To ask how long you think food banks should support people for?

[tartanbaker]

I help to run an independent food bank, & we currently support over 100 families. We are nearing our capacity (in terms of numbers we can help) due to limited storage etc, but there are new people applying all the time. We give people food every week, and some families have been registered with us for about 2 years now. They are still needy, and we all know that things are going to continue being tough for the foreseeable future, so my question is…if you were to donate to a food bank, how would you want them to use your food/money? Continuing to help everyone for as long as they ask for help, even though it might mean turning others away? Or telling existing families who rely on you that you can’t help them any more because you are going to help new people now? It’s so hard, and an ongoing debate we are having, and I’d be really interested to hear other people’s opinions. Both options seem really tough….

There shouldn’t be any food banks at all. Will it take rioting , protests etc to change this??

That won’t happen while so many people are convinced that people are just not trying or choosing to be reliant on food banks.

Until people realise that it’s not just addicts or people with problems that need food banks, it’s every day people who work and just can’t get by there won’t be the appetite to properly hold the government to account.

Categories of means tested need? People in highest category get weekly food, second category get fortnightly so essentially split with another person. Awful that you have to have this debate.

I knew so many low income earners who abuse the food banks. They would go through their pay from Centrelink and buy alcohol, smokes, actual drugs like ice, meth etc. Their pay check was/close to $1000 per fortnight and most didn't have accommodation as they liked the idea of not paying rent so they surfed around to people's houses, no animals, no responsibility. They chose to spend and live like this as they knew after so long they could reach out and get another food package from Anglicare and also St Vinnie's did/do them too. They didn't do food shopping as Anglicare/St Vinnie's had that covered every day giving out free meals, cordial, tea, coffee to everyone. Their clothes came from St Vinnie's. They did all this as a choice, they didn't really need help and nor was it to survive but always a choice of living. They knew each other's pay day so when it was that person's pay day they would go around to that person's house to take what they could until they had nothing left then move on to the next person who had money. I was about 21yo when I witnessed all this. I was the complete the opposite to them but the only thing we had in common was our pays. I didn't go on about life the way they did and still don't and they all still live the way they were. I am now 33yo.

P.S. my advice is to set a timeframe up so we can only help for 3yrs etc that way everyone gets assistance. Everyone can only help so many people, not everyone. I would say if they really need the help then they would accept financial counselling asap given the chance. When you give out stuff to people who you believe truly need the help it only creates more and more people coming and being like I said above and it's only going to get worse

Also I want to add this is happening in Australia

One of the things I've never understood - there was a trussell trust report couple of years back on foodbank users, saying 39% are single men (I think its something like 11% single women).

So why do women end up there less?

Are there better services available to women? Are women less prone to some chronic health conditions etc?

An impossible situation but IMO food banks should be a short term thing. That way you can help a much broader range of people. Help should be on the basis that people must find ways to wean themselves off the support, however difficult.

Also, helping someone for 2 years only serves to let this government off the hook. People shouldn't be in this position if they're genuinely needy as that's what we pay taxes for.

So why do women end up there less?

women frequently have sole care of children and therefore have recourse to greater public funding? For men on a low wage, having to pay out maintenance can have a massive impact on their living standards. I think we frequently forget that (and I say that as someone who has a very well paid ex who pays no maintenance).

My feeling is that for the sake of the new starts, there has to be a cut-off for the long-term people.
Some people may find themselves in a sudden crisis, and it would be heartbreaking if the help just wasn't there for them.
I mean, ideally it would be there for everyone, all of the time. However this simply isn't practical.

Could you support both old and new customers, but give each family less to save money/storage?

I work with client groups who use foodbanks. It pains me to see little old ladies on very little money donating and to see how the foodbanks get abused. A lot of clients will get paid, use their money for drugs drink etc then apply for foodbank to keep them going. We have dropped off foodbanks to people who ring up and say they don't want this crap. I've turned up when they've been unloading their car full of shopping. People lie and say they don't live with their partner come in and apply for foodbank each saying they have kids (same kids) and others who apply and give the foodbanks away for money. Its being abused personally I think it should be a foodbank shop. Where you pay for the goods but only a few pence per item.
Foodbanks catching on to the abuse now and making strict rules only so many in a period and referred on for financial support. We shouldn't be proud of our foodbanks. It's become the norm. We should be thinking how bad it is that we need them and looking for change. It's depressing. . People should have enough money to get by . 348 pound a month is just enough now to cover gas and electric etc. People are trying to claim all the extra benefits to have money to survive. Uc has created more claims not less. It's a shame that the misuse is creating limited help for the genuine customers that go there.

what a lot of people criticising long term food bank users fail to grasp is that many of these families work.

