Will you be volunteering to be a lollipop man/woman?

How about spending a day going into a school to teach the kids a subject close to your heart?

Or maybe a day helping out in a care home, a library, a hospital, prison or drug rehabilitation centre?

In HMRC we've been offered paid leave if we'd like to be part of The Big Society. Unfortunately we can't just volunteer for any public service, it has to be of benefit to HMRC, such as explaining the intricacies of PAYE to teenagers.

Which seems a bit of a con really as that's something we should be doing anyway!

Has anyone else been offered this wonderful chance to be part of The Big Society? Will you be out there getting involved?

Or are you a volunteer already who does it from the heart and because you care and who doesn't need The Big Society in order to do so?

Nope. :hihi:

I'd rather pay more tax and let people have these jobs than give up my spare time to help do the jobs that people should be paid for!

BS also stands for something else !

Which seems a bit of a con really as that's something we should be doing anyway!

Only a bit of a con?:o

BS also stands for something else !

Brain Stem?

Big shop?

Big Sea?

:D;)

Will you be volunteering to be a lollipop man/woman?

How about spending a day going into a school to teach the kids a subject close to your heart?

Or maybe a day helping out in a care home, a library, a hospital, prison or drug rehabilitation centre?

In HMRC we've been offered paid leave if we'd like to be part of The Big Society. Unfortunately we can't just volunteer for any public service, it has to be of benefit to HMRC, such as explaining the intricacies of PAYE to teenagers.

Which seems a bit of a con really as that's something we should be doing anyway!

Has anyone else been offered this wonderful chance to be part of The Big Society? Will you be out there getting involved?

Or are you a volunteer already who does it from the heart and because you care and who doesn't need The Big Society in order to do so?
Post the details of PAYE on here and take a day off.

Teenagers should read my posts on the Effective Marginal tax rate.

Im sure you can work for anybody for nothing but it wont do your health any good

Or are you a volunteer already who does it from the heart and because you care and who doesn't need The Big Society in order to do so?
Yep.


The HMRC scheme is a bit of an odd one though. If they want to do PR they should call it PR. If they want to do CSR they should come up with something that is for the benefit of others that allows them to bask in the reflected glory, not do something that is for the benefit of HMRC.

I do hope that they will be paying your expenses for your 'day off' and conversely don't expect others to pay their own expenses for the good work that they do with their business, not for their business.

Forgive me for not trusting HMRC but I smell a rat. I hope that I'm mistaken.

I was asked to speak to young business people by my local community group, but declined as there was no financial reward on offer. Little did they know that I have been advising local businesses in my spare time for years, free of charge. The fact that they expected me to do it FOC offended me, If they had offered something I would have turned it down and given my services for free!:mad:

The big society is a nonsense, dreamt up by the Etonian millionaires club in Downing Street to make them look human.

With Rich Philanthropists the big society could flourish.

The Conservatives are well placed to make it happen.

You might think the rich would make available funds which encourage the young unemployed to care for the elderly.

We have an excess of labour and an aging population.

Never in our lifetime have we been better placed to look after an increasingly elderly population.

We also have gross excessive consumption and poverty.

Will you be volunteering to be a lollipop man/woman?

How about spending a day going into a school to teach the kids a subject close to your heart?

Or maybe a day helping out in a care home, a library, a hospital, prison or drug rehabilitation centre?

Some people already do this, surely? Not sure about all of the examples you've given but I know lots of parents and grandparents volunteer at the local school, and there is a pretty well established volunteering sector already established, that works with people with drug problems etc. It can't really be feasable that NO ONE gets paid to work in these areas, surely someone has to organise and manage the process..

I'll be volunteering when the hole in my rectum heals up! :)

Yep.


The HMRC scheme is a bit of an odd one though. If they want to do PR they should call it PR. If they want to do CSR they should come up with something that is for the benefit of others that allows them to bask in the reflected glory, not do something that is for the benefit of HMRC.

I do hope that they will be paying your expenses for your 'day off' and conversely don't expect others to pay their own expenses for the good work that they do with their business, not for their business.

Forgive me for not trusting HMRC but I smell a rat. I hope that I'm mistaken.



Are you aware of what Clegg thinks of the Big Society Tone?

The Conservatives merely want an end to too much public money being used to pay people to do unproductive things, because under Labour labour the public sector grew into a gigantic unproductive monster, holding the country back.

Some people already do this, surely? Not sure about all of the examples you've given but I know lots of parents and grandparents volunteer at the local school, and there is a pretty well established volunteering sector already established, that works with people with drug problems etc. It can't really be feasable that NO ONE gets paid to work in these areas, surely someone has to organise and manage the process..

