If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Woodcraft Folk "chopped down"
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
For the sake of £50,000, the government has pulled funding for the Woodcraft Folk, making it highly likely that the organisation- a "socialist" version of the regimented scouts- will have to either close or drastically cut back its activities.
Story.
£50,000pa is nothing. Surely it has nothing at all to do with the Woodcraft Folk's condemnation of the war in Iraq, and of Blair's handling of it? :chin:
It is a disgrace, and if I had £50,000 lying around I'd give them the money myself.
Story.
£50,000pa is nothing. Surely it has nothing at all to do with the Woodcraft Folk's condemnation of the war in Iraq, and of Blair's handling of it? :chin:
It is a disgrace, and if I had £50,000 lying around I'd give them the money myself.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
less than the total rises in mps wages this year
That said given some of the crap we do use Govt money to fund I suspect its less that they are having their funding stopped because of their political stance and more to do with the fact they probably put together a shit grant claim and just expected the Govt to fund them.
I've seen way too many organisations which think they have a god-given right to Govt funds and become flabby or just put in demands for more and more money and just expect the Govt to bail them out.
I was hoping to send mini brite there if I could find a local group.
What about the lottery..?
Loads of voluntary/community groups get at least some of their funding from the Government.
eg from ODPM
http://www.odpm.gov.uk/pns/displaypn.cgi?pn_id=2005_0030
And most of them get such small amounts (relatively speaking) that all the Minister does is ticks it through based on advice from Civil Servants.
Normally if a claim from a loong-standing beneficiary is rejected the government explains why, and allows the organisation to correct the claim.
£50,000 is hardly "bloated".
I read the Independent article when it first came out, I've just been reminded of it now. The fact that a consistent claim gets turned down after being critical of New Labour is very Blair: screw anyone who attacks him. Look how the BBC were shafted.
Forgive me, but I know nothing about this organisation having never heard of them until this story came out. I'm an ex-scout myself.
Then New Labour cut their funding without any explanation, and without the money they will fold.
They're basically hippy Scouts- scouts without the militarism and the nationalism.
Whopps. Big mistake.
Not that it was against Blair but they made the organisation political and therefore not suitable for direct Govt funding. IMHO.
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...
IME you can never call scouts militaristic.
Nationalism is a bit heard, wouldn't have thought you could describe it thus either. But I suppose that scout do swear an oath to the monarch as part of the promise though...
They might think they're above questioning, but if people are persistent enough...
Yes, £52 000 is a lot of money isn't it?
Source
:eek:
It would depend what your budget is...
A trifling £4.2m I'm afraid....
You wouldn't be surprised if it was just an impartial "value for money" sort of thang - I would
Given the amount of groups who failed to get grants you cannot sit down and go through in detail with all of them why they didn't get it. especially because often there is no particular reason apart from other applications were better.
Yes, I know, I gave you the link.
No - I'm agreeing that many organisations didn't get grants - in fact a lot of the money went to wealthy, well funded organisations.
Which is a nice "administrative" state of affairs.
:hyper:
Are we shifting arguments? This seems to have moved from this is political chicanery by the Government to they deserve it more than others.
However, I'll bite. Leaving aside the fact that an organisation who in 2003 has an income of £915k and expenditure of £840k is not exactly poor http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/registeredcharities/showcharity.asp?remchar=&chyno=1073665
do you wonder why some organisations become wealthy and well-funded?
These grants are not given to give pay-rises to the staff or because the trustees would like a new car, but because the Govt thinks that the grant will be of benefit to those the organisation is trying to help. Organisations get a lot of grants if a) they can show that the grant will actually make a difference b) they have a management structure which isn't so all pervasive that the grant is swallowed up in admin costs, but is tight enough that we don't have to have a Minister on newsnight explaining why we called in the Fraud Squad.
Wealthy and well funded grant donors are usually also effective organisations.
They've been recieving this grant for nearly 20 years, and a grant since the 1960s. It is 20% of their budget. Suddenly they're not good enough any more? I seriously doubt that, don't you?
No its not. In 2003 according to figures they gave the Charity Commission they had an income of £915k - so its nearer 5% of their budget.
In 2003 they had a surplus of £75k, 2002 surplus of £20k, 2001 surplus of £23k, 2000 a surplus of £143k and in 1999 a deficit of £56k. So since 1999 they have built up reserves of £205k, four times the amount they are asking for from the Govt.
Grants are not given for you to build up your cash reserves...
And yes I can believe suddenly there not good enough... Or rather someone's decided that there are better ways of spending the money. Govt does it all the time.
Spend it on groups that aren't contrary to Blair's dictatorship.
Not militaristic? I won't dispute your experience but for me it was very much so. Old B-P did base the organisation on his military experience and creed. Get the boys of the terraces and fit for Empire building perhaps?
I certainly remember the drilling and marching, raising and saluting the flag, long hikes in uniform etc
:yes:
I found it all very exciting like I was a young soldier. Then when we did the Hitler youth in history at school it sounded oh so familiar
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.
Source
Seems like theres a hundred MPs who think its a political, rather than an administrative matter.