|
Nov 2023
12:28pm, 7 Nov 2023
22,547 posts
|
larkim
The notion that charities are more dynamic and effective outside of the public sector is not dissimilar to the argument for private enterprise running other public services. And Big_G makes a great point about the independence and anonymity that certain charities can provide to people in need especially where it can be the very "safety net" services' failures that are driving people to need some of those services.
It's certainly true that charities benefit from a "skies the limit" approach - if they can secure voluntary funding through donations / legacies and the like over to allow services to operate at levels beyond that which general taxation would ever fund, then that's their business. The downside to that is that the charity sector ends up skewed by emotional appeals; it's not right that many animal charities, for example, find it much easier to raise funds than many people-centric charities.
The flip side of that of course is that if a charity doesn't find funding, then either that sector gets under-served, or the public sector ultimately stands in.
As for Capt Tom. Whilst impressive, I doubt he had any concept at the outset that it would be leapt upon to generate such large sums of money, whether that would end up as charitable or not. His family have truly pissed on his grave though with their behaviour.
|
|
Nov 2023
12:33pm, 7 Nov 2023
24,172 posts
|
richmac
The notion that charities are more dynamic and effective outside of the public sector is not dissimilar to the argument for private enterprise running other public services.
No ones saying that charities are more dynamic, I'd suggest they have a lot of inefficiency, what we are talking about is their focus
|
|
Nov 2023
12:53pm, 7 Nov 2023
14,986 posts
|
Dave W
They could stay as they are but just get money from the government. They are already supposed to be overseen by the Charities Commission so no need to subsume them into government. Can see that there could be some downsides but these lifesaving services shouldn’t need to be charities.
|
|
Nov 2023
1:01pm, 7 Nov 2023
3,039 posts
|
Big_G
Not trying to be argumentative, but I suppose it could be said that that registered charities do get money from the government, via gift aid. Not enough, probably, but they do get some.
|
|
Nov 2023
1:04pm, 7 Nov 2023
12 posts
|
Yakima Canutt
I'm chair of a local charity (a Citizens Advice Bureau). Like most we have a large element of funding from our local council delivering "information and advice". The commercial reality is that we are staffed by a mixture of volunteer and staff and so for the council they get beneficial financial outcomes for clients (the needy in our local community) that represents value for money for the council. If they took the service in house - which believe me they would love to do - they would have to pay staff and it would cost more. Its an arrangement which has challenges - council contract oversight and (or but) we need the funding as it supports other initiatives and ultimately that funding gets recycled around the community where it is needed the most. That funding is also competitive - there are other charities which would and do happily bid for the service.
|
|
Nov 2023
1:20pm, 7 Nov 2023
22,548 posts
|
larkim
No ones saying that charities are more dynamic, I'd suggest they have a lot of inefficiency, what we are talking about is their focus
I'd say the good ones are a lot more dynamic. Maybe I'm the only one thinking that; but their independence can be a significant benefit.
Because they have to be in the public consciousness to get access to funds, they innovate, they run strong campaigns, etc etc. They can, as the RNLI did a few years ago, end up with more money than they need if they are very successful (in their own terms).
Of course, not every charity is the same - there are poor, lazy, inefficient ones, and there are ones which are not run effectively with their beneficiaries in mind. There's a broad range of them out there.
|
|
Nov 2023
3:37pm, 7 Nov 2023
21,048 posts
|
rf_fozzy
There are some charities, let's take the RNLI for example, that would benefit from increased government support and perhaps even be taken into some form of "in-house" situation (and therefore effectively become some form of quango type entity.
However, there is a good argument that they should retain the independence from government and have some ability to self-fundraise (although hopefully the stability of revenue flow would negate some of this).
Similarly there are some bodies (e.g. Sport England) which are currently govt bodies that could do with similar status.
Then there are some charities that should not be taken in house - in particular thinking big medical charities (CRUK, ARUK etc) - they fund research and things that govt bodies would not fund and it's important that they continue to do so.
Similarly "campaigning" charities - e.g. Shelter obviously wouldn't fit into a quango type body - their aim is broadly (although not totally) lobbying.
Note I'm mostly talking about big charities here. Small charities are a completely different thing.
|
|
Nov 2023
3:42pm, 7 Nov 2023
21,049 posts
|
rf_fozzy
The downside to any body being taken into public ownership via government funding is of course you are then subject to the whims, prejudices and priorities of the government of the day.
And many "quangos" and public bodies doing good work independent of govt found themselves in trouble during the Cameron/Osborne austerity purge in the early 2010s.
The prime example of which for me was Public Health England which had a huge chunk of funding wiped out. Because most of PHEs remit was pre-emptive and preventative intervention, there is a good argument to be made that at least a significant minority of the pressures on the NHS more widely are down to cuts to PHE and the community health services they provided.
|
|
Nov 2023
3:54pm, 7 Nov 2023
3,643 posts
|
paulcook
The downside to any body being taken into public ownership via government funding is of course you are then subject to the whims, prejudices and priorities of the government of the day.
Exactly. My first thoughts here turn to the RNLI and Farage and / or JRM’s opinions and meddling. Just one example obviously.
|
|
Nov 2023
7:07pm, 7 Nov 2023
24,178 posts
|
richmac
The bloke with the gold hat delivered his speech with an amazing degree of contempt for what he was forced to read.
Gilded cage eh
|
Fantasy General Election
Jul 2024