You're absolutely right. There have always been people who've volunteered for all sorts of things. We just didn't know it was called being part of the 'Big Society'. :D

I was a volunteer when I was working, I was a samaritan for several years, and I helped set up a credit union. For the last few years I've been on the board of a local housing organisation, working with other volunteers. I went to a lunch club for the first time a couple of weeks ago - run by volunteers. I go on a weekly health walk, and although there are paid organisers, the walk leaders are... volunteers.

Loads of people on the forum do voluntary work already, just look in the Pets section! However, part of the problem is that many people don't want to contribute at all, either money or time and effort. Sometimes they are the people who complain that 'there's nothing for our children to do!'. :o

As a retired person, I'm considering volunteering in a local school, helping children with their reading. Seemingly there is quite a need for that. Perhaps parents are too busy volunteering their time elsewhere to help their own children with their reading. ;)

Yep.


The HMRC scheme is a bit of an odd one though. If they want to do PR they should call it PR. If they want to do CSR they should come up with something that is for the benefit of others that allows them to bask in the reflected glory, not do something that is for the benefit of HMRC.

I do hope that they will be paying your expenses for your 'day off' and conversely don't expect others to pay their own expenses for the good work that they do with their business, not for their business.

Forgive me for not trusting HMRC but I smell a rat. I hope that I'm mistaken.

There was much speculation at work as to what our particular scheme was about. In the past people did get time off to do a variety of volunteering but because it was paid special leave it was decided that any volunteering had to have some business benefits. Imagine the headlines if civil servants were given paid leave to plant trees or rescue stranded ducklings.

So now we have the opportunity to volunteer for the benefit of HMRC and get paid...which sounds oddly like doing the job.

The cynic in me thinks The Govt has asked the Civil Service to be proactive re The Big Society. Gus O'Donnell has passed the edict down the line to Dept heads and ours has come up with some half cocked idea which means she'll be able to provide positive feedback back up the chain. Gus can then tell Dave how committed we all are to his idea.

You're absolutely right. There have always been people who've volunteered for all sorts of things. We just didn't know it was called being part of the 'Big Society'. :D

I was a volunteer when I was working, I was a samaritan for several years, and I helped set up a credit union. For the last few years I've been on the board of a local housing organisation, working with other volunteers. I went to a lunch club for the first time a couple of weeks ago - run by volunteers. I go on a weekly health walk, and although there are paid organisers, the walk leaders are... volunteers.

Loads of people on the forum do voluntary work already, just look in the Pets section! However, part of the problem is that many people don't want to contribute at all, either money or time and effort. Sometimes they are the people who complain that 'there's nothing for our children to do!'. :o
t not be so willing
As a retired person, I'm considering volunteering in a local school, helping children with their reading. Seemingly there is quite a need for that. Perhaps parents are too busy volunteering their time elsewhere to help their own children with their reading. ;)

Yes, this is something my school is really keen on getting the parents to do... but also beneficial to the parents, don't you think? I've volunteered for a few different projects since having the kids, running a mother toddler group when they were small, moving into the fundraising and management at their pre school, and next year it will be volunteering in the school. I do it because I can, I like to be useful, and I am gaining transferrable skills for my CV! But I do only work PT, I suppose if you were at work full time you might not be so willing

The Conservatives merely want an end to too much public money being used to pay people to do unproductive things, because under Labour labour the public sector grew into a gigantic unproductive monster, holding the country back.

Is a lollipop lady unproductive? How about a respite carer for a disabled child? "Unproductive" means different things to different people.

Is a lollipop lady unproductive? How about a respite carer for a disabled child? "Unproductive" means different things to different people.

They become "unproductive" if they don't get paid.

Are you aware of what Clegg thinks of the Big Society Tone?
I don't have a clue wednesday1.

Do you do much for others before yourself?

When Hell freezes over and Satan is seen driving a snow plough to work. There is no way I'll be volunteering for the likes of Cameron and his "Privatise everything" brigade - My time equals reasonable renumeration for my talents.

Anything else is plain madness.

I don't have a clue wednesday1.

Do you do much for others before yourself?



Yes I do a bit Tone. I think that for some people though who don't like Cameron or the Tories it may prove counter productive.


Anyway for the record Clegg said before the election (May 2nd):

"What is this big society? It is a big society with a price tag attached.

"It's a bit like inviting someone to a party in a pub and find that it's your card behind the bar paying for everyone's drinks.

"What is emerging is what has always been there, which is a well-oiled PR machine, but basically it's disguising fake change. It's hollow. There's nothing in it."

Think that summed it up nicely!

However by the end of the month he seemed to have undergone something of a Damascene conversion, see after 5.20 on Youtube clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SDF6wFsySQs

:o:suspect:

Or are you a volunteer already who does it from the heart and because you care and who doesn't need The Big Society in order to do so?

I was a volunteer with SOVA (Supporting Others Through Voluntary Action). But the program got cut. The contract was not renewed with the Youth Offending Service.

