package dates. The food bank got large donations of stock when manufacturers changed packaging or formula. Food that might othwise have gone to landfill. They moved huge amounts of food.

I worked there because I don't think people should go hungry. But I agree with you OP that it is shameful for a rich country like the UK (or the US) to have a set up where it's citizens go hungry and rely on charity for basic sustenance.

I live in Canada now and we have a very active local food bank, with lots of small local events where a bag of food for the food bank is the entry fee, as well as the corporate side. Also someone said about fruit, our bank will send volunteers to come and pick unwanted fruit for redistribution. Which is all very philanthropic, and environmentally friendly but I felt a bit uncomfortable with the concept and thought that the UK benefit system was better because I feel quite strongly that people shouldn't be so short they rely on charities for basic food to survive. It is very sad that the UK should be in this position, and really points up what an unpleasant sham Cameron's 'Big Society' is for him to feel that their growth is in any way a good thing.

Bit off topic. I was surprised by this

"If people give us cream crackers, we wouldn't give them out, because it's insulting if [the recipients] can't afford to buy cheese to eat with it"

Do people only buy cream crackers if they have cheese? Why would it be insulting to give them out without cheese?

That has already been covered on the thread, basically they try to give out things which don't need things adding to them to eat. crackers really you at least need butter, the weetabix you would need milk so it's not ideal to say "here's your food but you need to buy x to eat it"

Juule, that's been discussed. Cream crackers are pretty much inedible without something on them, and we're talking people with nothing in their cupboards. No spread, jam, peanut butter, nutella, nothing. So you're basically giving them something you can barely eat which they will have to choke down or go hungry. Very charitable, I don't think.

I got angry the other a while ago in sainsburys...it was towards closing time and they were gathering all the bakery bread and cakes off the shelves and chucking it in a large bin bag. I asked the worker what was going to happen to the food, and she said that it would go to the zoo. It was winter time and I thought that surely it would do better to go to a homeless shelter or something. Ok, so at least they weren't throwing it away, but still!

There was something about this on the Jeremy Vine program the other day.

One mother hadn't eaten for 5 days so that her children had enough to eat, totally heartbreaking.

Another woman was there to get food parcels because she had no money - because she had spent it all on cigarettes. The journalist asked whether she had tried to give up 'yeah but its hard isn't it?' and then she laughed.
It made me sick.

Gosh what an idiotic woman. Surely you would do all you can (even giving up precious cigarettes) to feed yourself and your children. That makes my blood boil.

The system is so flawed in this country. The comment from David Cameron just goes further to strengthen my opinion that he is completely out of touch with the majority of people.

I wasnt aware that his idea of a "big society" was to humiliate people. Or to expect everyday folk to feed those in need, when infact thats his responsibility.

If there was a food bank near me I would donate, even though I feel there are better ways to help those in need.

And that's why I got involved, wannabe. This isn't the best system by a long way, but there are (for example) mothers of young children in my community regularly skipping meals so that they can spend what food money they have on their children. Waiting for the government to speed up the benefits system (or whatever) isn't of any immediate help to them.

I dont disagree with food banks at all. Infact if there were any near me I would volunteer.

I just think that perhaps David Cameron needs to actually do a supermarket shop to see the unbelievable cost of food. And have to stick to a budget.

It makes me really angry that a country which is rich on paper lets this go on. And the olympics in the OP are relevant. Maybe the rest of the world should be reading about this instead of the olympics.

It's disgusting that people are going hungry in this country when millions are wasted on the Olympics.

It's just heartbreaking isn't it.

The idea that families can't eat for fuck's sake. Worse, that fact that it's not surprising.

I had a hairy couple of months between H and I separating and me going back to work but I always managed. I'm very lucky in that the benefits system is working for me. I'm not living the high-life by any means but we certainly have enough to live on day-to-day.

The scary part is that it really is day-to-day. There's nothing in reserve so one unexpected expense and it really is easy to see how things could spiral.

The worst part is people's attitude. We had this on a previous thread about food banks. The OP was genuinely shocked that they existed and couldn't believe how bad the situation is getting.

It was a great thread to start with, lots of people genuinely wanting to learn more, sadly it wasn't long before it was completely derailed by those who think that people are only poor because they're stupid.

