Jump to content

Charities and Volunteers take on Government services


Apple
 Share

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, 2112 said:

 I give to small charity collections, who do need the funding, eg, Lifeboats 

While the lifeboats are a fine and worthy cause I don't think you can call the RNLI 'small'.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TheTeapot said:

While the lifeboats are a fine and worthy cause I don't think you can call the RNLI 'small'.

Yes you have a point. However, it is 100% funded by donations, not receiving Government funding. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Right forgetting last nights shenanigans I assume you are referring to Government overseas aid ( be that IOM, Uk or elsewhere)

There is this assumption that this aid is appropriated by the recipient government and used for nefarious purposes. Funding palaces, luxury cars for top officials, that sort of thing.

There are procedures in place to make sure this does not happen. Although obviously you can’t be sure that there is not some leakage.

Similarly there are those ( and I am excluding those blinkered Manxies who won’t give to any charity unless “ all the money stays on the Island” , for obvious purposes) who won’t give money to say the Red Cross or Medicine sans Frontiers.
They seem to believe that these organizations simply hand over the money to the despots to do with as they will, rather than them organizing humanitarian aid and targeting where they think it is best needed.

Or maybe they use this myth as a convenient  excuse not to put their hand in their pockets.

If they don’t want to donate fine, that’s there prerogative but why not say so instead of these lame excuses

A great deal of overseas aid is given through project aid, ie it funds specific projects in-country managed by the charity or a contracted to a private sector project manager, civil engineer, etc.  Not much is simply handed over to the country's government to spend at will for the very reason of 'leakage'. 

Leakage probably does still happen, though, through some personal interest in a local supplier to that project.  Most despots get their riches through straightforward appropriation of their country's public funds and assets.   They build the whole system around their personal enrichment.  But many aid donors and large charities have mechanisms in place to limit this possibility.  The ones I would be concerned about are the smaller charitable donors who give to overseas projects, they do not have the sophisticated processes to ensure value for money and that the money goes where they want it. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, 2112 said:

I usually donate clothing or something which can be sold in the MSPCA shop. I give to small charity collections, who do need the funding, eg, Lifeboats 

160k a year to the chief executive alone!!

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ramseyboi said:

160k a year to the chief executive alone!!

Which charity? Large UK charities have 000s of staff, premises & multi national organization and require highly experienced management to run them who require a salary to live

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ramseyboi said:

160k a year to the chief executive alone!!

They need to raise a lot of money, which requires a professional operation. To get a good enough leader, you have to pay. If you try to do it on the cheap, you get the likes of those who put up for MHK, and results to match. If the CEO doesn't deliver, they're out of a job, so it's money well spent.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, manxman34 said:

They need to raise a lot of money, which requires a professional operation. To get a good enough leader, you have to pay. If you try to do it on the cheap, you get the likes of those who put up for MHK, and results to match. If the CEO doesn't deliver, they're out of a job, so it's money well spent.

They also have to compete for staff in the job market. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Banker said:

Which charity? Large UK charities have 000s of staff, premises & multi national organization and require highly experienced management to run them who require a salary to live

Presumably this is regarded as the most efficient way of of providing emergency social relief for disadvantage groups / individuals and bypasses the "unnecessary" red tape and administration needed if it was run by a Government Department.

It keeps staff "off the Government payroll" and gives people with time on their hands something worthwhile to do, but where do the volunteers etc stand when it comes to accountability for the services they provide. 

For example, the Foodbank announced recently the difficulties they were experiencing and I assume they are saving the Government a fortune in social care etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Apple said:

Presumably this is regarded as the most efficient way of of providing emergency social relief for disadvantage groups / individuals and bypasses the "unnecessary" red tape and administration needed if it was run by a Government Department.

It keeps staff "off the Government payroll" and gives people with time on their hands something worthwhile to do, but where do the volunteers etc stand when it comes to accountability for the services they provide. 