Volunteers need organisations for training and support and when it comes to working with children, monitoring, CRB checks (you can't dispense with them entirely).

A bit ironic that just when there's a call for more people to volunteer, some of us who already do so can't continue because of the cuts.

Nice one DC, well thought through!

I doubt it should be called Big Society Volunteers, but renamed to Big Charity Volunteers.
I say this because I doubt any of the small charities will get coverage of benefits for volunteers.
I.E. like the system we have now where you have to volunteer for certain Charities for you to keep your benefits, if you work for any other Charities other than those deemed acceptable, you lose your benefits.

Volunteering is one thing, but working for free doing a job that needs doing is surely taking paid work away from the unemployed.

Is this the volunteering you'll be made to do, just to eat, should you be unlucky and lose your job?

Is this the volunteering you'll be made to do, just to eat, should you be unlucky and lose your job?

that's the plan. and because people will be doing that, more people will lose their jobs coz local authorities etc can get free labor. genius.

but working for free doing a job that needs doing is surely taking paid work away from the unemployed.

It's also a way to get something for nothing on behalf of the government.

Will you be volunteering to be a lollipop man/woman?

How about spending a day going into a school to teach the kids a subject close to your heart?

Or maybe a day helping out in a care home, a library, a hospital, prison or drug rehabilitation centre?

In HMRC we've been offered paid leave if we'd like to be part of The Big Society. Unfortunately we can't just volunteer for any public service, it has to be of benefit to HMRC, such as explaining the intricacies of PAYE to teenagers.

Which seems a bit of a con really as that's something we should be doing anyway!

Has anyone else been offered this wonderful chance to be part of The Big Society? Will you be out there getting involved?

Or are you a volunteer already who does it from the heart and because you care and who doesn't need The Big Society in order to do so?

You could volunteer to video suspected benefit cheats playing football and the like, or secretly living with somebody when they've said they're living alone.

It's also a way to get something for nothing on behalf of the government.

each other

I already give approximately 15 hours per week to society.

I'm out of the house for around 9 hours a day at work, so 45 hours a week.

And I lose about a third of what I earn in tax.

Therefore, 15 hours (a third of my time) is spent working directly for society.

I'm sure most other people who are employed do the same.

However, those that are not employed by who claim benefits probably don't contribute their time.

They may not have the money, but they will have the time. Maybe that should be a starting point for big society.

its admirable that HMRC are giving paid leave to staff to volunteer but not so good that they dictate what shape this volunteering should take.
:nono:

And as far as big society is concerned it's all a load of tosh. Those who have volunteered or will volunteer do so because that's something they always have done. It won't create an army of new folk rushing to do work for free. It takes a certain kind of personality to do stuff for free and there are some who never would.

p.s. SV you little fibber I know you have a charitable bone in your body I've seen you in action remember. ;)

It's also a way to get something for nothing on behalf of the government.

Isn't the mantra of the government(?) something like, "Nobody should get something for free?" I pointed this out the other week and get slated for the Tory Bullyboys as you might expect.

I would sell my house and all my possessions to help Dave. We are all in this together, apart from the Royal Bank of Scotland plc.

I'd like to contribute, giving young and disadvantaged kids advice about starting and running Businesses and bettering themselves. Might look into setting up a charity myself to be honest.

Big Society is the zombie corpse of britain gift wrapped as policy.

I already do and will carry on for as long as I can. Surely if you get paid to volunteer it's not volunteering though is it!!!

You could volunteer to video suspected benefit cheats playing football and the like, or secretly living with somebody when they've said they're living alone.

I don't have to volunteer to do that - there are people who get paid to do it. Or maybe if I volunteer to do that, someone from the benefits agency can volunteer to do my job for a day.

Id work for free doing anything as long as labour dont get back in power! !

Id work for free doing anything as long as labour dont get back in power! !

Why aren't you out cleaning the streets and picking up dog muck then?

Why aren't you out cleaning the streets and picking up dog muck then?

Because i already work 50 hours a week away from home trying to help repay a massive hole in our economy left by our red friends labour

I volunteer already because its fun and it makes me feel good. Do gooders R Me. However like the person who volunteered for SOVA you need good training and support to be a volunteer in something complex. With funding cuts thats all going.

Because i already work 50 hours a week away from home trying to help repay a massive hole in our economy left by our red friends labour


blimey. You sound a bit generous for a Cockney!:hihi:

Volunteers, are generally, not capable of doing the same job as a paid employee. They're usually well meaning people with spare time.

I don't understand how the government is insisting, rightly, that the unemployed should find jobs, while at the same time ensuring their are less jobs available...

Because i already work 50 hours a week away from home trying to help repay a massive hole in our economy left by our red friends labour

They did mess up that's true. However, I always thought the problem was brought about by the banking crisis? I think its simplistic to just blame Labour...