We all need defense mechanisms of course but there were several posters who were utterly convinced that people who can't afford food are in that situation because of previous bad decisions.

It's bad enough that this level of poverty is right outside everyone's door but worse that some refuse to see it.

Sorry, rant over

In response to the OP, if someone volunteers at a food bank they can whinge all they bloody well like! At least they're turning off the TV and doing something about it!

(also I can't imagine how lovely it must feel to have a treat like an iced bun etc when you live off the most basic of rations every single day. It may seem like a small thing but really it isn't)

I stand to be corrected as always on MN, but didn't the money for the Olympics come from the National Lottery? I'm not sure whether it's a question of Olympics vs Benefits, is it? What do others think?

I think the volunteers have to detach themselves a bit, or they would end up heartbroken by the reasons people have ended up "eligible" for a food bank. I agree that the crackers comment is odd - they could give out a jar of value jam/peanut butter to go with it, surely. I can see why too many tins of beans/soup might be a problem, because they would need heating to be palatable, and if you can't afford food, you may not be able to afford gas/electric to heat them up. whereas tinned tuna/sweetcorn etc is edible cold.

I dont know where the money came from but IMO it could have been better spent.

I dont know a single person who gives a shit about the olympics. Probably because they are too preoccupied with huge bills and whether they will still have a job next week.

"Isnt it great for the country though" "Its making history"

Fuck that. Im sorry. But in the middle of a recession in which the government is strangling the economy and blaming it on "benefit britain" instead of the bankers, who actually caused it and are being given bonuses for the trouble, I really think this country needs to get its priorities straight.

This made me cry.

I don't see a problem with the cream crackers though. I think they are quite alright with a scrape of Marmite, which does go quite far.

I've always thought that Cameron was unpleasant but I can't believe that he is 'happy' that there are food banks.

I would be utterly, utterly ashamed in his shoes

Well wannabe, I'm looking forward to the Olympics and have two sets of tickets. AND I think we shouldn't have to have food banks. I don't think that in a rich country that benefits and the OG are mutually exclusive. We are a rich country comparatively; we need to sort the taxation/benefits balance out I think. Tax those who can afford it and provide reasonable benefits to those who need them as a safety net. If we want a decent benefits system, health service, road system etc we all have to be prepared to pay for it through our taxes. I also agree that it is wrong that people working in the public sector are losing their jobs because we had to bail out the banks. But I'm still looking forward to the OG and I don't really see why people are so antipathetic to them as an event.

I think its because a lot of people are sick of hearing about the olympics and how much they cost, when in the next breath we hear that benefits are being cut.

I would rather know that the vulnerable and worst off in our society were being looked after than hear about the olympic stadium.

You are right, the two arent mutually exclusive. But the olympics are a kick in the teeth to those who are going without because the government has branded them as lazy.

The Olympics was partly funded by the national lottery. As a result of this, less charities were supported but it has been arranged that they would receive funding from the sale of the stadium once the Olympics are over (heard this on the TV). As the vast majority of lottery tickets are bought by those with little, it's the poor and those unable to feed their children who have paid for this, exactly the same people who are in need of foodbanks.

I facilitate life skills classes with people who have housing issues. We talk about smoking. It IS hard to give up, particularly when you are stressed and depressed. Yes, you should prioritise food but people don't. It is an addiction, after all.

It's not just the UK that food banks are on the rise, I was living in the Netherlands until recently and they've increased there as well. Rising unemployment plus benefit cuts is leading to an increase of people of people living on the poverty line there too. I'd imagine it's a similar story across Western Europe.

I understand why people who have little are frustrated by the spectacle that is the Olympics, but the country wasn't in this position when we bid for the Olympics and won. We can't just turn round and say no, sorry, there's a recession now so we aren't going to bother anymore.

The Olympics will be enjoyed by millions of people in this country and across the world. Why should they be made to feel guilty for enjoying it because other people are poor?

Do the poor people in this country feel guilty every time they enjoy something because there is someone somewhere with less?

I fully support the poor being supported, but I don't like the attitude that nothing else that costs money should ever happen because some people are poor. There are plenty of people who aren't poor that pay into the system and have a right to be part of these big world events like the Olympics. Everyone in this county deserves consideration from our government, not just poor people. And as there are plenty of taxpayers who are enjoying the Olympics, I think it's great that we are able to host it.