Woodcraft Folk "chopped down"

Former Member

They haven't built up a surplus of £205k - the last reported surplus was £75k in 2003 - for someone claiming to be a grants administrator, it was a rather perplexing mistake to add up the operating surplus for each year - because it gets carried over - not put into a seperate bank account.........

Former Member

freethepeeps wrote:

They haven't built up a surplus of £205k - the last reported surplus was £75k in 2003 - for someone claiming to be a grants administrator, it was a rather perplexing mistake to add up the operating surplus for each year - because it gets carried over - not put into a seperate bank account.........

Mea culpa - a rather stupid mustake
I'm not a grants administrator.

However I have made recommendations on whether to give an organisation a grant. This is not based on their financial position, but on whether it delivers Govt objectives. When we have limited budgets comparisons have to be made and the money goes to those organisations which give the most 'bang for the buck' (OK this is slightly simplistic because we may also take into accounts things like regional poverty, an innovative approach we could be copied by others etc). Others look at whether the organisation is finacially viable.

However the point still stands (even if slightly changed). They do not need the grant, but can use some of their surplus. I can see why they want to be finacially prudent - but the claims that if they don't get this money they are in danger of collapsing seem to be a slight exxageration.

Former Member

They can use some of their surplus this year.

What about the other three?

Bear in mind that charity surpluses are quite common, as quite often benefactors leave money after the charity has allocated funds for that year.

Question is: would the scouts be allowed to die like this?

Althoughas my better half rightly points out, the government has a history of allowing groups that don't suck Blair's cock to die out.

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

You poor bastard. Didn't do any drilling and only marched on St George's Day Parade. Hence my acceptance of a nationalistic approach, although that is tempered by the number of scout around the world...

Long hikes in uniform? I think you're reading too much into that. You could also, if you wanted to, pervert the meaning behind orienteering, map reading, outdoor cooking, the ability to light fires without "fuel" etc.

Or you could say that I'm not reliant on supermarkets, electricity etc.

Actually to this day, I will happily walk for miles regardless of the weather and the self-discipline/outdoor skills/drills etc gave me a lifelong self-confidence that I have always been greatful for. (Not forgetting the Eddie McGee books).

The hiking thing? well did all that and the others in the scouts but also with other youth groups and schools but only the cubs/scouts insisted on us wearing uniform.

Former Member

girl with sharp teeth wrote:

The Government let the Rape Crisis Federation fold in 2003 for the want of £16,000.

This is disgraceful and makes me ashamed to have once believed in the Labour Party, what a sucker I was.

GWST what did Blairs Babes have to say about this?

Former Member

.

Former Member

*speechless*

:banghead:

Former Member

Man Of Kent wrote:

Whopps. Big mistake.

Given the scouting organisationa ren't even allowed to go to Laser Quest type place that's funny. They have guns there you see... ditto paintballing...

how strange. When I was a scout I declined to participate in the rifle shooting. Archery was a different thing altogether

IME you can never call scouts militaristic.

Perhaps it has changed over the years. I remember the Scouts, Air Scouts and Sea Scouts - parallels to the army, airforce and navy. I rememer flag breaking, saluting, standing to attention, at ease and easy and other parade drill. I remember getting the guff about BP training boys and breaking the seige at Mafeking.

It doesn't have the same direct l links as the Cadets and Corps.

Former Member

Maybe you're right. I just never saw it that way.