Volunteers, are generally, not capable of doing the same job as a paid employee.

WHAT!!!!!!!!! I'm dissecting this one, if you really believe that inaccurate generalisation about volunteers your insane.
How can you even say that without disguising the huge pile of stinking ignorance you just piled up in front of you.
Volunteers are the backbone of society, when the system fails, when the businesses break it's the volunteers that are still there volunteering.

Ask yourself this, who are the volunteers?
Before you go generalising and judging them.

I would put a volunteer over a paid worker anyday, a paid worker is going to get their pay at the end of the week and may not feel obliged to put as much effort in as the volunteer who is doing it for the most part to help those who struggle to help themselves.

Correct your attitude dude.

They're usually well meaning people

Couldn't agree more, and at least you are giving them some credit even if it is far from what they deserve.

with spare time.

I used to work 9-5, 5 days a week, friday evening I'd go out collecting around the pubs for a local charity, one that I believed passionately in.
Run by a local disabled man who himself had been out collecting for over forty years to provide holidays for other disabled children.
It may not sound so extravagant to be taking groups of local disabled children to skegness for a week, but us volunteers worked hard for those children to go on holidays, year in year out.
Saturday I would spend 9-5 out collecting for this cause, and from 6-11 doing the pubs again, did the car boots on Sundays.
My spare time was between 5-11pm monday to thursday.
So yeah volunteers do get some spare time.

Oh and before I forget, I used to book all my working holidays in one bulk so that I could spend my time collecting for those kids.

I hope this post helps you to understand things a little clearer.

Digsy I dont know if he meant that volunteers aren't as good as paid staff.

Because i already work 50 hours a week away from home trying to help repay a massive hole in our economy left by our red friends labour

So your boast that you'd gladly work for nothing was just a load of old blowhard then?

Digsy I dont know if he meant that volunteers aren't as good as paid staff.

I'm not quite sure what he meant but the way I read was a little offensive.
I do apologise for my outburst though lol.

The point I was trying to get at is, I didn't care much about my 9-5 job and I was being paid for it, it was a mundane task that was necessary to earn a living.

Volunteers tend to care about the cause they've volunteered for and are willing to put in more effort without the need of a financial reward.

Now if he meant that volunteers are not capable because a big portion are disabled themselves, helping the needy, then from that aspect I can kind of agree.
Some volunteers are not as capable as paid workers.

But I'd still put a capable volunteer against a capable employee anyday.

Nobody should get something for free?

Sounds fair (providing it is applied across the board - which it won't/isn't).

Id work for free doing anything

Then do so rather than saying:

Because i already work 50 hours a week away from home trying to help repay a massive hole in our economy left by our red friends labour

Other people work away from home yet volunteer.

I think its simplistic to just blame Labour...

Not if you're a tory or libdem supporter/party member.

WHAT!!!!!!!!! I'm dissecting this one, if you really believe that inaccurate generalisation about volunteers your insane.
How can you even say that without disguising the huge pile of stinking ignorance you just piled up in front of you.
Volunteers are the backbone of society, when the system fails, when the businesses break it's the volunteers that are still there volunteering.

Ask yourself this, who are the volunteers?
Before you go generalising and judging them.

I would put a volunteer over a paid worker anyday, a paid worker is going to get their pay at the end of the week and may not feel obliged to put as much effort in as the volunteer who is doing it for the most part to help those who struggle to help themselves.

Correct your attitude dude.



Couldn't agree more, and at least you are giving them some credit even if it is far from what they deserve.



I used to work 9-5, 5 days a week, friday evening I'd go out collecting around the pubs for a local charity, one that I believed passionately in.
Run by a local disabled man who himself had been out collecting for over forty years to provide holidays for other disabled children.
It may not sound so extravagant to be taking groups of local disabled children to skegness for a week, but us volunteers worked hard for those children to go on holidays, year in year out.
Saturday I would spend 9-5 out collecting for this cause, and from 6-11 doing the pubs again, did the car boots on Sundays.
My spare time was between 5-11pm monday to thursday.
So yeah volunteers do get some spare time.

Oh and before I forget, I used to book all my working holidays in one bulk so that I could spend my time collecting for those kids.

I hope this post helps you to understand things a little clearer.

I am glad that you posted this as I was just about to say the same thing, almost.

ooh and we already have the big society. It is alive and kicking here in Sheffield. Without the army of volunteers who already offer up their time for free, many of the organisations that depend on them would have ground to a halt long ago.
Anyway the Big Society isn't just about volunteering, it is about people having a change of attitude and taking personal responsibility and not always relying on the state to do everything for them as discussed in my previous thread about Liberty versus authority.

I already do volunteer work, from a desire to help in a good cause, and so do many other people. We do not need a patronising collection of people chiefly spending their time thinking up new wangles to extricate themselves from the doo doo they led us into, telling us how to be good citizens. One also doesn't hear much about those who are rich doing their part for the Big Society by exercising any philanthropic urges...

