Geoffrey Settle Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Just listening to the Jeremmy Vine show/discussion on Radio 2 and I'm left wondering what is new about it? Is it just what Anderson Consulting used to alledgely do so successfully rebrand an existing idea? Can anyone explain simply? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Basically, folk doing owt for nowt, rather than nowt for owt! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fugtifino Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Well, that's one way of seeing it, though I don't have problem with the concept in principle, but... Liverpool Council, charged with being at the vanguard of this, have withdrawn their support for it: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/02/03/big_society/ With dazzling irony, the Big Society "Tsar", finds working for nowt not as appealing as he first thought: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-23920428-how-my-top-government-job-left-me-almost-penniless-and-unable-to-support-my-family.do (the link says it all, really). So, no alarm clock hero he. Add to this the cuts in funding to organisations like CAB (who provide a valuable service - often by volunteers), Sure Start and other volunteer groups (people who are used to managing volunteers), it's not getting off to a very good start. Loved the irony of this loosely related news, which highlights just how far out of touch these pillocks are: http://graduatefog.co.uk/2011/1222/high-pay-commission-unpaid-intern/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
harry hayes Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Didn,t John Major try the same thing, but in a different name. Hiis MPs let him down as he let himself down with Edwina. The idea was good though, although simply repeating the neighbourly old time state. On a perhaps lighter note (pun), I read in the paper that special beds are having to be bought and small cranes to lift people on to them. Happy days Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 fugtifino makes a very valid point with his last paragraph. Whilst the idea is ok, the expectation that the "Third Sector" is going to fill all the jobs that council/gov. have got rid of is a nonsense. Already, the present volunteers are losing interest because of the funding cuts at grass roots and cuts to the other agency's like Age Concern, CAB and others. Volunteers could call on these groups for advice and expertise. In a lot of cases, it will no longer be there. This is the start of the slippery slope, where society is going back in time. The gov. thought that with all these over 50's retiring or being made redundant, that they would step in and fill the breech. I'm sorry, but it ain't going to happen. The volunteers of Warrington are already disallusioned about losing what has been available for years, and are walking away. PS.WBC were asking volunteers to log their time spent volunteering, 12 to18 months ago. I wonder why. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted February 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 You make a valid point Pete especially with your years of dedicated service. I know from driving a mini bus every Tuesday for the Blind Society the changes that they are having to make to survive. Should I be filling in my timesheet Pete It's been very hard for them building up a good base of volunteers but this alone has not kept the wolf at bay. Last year they had to start ask members to make a contribution towards transport costs. They are very grateful to the Warrington Wolves for allowing them to make a collection at the ground during a match last season. Without this money even more facilities would have been under threat. So if you made a donation last year, thank you very much . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Couldn't we just pay tax, and cut out the man with the collection tin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted February 4, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Very generous of you sir. I'm sure if you pop into Museum Street OBS and make a donation you will be more than welcome. There is probably a form that you can fill in so the society can claim back the tax on the money you have had to pay which they can recoup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 4, 2011 Report Share Posted February 4, 2011 Give unto Ceasare what is Ceasare's - and keep the rest for yourself! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted February 5, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 5, 2011 So that's a centurian then Obs - ?100 very generous Just been watching Question Time in Workington. The Government spokesman fell heavilly on his sword. He stood no chance on the sale of woodland, he simply couldn't come up with one reason to support it and faced a barrage of resistance from the rest of the panel and everyone isn the audience. Then he tried to explain the Big Society and the result was the same. Either the Immigration minister Damian Green MP was poorly briefed or the ploicies can't even be defended by his own party? You decide by wathing this week's the programme. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Looks like a typical knee jerk reaction to the sale of woodland. Here is the consultation document for you to read and THEN make up your mind if its good or bad: http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/consult/forests/20110127-forestry-consult-doc.pdf There's nothing worse than deciding something without looking at the facts. This is usually the way with Question Time audiences, and some posters on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 A 'government document' and 'facts' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 You've read it then Wolfie? Thought not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wolfie Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Maybe I can't see the wood for the trees, but can't see anything to change my mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Well. the longer this arguement spins out, the less easily it is being defended by the Gov. They argue that only 18% of land is held by the Forestry Commission - therefore, why the need for "competition"? They now concede, that there will be little or no saving or profit from this exercise - so why bother in the first place? Seems this and other "initiatives" are being driven by ideology rather than budget responsibility - and those soft LibDems are going along with it all! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 As I said.................. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted February 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Asperity is all at SEA over this topic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 I don't know why you think that as I haven't offered an opinion either way. I have, however, read the consultation document. Have you, or are you just giving your knee jerk reaction? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted February 6, 2011 Author Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 I haven't read it yet and it's only the 2nd day - lots of time left. I wouldn't like to rush in and I don't think the I have offered an opinion, observations yes. The SEA change was a play on words on the fact that you sail up and down the coast or have you retired from that profession? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Don't give up the day job to become a comedian Geoff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Just a quick point asp, I thought you did not trust government documents Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Only if they come from Brussels! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 Just a quick point asp, I thought you did not trust government documents Another one who makes things up about me. I don't think I've ever put a blanket ban on trusting government documents. I am sure you will have evidence of this? And I don't mean my belief that all politicians lie through their teeth because thats a taken Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Kije Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 I see, You trust government papers that tend to agree with you, but if they don't they are crap Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted February 6, 2011 Report Share Posted February 6, 2011 As I said to Geoff, I haven't posited an opinion either way so how you can decide that I agree with the document (which I assume you have actually read ) is somewhat beyond comprehension. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.