Sir, – Perhaps Oliver Callan was a little overzealous in his criticism of the charity sector but he raises some valid points ("It's Christmas, the season of charity guilt-tripping", Opinion & Analysis, December 15th). Here in the UK, we have a situation where government agencies are referring vulnerable people to food banks when welfare claims are refused, or to homeless charities for emergency accommodation when housing is refused. Well-meaning charities are propping up a regime that allows the government to dismantle the postwar social settlement, with huge implications for society.
For the first time in two or three generations, white working-class communities in Britain have found themselves competing for scraps usually reserved for the immigrant poor, which in turn is fuelling a rise in populist xenophobia.
As automation begins to take hold over the next decade, we can expect this situation to deteriorate further, unless a new social settlement is agreed.
Instead of passively bailing out a government’s intentional failures, charities need to politicise, mobilise and agitate in order to expose and embarrass so-called centrist political parties and their representatives.
Active charities may lose state funding as a result, but it is time to end the cosy consensus between certain organisations and their government sponsors. – Yours, etc,
CIAN CARLIN,
London.
A chara, – Patients in the Greenmount Centre in the St John of God’s campus in Co Louth had money inappropriately charged from their accounts to pay for services and aids that they should have received for free (December 13th).
It is, sadly, the latest in a series of such scandals and a common thread runs through all of them. On each occasion the State has delegated its responsibility for providing such services to religious, voluntary or charitable organisations. This has many advantages; such organisations can often provide services more cheaply as they can attract volunteers and donations which offset or reduce the State’s contribution. It may also lead to the State paying into sectors where different groups may duplicate each other’s efforts, have voluntary or part-time workers, including at board level, and where clinical governance practices may reflect what has been done previously rather than best practices. Of course, there are many organisations where voluntary or part-time members provide an excellent service.
Although these organisations are at arm’s length from the State, this does not remove the State’s responsibility from ensuring that they have adequate funding and are governed appropriately.
Children’s hospitals have to fundraise to cover gaps in service provision not covered by the State. We can only hope that the new national children’s hospital will be adequately funded to avoid this in future. – Is mise,
SÉAMUS McMENAMIN,
Navan, Co Meath.
Sir, – Nobody wishes public goodwill towards charities to diminish, but it’s the very slickness, drive and professionalism of so many charities that tends to make people dubious.
One marketing mantra I am tired of hearing is that I can help some cause or another “for the price of a cup of coffee”.
First of all, the implication that a cup of coffee is a negligible expense is not true for many people. Second, if I contributed to every charity that minimises their demand as “the price of a cup of coffee”, I wouldn’t be able to afford a cup of coffee – or anything else, for that matter. – Yours, etc,
MAOLSHEACHLANN
Ó CEALLAIGH,
Ballymun, Dublin 11.