I already do volunteer work, from a desire to help in a good cause, and so do many other people. We do not need a patronising collection of people chiefly spending their time thinking up new wangles to extricate themselves from the doo doo they led us into, telling us how to be good citizens. One also doesn't hear much about those who are rich doing their part for the Big Society by exercising any philanthropic urges...

But the point is that those who do volunteer dont always shout it from the rooftops do they. They just get on with it. People volunteer for many reasons, some of which are forced upon them as part of their studies like in University.

I'm not quite sure what he meant but the way I read was a little offensive.
I do apologise for my outburst though lol.

The point I was trying to get at is, I didn't care much about my 9-5 job and I was being paid for it, it was a mundane task that was necessary to earn a living.

Volunteers tend to care about the cause they've volunteered for and are willing to put in more effort without the need of a financial reward.

Now if he meant that volunteers are not capable because a big portion are disabled themselves, helping the needy, then from that aspect I can kind of agree.
Some volunteers are not as capable as paid workers.

But I'd still put a capable volunteer against a capable employee anyday.

Yes I completely agree and I think what he posted could have been taken two ways. No need to apologise we're here for the debate aren't we :)

However what you've said - there are some people who care about their paid work so much that they go routinely above and beyond to help customers or service users just for the sake of helping them, and not for any financial benefit. Conversely there are some people who volunteer just to put something on their CV or so they make themselves look good.

To my mind saying volunteers are sometimes not capable of doing what staff can do is not always a slur on the volunteer, sometimes staff just have better resources - a budget, for example, a phone line or an office to use. They might have specialist or expensive training. I dont think its as simple as volunteers are good and paid staff aren't.

How I read Franks post was the same as what I think about this Big Society thing - dont try and get professional staff on the cheap by making jobs that should be paid volunteer jobs.

Yes I completely agree and I think what he posted could have been taken two ways. No need to apologise we're here for the debate aren't we :)

However what you've said - there are some people who care about their paid work so much that they go routinely above and beyond to help customers or service users just for the sake of helping them, and not for any financial benefit. Conversely there are some people who volunteer just to put something on their CV or so they make themselves look good.

To my mind saying volunteers are sometimes not capable of doing what staff can do is not always a slur on the volunteer, sometimes staff just have better resources - a budget, for example, a phone line or an office to use. They might have specialist or expensive training. I dont think its as simple as volunteers are good and paid staff aren't.

How I read Franks post was the same as what I think about this Big Society thing - dont try and get professional staff on the cheap by making jobs that should be paid volunteer jobs.

Yes I agree with most of what your saying.

I didn't mean to give the perception that employees are better than volunteers or vice versa.
I meant that I'd pitch a capable volunteer against a capable employee any day, because it's a tie, stalemate, they are one and the same.
Both will give similar results.

ooh and we already have the big society. It is alive and kicking here in Sheffield. Without the army of volunteers who already offer up their time for free, many of the organisations that depend on them would have ground to a halt long ago.
Anyway the Big Society isn't just about volunteering, it is about people having a change of attitude and taking personal responsibility and not always relying on the state to do everything for them as discussed in my previous thread about Liberty versus authority.

Some people don't rely on the state "to do everything for them" but they do still need specialized support and help from paid workers. Replacing them with willing volunteers just isn't good enough, neither is telling them just to get on with it and do it themselves.

Some people don't rely on the state "to do everything for them" but they do still need specialized support and help from paid workers. Replacing them with willing volunteers just isn't good enough, neither is telling them just to get on with it and do it themselves.

I am not questioning that they do need specialised support, if they ask for it.This is different to the state interfering in the lives of people without them giving consent.
I dont know why you question the role of a willing volunteer and say it just isnt good enough.You are making the assumption that the volunteer doesn't have the skills required.There are many extremely qualified volunteers who dont necessarily want to have a paid job for many reasons but feel that they want to contribute to give something back, or even get something out of it for themselves.

I think people are confusing volunteering with being made to do things.

I was thinking the same. There isn't a direct link between losing benefits if you don't accept reasonable work offer/doing community work and volunteering for the benefit of others.

It's a pity that volunteering has become a political issue. For me volunteering is about helping others, it has nothing to do with my political beliefs.

In fact my political beliefs are shifting but I feel the same way about volunteering.

They did mess up that's true. However, I always thought the problem was brought about by the banking crisis? I think its simplistic to just blame Labour...

I don't think Labour made people borrow loads of money they couldn't pay back, they didn't make me anyway.

I don't think Labour made people borrow loads of money they couldn't pay back, they didn't make me anyway.

Didn't the problem start in America though? The Labour government can hardly be blamed for that...

