Charity

[Jim at the Common Riding]

Told to 'piss off' ... that ia how much they get from me ...

[Robin]

When it became widely recognised as a way to qualify as self-employed and hence entitled to the full range of in-work benefits? Actively promoted by some charities for Roma. Eg

[Adrian]

Glad we're all agreed that it was a total irrelevance in terms of the question, then.

...without the diversion into...

[John Chance]

No it was not. The original question clearly asked why they don?t all use volunteers.

I pointed out that they don?t all have enough volunteers to use, so my comment was completely relevant to the original question.

Which just proves what I said, that my comment was completely relevant to the question I commented on.

[Adrian]

No, you were the first to mention volunteers.

(in relation to the use of chuggers)

[Nightjar]

All have access to some volunteers and they don't necessarily need many. When I was still running my main business, one charity that was on my donations list relied for fund raising upon one lady, who phoned up local businesses, asking them to donate. They had investigated using a collection company, but had decided she was far more effective.

[Nightjar]

It still reads the same.

[tim.....]

I thought it was just me

I don't feel so bad now :-)

tim

[John Chance]

Never said I was.

[John Chance]

But not necessarily enough well organised ones to do better than chuggers.

They do to do better than chuggers.

Doesn?t work anything like as well with donations from the general public.

[Big Les Wade]

tim..... posted

Perhaps I didn't express myself clearly. Trying again: Not everything ought to be funded out of taxation. It depends what it is.

[charles]

What is happening is that charitiea are asked to help to run a council or government service. They accept what appears to be a recognition of their excellence but gradually the funding fades away until there is none. One such round here are the public open spaces which belong to the County Council. In 3 years time the money for managing them stops.

[Adrian]

Sometimes, yes - and when they are, they're paid for it. Out of taxation.

But what I think you mean is that they're asked to help run what used to be a council or government service, or what you think ought to be a council or government service. Which is a very different thing.

[charles]

You didn't read all that I wrote. What is happening is that they are no longer being paid, but still expected to provide the service

Nothing to do with what I think.

[Adrian]

So you're talk>> But what I think you mean is that they're asked to help run what used

There are a lot of services councils and the government have recently ceased providing - some of them were provided directly through the public sector, some through partners in the private or third sectors.

[charles]

But they are.

and now those partners are being asked to pay all the bills.

[Adrian]

If they were still council services, then the council would be funding them.

Because the council are no longer providing the services, directly or indirectly.

[charles]

They still own the property that the charity, to which I am referring, maintains.

I think that provision of public open spaces is still a requirement on councils.

[Adrian]

How nice of the council to provide a charity with surplus land to use. I hope they don't charge too much rent.

It is. But perhaps that council has more than the bare minimum, so can save money by divesting itself of the maintenance of some. Better to allow a charity to use it, or close it and sell it off?

[charles]

The charity is not "using" the land - it's maintaining it for the Council.

Not some - all.