For example, the Foodbank announced recently the difficulties they were experiencing and I assume they are saving the Government a fortune in social care etc. 

lots of charities including food banks save government a fortune. A lot of the charities will have public liability insurance to cover claims for injuries etc, smaller ones giving free food out etc won’t have anything but the risk if any claim is obviously very low.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Apple said:

Presumably this is regarded as the most efficient way of of providing emergency social relief for disadvantage groups / individuals and bypasses the "unnecessary" red tape and administration needed if it was run by a Government Department.

It keeps staff "off the Government payroll" and gives people with time on their hands something worthwhile to do, but where do the volunteers etc stand when it comes to accountability for the services they provide. 

For example, the Foodbank announced recently the difficulties they were experiencing and I assume they are saving the Government a fortune in social care etc. 

Presumably volunteers will be the responsibility of the charity who will have to provide all the relevant training. 

The charities won't be saving the government anything as they will be plugging an area that Government don't provide for.  Of course, there is the argument that Government should be providing in a given area, but unless they are doing do already and there is a choice to use a charity also providing in that area, there is no saving.  For example, the Food Bank could be said to provide savings in the benefits system, but when they provide food to someone on benefits, that does not reduce the amount of benefit received and their existence is not factored into the calculation of what the benefit should be.  They plug the gap where someone is entitled to benefits but not yet in receipt, but there is no saving because they wouldn't be getting the benefit anyway.

Similarly, when everyone says, for example,  all chronic illness support care should be provided by the Health Service, if it isn't funded already there is no saving.  

That is not to say that these charities don't contribute, they contribute immensely, but from Government's angle they are doing something that Government does not do, so no savings.  If the charities weren't there, there is nothing to require the Government to step in. 

This is the truth of what is known as the caring society, that the slack is taken up by charities.  It is a different argument as to whether the gaps in provision should have created in the first place.  So shaming Government to up their game in these areas whilst headline stealing, won't wash much.  

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Government have had a deliberate plan to push services into the third sector eg addiction services, homelessness provision, free school meals in summer etc.

Meanwhile the taxpayers are funding an extra £3.5m on management salaries for Manx care, c£400k for LFTS , unlimited funds for DOI mistakes etc. A fraction of the above funds would fund a lot of local charities for years!

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Banker said:

Government have had a deliberate plan to push services into the third sector eg addiction services, homelessness provision, free school meals in summer etc.

Meanwhile the taxpayers are funding an extra £3.5m on management salaries for Manx care, c£400k for LFTS , unlimited funds for DOI mistakes etc. A fraction of the above funds would fund a lot of local charities for years!

Yes, that is true, but even if those savings were made they won't necessarily be paid to charities or by taking over some of the services.  And, would the charities want the undoubted interference from Government that would result?  What happens to the charity if funding is cut? 

It is a simplistic argument, persuasive, but not where Government sees itself and some would argue not where they should be.  Its role should be to provide a core of services efficiently and effectively, (and we know where that is) and to reduce or eliminate charges for certain of its services to those in receipt of benefits, eg buses as was identified by the recent study into poverty in the IOM. 

As an aside, free meals during school holidays has never been provided by Government pre-Covid and LFTs should not have been given away in the way they did, it was bound to result in people stockpiling.  They should have been sold at cost, free to those on benefits and limited per person. It was a prime example of a lack of strategic thought and being able to think through the consequences of options. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Plenty of local charities pocketing chunks of government cash for services that government should be providing, and in many cases could be providing for less than they pay out now as they already have the huge infrastructure to avoid duplication of costs etc.

i m not claiming to have the answer, but with so many government staff, building and other costs already we shouldn’t then be having government pay charities to provide a service and have to raise additional funds for it as a community when it would be more efficient in every way for government to provide those services in the first place.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ramseyboi said:

Plenty of local charities pocketing chunks of government cash for services that government should be providing, and in many cases could be providing for less than they pay out now as they already have the huge infrastructure to avoid duplication of costs etc.

i m not claiming to have the answer, but with so many government staff, building and other costs already we shouldn’t then be having government pay charities to provide a service and have to raise additional funds for it as a community when it would be more efficient in every way for government to provide those services in the first place.

 

Sounds good in theory but the words government and efficient in the same sentence is an oxymoron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...