The problem started when collectively, governments, banks, individuals, (and not just in the UK) we all decided we could spend more than we earned (and banks invented ways to lend to previously uncreditworthy individuals). Well the chickens have come home to roost.

Ain't no getting round it, it's payback time. And if we don't start paying back, then our credit rating falls, interest rates rise and we're in even deeper doodoo.

Or we could default on our debts and lose everything ... I'm up for that, I don't have savings or a pension to lose. Let's wipe the slate clean and start again ;)

I don't think Labour made people borrow loads of money they couldn't pay back, they didn't make me anyway.

No but they helped in escalating the situation by not stopping the sales of Council homes and by not building any more which helped them politically and financially. In order to be housed people now had to buy instead of rent. The subsequent escalation in house prices made banks and builders take risks which we are now paying for.

I think volunteers are only real when they are not paid and do the work because they want to, being forced or paid is not volunteering. What's not touched on is the rights of volunteers in the workplace. They don't have employment rights because they are not employees and they may not be insured against accidents in the workplace.

And to answerer the OP, I would never volunteer willingly again, except for babysitting my grandson. :D

By volunteers in the workplace, do you mean interns? Unpaid work in order to gain experience?

I think people are confusing volunteering with being made to do things.


It's the thin end of the wedge.

No but they helped in escalating the situation by not stopping the sales of Council homes and by not building any more which helped them politically and financially. In order to be housed people now had to buy instead of rent. The subsequent escalation in house prices made banks and builders take risks which we are now paying for.

I think volunteers are only real when they are not paid and do the work because they want to, being forced or paid is not volunteering. What's not touched on is the rights of volunteers in the workplace. They don't have employment rights because they are not employees and they may not be insured against accidents in the workplace.

And to answerer the OP, I would never volunteer willingly again, except for babysitting my grandson. :D

I think that voluntary organisations must have liability insurance in case of accidents.(the one I volunteer for does.)

The problem started when collectively, governments, banks, individuals, (and not just in the UK) we all decided we could spend more than we earned (and banks invented ways to lend to previously uncreditworthy individuals). Well the chickens have come home to roost.

Ain't no getting round it, it's payback time. And if we don't start paying back, then our credit rating falls, interest rates rise and we're in even deeper doodoo.

Or we could default on our debts and lose everything ... I'm up for that, I don't have savings or a pension to lose. Let's wipe the slate clean and start again ;)

And who is suffering, certainly not the banks nor those in Government....as per usual its people, real people struggling to make ends meet who are being shafted whilst those that caused the crisis ride off into the sunset with their bonuses. In it together? Yeah right, when the boss of RBS or Barclays has to beg the council to provide respite care for a severely disabled child I'll begin to believe that the pain is being spread evenly.

I've been inspired by the idea of the Big Society and will be making sure I do every bit as much volunteering as Francis Maude (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2Wue8IN_xQ), the minister responsible for the initiative.:hihi:

Oh, drat - that means I will have to stop doing anything at all! Perhaps I won't follow his shining example after all.

I've been inspired by the idea of the Big Society and will be making sure I do every bit as much volunteering as Francis Maude (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y2Wue8IN_xQ), the minister responsible for the initiative.:hihi:

Oh, drat - that means I will have to stop doing anything at all! Perhaps I won't follow his shining example after all.

Ha ha ha....all in it together...etc etc...they must must be laughing themselves sick at the thought of all their little supporters running around encouraging people to volunteer to do jobs that need doing whilst Maude and his chums do bugger all.

Where are the Big Society cheerleaders when you need them?

And who is suffering, certainly not the banks nor those in Government ....

Governement spending on our behalf has meant that we have all benefited in the past. (Schools, Hospitals etc and in Sheffield, Crayfish Conservation Officers @ £24k p.a. pro rata)

The cuts mean that we will have to forego some of those benefits.

Surely you're not advocating that we continue to borrow and spend on the the current scale?

But bringing this back to volunteering ... I have to admit that I do feel a bit jaded. The program I volunteered for has already been cut. It's a response to this ... http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/photobylines/2011/2/22/1298400212637/Budget-deficits-graphic-008.jpg

Will I find another project to volunteer for? Maybe. But it certainly won't be in response to Cameron's Big Society nonsense.

Ha ha ha....all in it together...etc etc...they must must be laughing themselves sick at the thought of all their little supporters running around encouraging people to volunteer to do jobs that need doing whilst Maude and his chums do bugger all.

Where are the Big Society cheerleaders when you need them?

I just love it where he says it's unfair to ask him that question cold!!

When I heard that, I thought, dear gods, the moron was being interviewed about the Big Society and volunteering - how could it not occur to him that he may be asked about his own volunteer activities?

Then I found this wonderful interview (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12451896), where he actually says, "I have not heard anyone who has actually said that what we are trying to do isn't right."

