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

[Tortington]

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.

If we are so skint as a country- then how come we can bail out Ireland and other countries on the gamble that they will pay it back and add interest to that to make us some dosh?

it is as simple as your mate saying he is skint but lending your other mate 500 quid - it just doesn't add up.

How on earth can funding be taken from what is an essential service to many people , especially those who are in financial trouble due to all the cuts , cost of living etc
People will end up turning to loan sharks and those nasty fee paying companies because they cannot afford to pay for advice.

This is why I just can't accept Tory supporters bleating on about the problem being Labour's fault and that they are just trying to fix the mess, because it's simply not true.

Frankly, even if Labour had royally screwed the country, the way the Tories are going about solving the problem is completely and utterly flawed and unfair. They are putting such an enormous burden on low and middle income earners and benefit claimants that the country is going to remain screwed for an awfully long time. They keep saying that everyone needs to share the pain, but everyone is not. They are not, the super-rich are not, the big corporations are not.

So they are robbing the ordinary working people and the vulnerable and then removing their support mechanisms. Surely that is indefensible even by the hardest line tory? It beggars belief!

Whilst there have been 40% cuts to universities, and 60% cuts to social housing, the arms trade was cut by just 8%. The government spends more money buying arms from BAE Systems alone than it does on climate change, equating to £64 a year for every adult and child in the UK. Furthermore, according to figures obtained by Campaign Against Arms Trade, £700 million a year is spent on government subsidies to the arms trade.

www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/cut-the-arms-trade-not-public-services-demonstrate-13-september

'So they are robbing the ordinary working people and the vulnerable and then removing their support mechanisms. Surely that is indefensible even by the hardest line tory? It beggars belief!'

Agree LIS

'it beggars belief' - well, it doesn't really. Do believe it, because that is the way of this Tory govt.

They have been straining at the leash for years to do this sort of thing.

And now the ministers are trying to out bid each other t oshow how 'nasty' they can be in their individual departments, as they think it will curry favour to the rank-and-file Tory who really hate the Lib-Dems for being so 'conscience-driven'.

And yes it IS a war on the poor, because 'the poor' don't turn a profit for the vested interest.

I don't see what is unrealistic about the idea of a successful private enterprise sponsoring a charity. Rather than taxing the banks more, for example, make a stipulation that they have to sponsor charities to the tune of x% of their profits...

Agree with Awesome - they've waited since 1945 to get it all back to the natural order in which 7% of the people own 84% of the wealth. We'd managed to claw back a few more crumbs here and there, but the glittering prize of health care has been closed to the profiteers (except for drug and equipment). Look at the fight in the USA to keep bloody capitalists private enterprise out of reach. What's the difference between us and them? About 6 months. They're already queueing up to be 'any appropriate provider'.

I always used to think that it was a disgrace that the government relied on charities to address huge social problems like homelessness etc, when it should be something that everybody pays for in their taxes.

But now the government is working towards a situation in which it doesn't want to support the charities, but neither does it intend to do their work itself - and all at a time when fewer people have cash to donate.

So - will private companies take on the CABs' work? I doubt it, unless they have a lot of extra money, which is unlikely during this 'crisis'.

Or will they? I wonder if this has anything to do with the resentment felt by high-street shops that when people can buy their clothes (slightly!) more cheaply from Oxfam, they are putting the for-profit stores at a disadvantage?

Could this attack on charities be a result of lobbying from high street chains?

I thought the CAB was an independent charity too. That's really bad news if it is going.

War on the poor - extends to very low income families with teenagers going to college and not eligible for the EMA replacement - the college bursary fund. On a family income of less than £13,000 - bus, train fares, equipment for college and possible trips out - are going to be very very difficult if not impossible for families.

The 'war on the poor' starts with the abolition of EMA imo.

we are well into the war on the poor. as well as the nhs lottery there will now be a lottery as to whether you are entitled to council tax rebate.

poor people don't need ema, we dont want them in further education - lets face it, they can't pay for it anyway. no, they must fight in the jobs market uneducated to stack shelves against educated degree level shelf stackers working to paqy off their student debt.

sell a kidney - im starting a new thread on this

Ok - a question: what would you do instead? Continue to borrow? Increase taxes? Or cut somewhere else?

Has anyone put forward a costed alternative programme?

Because until someone credible does, there isn't really anything here except whinging.

EW - have you an idea for a 'costed programme'?

Edith, the 'there is no alternative line' is just lazy. Of course there are alternatives. The government just doesn't want to pursue them. Labour went into the last election saying they would cut the deficit over twice the timescale of the Tories i.e. trying to balance growth and managing the deficit. If you don't like that, there are plenty of other alternatives. Ask six economists and you'll get six different answers. The idea that every single politician and economist and financier in the world thinks there is only one way to do this is just propaganda for those who want to do it THIS way.

edith in all fairness, its not likely that the govt is listening to mumsnet so even if there was a foolproof plan to run the world, it is all just discussion.

this discussion is spurring me on...making me think more. which is a good thing

And what's more, most of these are fake cuts anyway. Delaying operations doesn't actually save money - it just postpones the spending but means you have to spend more in the end, because people get sicker and don't benefit as much from surgery when it finally happens, or are unable to work so have to move onto benefits. Sacking youth workers may look like a saving, but costs far more when young people who could have been diverted end up committing crimes. Penny wise, pound foolish. But politicians only think up to the next election, sadly many of them, and certainly this lot, don't give a stuff about the trouble they are storing up for the long term.

With the global crisis currently worsening, I don't see that our economy is going to stablise during the term of this government. There will be little growth, money will be taken from public spending for no gain whatsoever. Their will be gains for a few but we won't know about them.

Then we will have a labour government back in again to have to slowly build on our economy which will take years. We will have wasted 5 years with this Tory government doing untold further damage.

'There' not their

Yes, and as I have recently been working with a charity who gives some of its funds to CAB to support its work in specific areas I am well aware that CAB has resources beyond dependency on Govt grants.

There are lots of things that in other places might be run by Govts, but in UK are charitable - the Lifeboats being the obvious example.

I don't have an alternative - but am very interested in any that might emerge.

Yes of course there can be one, that's why I allude to the possibility. Yes, this coalition, the opposition or any party alone could have one.

But no-one has.

Just wringing your hands and saying "aren't they bastards" isn't enough.

More food for thought - a) political astroturfing, dull and transparent as it always is, is very popular on MN, and b) lack of alternative is because all sides know the cuts are necessary, and the best hope for political survival of those who got us into this mess is to blame loudly a handy demon and hope the public remains gullible. MN is further to the left than the general population and therefore fertile ground.

If the astroturfers are supposed to be on Labour's side, they're doing a spectacularly bad job, because all this wailing makes the Tories look perfectly reasonable.

EMA was an utter JOKE of a policy. Just yet another sticking plaster solution, treating the symptoms rather than the cause. Typical of Labour.

I am not an ecomomist ot intelectual,so do not possess the knowledge needed to answer the question "well what do you suggest we do to fix things?".

What I do possess is a feeling that attaching any recovery plan to attacking the poorest of society is just plain wrong.