Feb 052012

Some might argue that with £200 billion spent on welfare each year (up in real terms from around £150 billion seven years ago) there is little need for a voluntary sector. However, the government gives over £11 billion pounds each year to the voluntary sector. This sector grew enormously under the last government and is largely staffed by Guardian reading labour voters who use tax payer money to campaign against government policy. Isn’t the voluntary sector supposed to rely on donations? Some “charities” get over 90% of their funds from the state. Doesn’t that make them part of the public sector?

Many of them have been campaigning vigorously against the proposed cap of £26,000 in benefits – a cap that is wholeheartedly supported across the country and which many people think should be lower. Maybe it’s self-interest. If you reduce the numbers of people reliant on handouts then you are reducing their clients. One piece of information shows how far some have lost their way from their original noble intentions. At some point the definition of homelessness has been changed to include families where children have to share a bedroom. Why? This is common in many homes. Including it undermines the cause for real homelessness –  a horrible, miserable experience – that should rightly be prevented. This real homelessness has declined in recent years but far from charities congratulating themselves on doing a good job and winding down their operations they have continued to grow by expanding their remit to include as many people as possible.

It’s time to remove tax-payer funding from this sector.  The money saved can be given in tax cuts, giving the public some extra change to donate to those groups who truly do a worthwhile job.

  5 Responses to “Funding the Voluntary Sector”

  1. Is it really true that the government counts kids sharing as homeless. That is ridiculous? I shared a room for years as a child, as many do in private households, and certainly never felt deprived.

  2. It is patently wrong that campaign groups (and I would include taxpayer funded union reps in this) are taxpayer funded.

    We taxpayers are paying millions to self-interested groups that then simply campaign against the policies of the government, democratically elected by us. This taxpayer funding must stop

  3. Great article. I agree wholeheartedly. This is something the Taxpayers alliance have been campaigning for an end to too.

    The problem with taxpayer funds and lobbying extends beyond the voluntary sector too. I remember after the last election a case of a government department (I forget which one it was) using its own funds to pay lobbyist to campaign against the work that very department was doing. Crazy!

  4. the public know what has, and is going on, it is certain that some who govern cannot think quick enough on how to get hold of tax payers money to enhance their jobs and to create cushy none jobs. charity should be charity, nothing more , and nothing less,
    Surely charities going into schools, and other places of taxpayers funded institutions will not work, will they be exempt from paying tax because of their charity status, and if this is so, would not this be counter productive when they are doing a job that should be taxable?

    • The government shouldn’t fund the voluntary sector. Taxes are not voluntary, so I am not voluntarily funding these charities.

      I would prefer to keep my own money and choose where to give it (I do give to charity very generously by the way). Why should the government take my money and then give it to a charity that I don’t necessarily agree with – if I had I would have given them my hard earned money myself.

      This country needs to totally rethink what government is there for.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>