He's obviously just living in his own little world - like all the other politicans - and probably does actually believe we are all in this together. :loopy:

All of this Tory contrick could be avoided if the Tories took the bankers bonuses off them. What is it £7 billion bonuses vs £6 billion cuts.

The truth is that they are using the debt situation to do the things that they never could have dreampt of.They hate the public services and NHS. They have only been allowed to do this by the joke party which is the LibDems.

Some people don't rely on the state "to do everything for them" but they do still need specialized support and help from paid workers. Replacing them with willing volunteers just isn't good enough, neither is telling them just to get on with it and do it themselves.

Can you point us to where this government has proposed replacing specialised support with volunteers?

All of this Tory contrick could be avoided if the Tories took the bankers bonuses off them. What is it £7 billion bonuses vs £6 billion cuts.

The truth is that they are using the debt situation to do the things that they never could have dreampt of.They hate the public services and NHS. They have only been allowed to do this by the joke party which is the LibDems.

If you seriously believe that silly statement you really have lost the plot.

If you seriously believe that silly statement you really have lost the plot.
No it's not, it's very sensible and true.

All of this Tory contrick could be avoided if the Tories took the bankers bonuses off them. What is it £7 billion bonuses vs £6 billion cuts.

The truth is that they are using the debt situation to do the things that they never could have dreampt of.They hate the public services and NHS. They have only been allowed to do this by the joke party which is the LibDems.

It has to be said that they are certainly trying to make people scapegoats and waving everything through while they still have a chance, whilst trying to get public opinion to support the cuts. It's true they hate every form of public spending, they even seemingly hate themselves because they're always try to outdo each other.

I've yet to hear what they will do if the deficit will ever gets wiped, which it won't anyway. What will they do, save for a rainy day? We've just had a rainy day and there wasn't enough money in the bank to cover it and even if there was, would they spend it anyway, so what's the point?

Anyway the Big Society isn't just about volunteering, it is about people having a change of attitude and taking personal responsibility and not always relying on the state to do everything for them as discussed in my previous thread about Liberty versus authority.

Hundreds of thousands of unemployed people will shortly have to 'volunteer' for the Big Society and work for no pay - or lose their benefits. David Cameron, a man who forgot exactly how many homes he owned ("Do not make me sound a prat for not knowing how many houses I’ve got") believes that the vulnerable and disadvantaged should be the foot soldiers of his Big Society dream to encourage a hard day's work for a hard day's no-pay.

The green fields of equal opportunity Eton inspired his vision to get Britain working for no financial reward. And it was the many, long hours spent wining and dining in the finest restaurants whilst a member of the Bullingdon Club that led him to concoct his goal to create a Big Society where only the rich get paid for working.

David Cameron, a man who forgot exactly how many homes he owned ("Do not make me sound a prat for not knowing how many houses I’ve got")
.

Good lord, I'd never heard that, but it's true:

Let's start with a tiny story, that points to a bigger untold tale. A few days ago, the Leader of the Opposition was asked how many homes he owns. "I own a house in North Kensington and... in the constituency in Oxfordshire and that is, as far as I know, all I have," he said. He then started to get confused, said he might own four homes after all, and pleaded:

"Do not make me sound like a prat for not knowing how many houses I've got."






Imagine if Neil Kinnock said this in 1991. Do you think you might have heard?

The fact that David and Samantha Cameron are worth an almost-entirely-inherited £30m, according to financial expert Philip Beresford, isn't in itself damning. Franklin Roosevelt was very rich, but became a great crusader for the poor. But Cameron is advocating policies that will benefit his tiny class of super-rich Trustafarians at the expense of the rest of us. He is committed to spending billions on a massive tax cut for the richest inheritees, paid for by the bottom 94% of us – and now he has announced his enthusiasm for a bogus economic theory that will justify shovelling far more of our money their way.



http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/johann-hari/johann-hari-why-are-we-silent-as-cameron-preaches-voodoo-economics-1691107.html

Hundreds of thousands of unemployed people will shortly have to 'volunteer' for the Big Society and work for no pay - or lose their benefits. David Cameron, a man who forgot exactly how many homes he owned ("Do not make me sound a prat for not knowing how many houses I’ve got") believes that the vulnerable and disadvantaged should be the foot soldiers of his Big Society dream to encourage a hard day's work for a hard day's no-pay.

The green fields of equal opportunity Eton inspired his vision to get Britain working for no financial reward. And it was the many, long hours spent wining and dining in the finest restaurants whilst a member of the Bullingdon Club that led him to concoct his goal to create a Big Society where only the rich get paid for working.

~ Never succumb to the temptation of bitterness. ~
Martin Luther King, Jr

Hundreds of thousands of unemployed people will shortly have to 'volunteer' for the Big Society and work for no pay - or lose their benefits. David Cameron, a man who forgot exactly how many homes he owned ("Do not make me sound a prat for not knowing how many houses I’ve got") believes that the vulnerable and disadvantaged should be the foot soldiers of his Big Society dream to encourage a hard day's work for a hard day's no-pay.