I'm sorry but this isnt true. Read the trussell trust report on this. Lack of employment is a big factor in foodbank use.

The biggest group using foodbanks is single men (39%), not families.

They are followed by single mothers with children (this one to me points to epic epic failure of the child maintenance system), then single women.

The report flags that full time employment is the a key factor preventing food bank use.

I'm sorry, but they are fucking scumbags.

Yanbu
It should be like 6 months and then help others.

Sadly seen so much abuse of the system I no longer donate or if I do it will be nappies or baby food.

Oh this is awful to read. I know lots of people who are on low incomes who make an effort to put a tin or two in the food bank as they have been close to needing the help themselves.

I think you need to streamline the offering rather than letting them choose the food donated to them individually. Honestly, I am not surprised that the bank is too much in demand if you let people refer themselves and then they basically get the same items/service as if they paid for them (who wouldn’t put buying food to the bottom of their priority list in those circs?)

You could do a family box and individual boxes containing X number of proteins, Y number of carbs and Z number of fruit and veg (depending upon what’s been donated, topped up by items you buy in bulk to reduce costs eg tinned meat/fish).

Good morning everyone, and thank you all so much for taking the time to post - I will ask all of the trustees to read this as all of your opinions are so useful. Food Banks are inevitably an emotive subject and, honestly, I respect and appreciate everyone’s input on it. We are all on the same side, wanting to help those who are genuinely struggling - wanting to avoid giving to those who are taking advantage whilst not scaring off or guilt-tripping those who genuinely need help. It is clearly a dilemma that everyone shares, with the voting literally at 50/50! We will continue to help as many as we can, not turn anyone away, direct them to help with other issues and just do our best to be non-judgmental and kind to those who need a helping hand at life, for whatever reason - that’s all any of us can do, isn’t it?

It is awful. I wouldn't want to put off anyone donating cause there are genuine people out there . But I guess it's just what I've seen. Foodbank by us now is extremely strict. List of banned people allsorts . Sad.

Flowers to your group for stepping in to help.
Having worked as part of a social initiative our charity found signposting as in "hers a list of numbers to call" unlikely to be acted on.
We agreed referral details with groups like women's aid, benefits maximisation, mental health and community connections and the local credit union. We looked after addressing fuel poverty.
If we identified a possible need for onward referral we asked the customer for their agreement, signed and passed (obviously with consent) their details for the agreed organisation's to contact them.
This helped and the number of cyclical returnees reduced manifestly.
Good luck.

@mycatisannoying most people accessing food banks need it only a few abuse the system. If you want to think about scumbags think more the middle and upper class people who abuse the tax system so they pay less and the businesses who offset profits to other countries to pay less tax. If everyone paid the correct tax we wouldn't need food banks.

That might be why food banks exist but for those where people can self-refer, it is not always why they are at a food bank. I started volunteering at a foodbank where people can self-refer this week. I spent time in the foodbank and time out with one of the vans as part of my induction. There were some people with awful situations- old and alone, women with children living in poor circumstances and evident poverty, some single older men who turned up and looked very run down. But there were others who were clearly not living on the edge- stood outside smoking, using expensive phones, turned up in their cars, grumbling about things that we didn't have, arranging to go for coffee afterwards with their friends who were there.
I'm sure I'll be shouted down but if you need to be given food, you shouldn't be smoking (about £11 quid a packet these days), or have an expensive phone or own a car or have money to go to Costa. Your focus for your money should be looking after yourself and your family. My phone is old, I don't drink or smoke. My car costs me at least £100 a month just in insurance and petrol.If you add £22 a week minimum for cigarettes that's £188 quid a month they could save, never mind things like Costa.
It's terrible that anyone needs a food bank but they are misused and seen as free extra resources by some.
Unicef needing to feed children in this country is disgraceful- I can't believe it is happening and the government and Press and voters seem to be ignoring it.
However, there are many people who fall into a group my grandad would have called 'scroungers'- people who will take anything whether they need it or not and who will see it as their right. They are the people who make life difficult for food banks.

Less likely to ask for help more likely, better money management

But on a more realistic and immediate level, I'll go with my initial opinion that those who abuse food banks are scumbags.