But how is that different from any of us who work?

I pay roughly a third in tax, therefore I give up roughly a third of my working time to society for free.

Why shouldn't the unemployed?

And they aren't getting a hard day's no pay - they are getting their benefits in return.

Why shouldn't the unemployed?

Because they will be doing jobs (graffiti cleaning, litter picking are two that have been mentioned) that should be done by employee's who receive a wage.

And they aren't getting a hard day's no pay - they are getting their benefits in return.

The unemployed will be doing a real job that, until the public sector cuts, would have been done for real pay. Now those jobs will be done for an extremely low level of benefits, undermining the minimum wage and threatening similar unskilled manual labour employment.

So to sum up, you are happy that people get other people's money for nothing?

The goverment seems to be sending out mixed messages about everything. For example, there are too many people are going to university so try to limit people going, which is not fair anyway, by reducing spending, reducing the places available and by increasing fees. Yet they turn around and say it will be cheaper for people to go to university than it did under Labour. It just doesn't make sense, the sums don't add up.

The unemployed will be doing a real job that, until the public sector cuts, would have been done for real pay. Now those jobs will be done for an extremely low level of benefits, undermining the minimum wage and threatening similar unskilled manual labour employment.It is not dissimilar, in the way of analogy, to a pay cut or wage freeze for benefits recipients.

Many taxpayers have had to do with a pay cut or wage freeze in the past 2 years or more, and indirect taxation has gone up.

So, under that analogy at least, it appears equitable: they would be doing their bit for the Great Clean Up Act (as suggested by F.Sidebottom).

Because they will be doing jobs (graffiti cleaning, litter picking are two that have been mentioned) that should be done by employee's who receive a wage..

I disagree. If we are paying for them, then they owe society their time. And if it's society's responsibility to pick litter, then they can do that on behalf of society.

It's not about whether we should be making them do work that other could get paid for, it's about why we pay people to do it in the first place when there are other people sat at home doing nothing and receiving money for dong nothing.

The unemployed will be doing a real job that, until the public sector cuts, would have been done for real pay.

So what?

And where would this 'real pay' have come from, a bottomless pit of money?

Now those jobs will be done for an extremely low level of benefits, undermining the minimum wage and threatening similar unskilled manual labour employment.

So we should carry on spending money we don't have on:

1. An overstaffed Public Sector where everyone gets moderate wage and benefits
2. High unemployment where everyone sits round doing nothing
3. Foreign workers who take manual work that our 'youth' won't do, and who choose to sit at home for their dole instead etc.?

Or should we make Public Sector cut back on jobs, fill the gaps with the unemployed on a part time basis as compulsory work (which if they refuse to do they lose benefits) as an incentive for them to actually get up and get some work done, and fill some of those jobs currently taken by Eastern Europeans etc.

Why pay someone to do a job AND pay someone else to sit at home?

We all volunteer our time when we work numerous hours and donate our wages to society, they should too.

Because they will be doing jobs (graffiti cleaning, litter picking are two that have been mentioned) that should be done by employee's who receive a wage.

The unemployed will be doing a real job that, until the public sector cuts, would have been done for real pay. Now those jobs will be done for an extremely low level of benefits, undermining the minimum wage and threatening similar unskilled manual labour employment.

Although I like the idea of people being more charitable within the community and actively helping to support the needy a little more, I don't think it is a good idea to start replacing all the paid charity workers with volunteers.
Because in effect all Cameron will be doing will be reducing the minimum wage for charity workers far below the minimum wage for corporate workers, in fact itmight even reduce the minimum wage for charity workers to benefits alone.

I don't think it is a good idea to start replacing all the paid charity workers with volunteers (etc.)Are many charity workers paid to remove graffitti and pick litter, currently? :huh:

More to the point: if persons are paid charity workers (therefore, presumably employed or at least contracted), then by definition they are not 'unemployed' (therefore be made to 'volunteer-or-else' under the proposed system).

It's a fair point, but are many charity workers paid to remove graffitti and pick litter, currently? :huh:

I honestly don't know, I thought it was the council that did it, but not sure.

Sorry if I'm not being clear enough with my positioning on this though, things like graffiti cleaners and litter pickers if currently paid positions are being replaced with unpaid volunteers then my above post still counts.

It will be turning the graffiti cleaners and litter pickers into benefit related minimum wage jobs.

It will be turning the graffiti cleaners and litter pickers into benefit related minimum wage.The crux of the matter is, there is not enough financing capacity left in Councils after the cuts, to pay as many graffiti cleaners and litter pickers as there once was.

Of course, alternatively, still under the same fact (no enough £s), there is enough money to pay as many graffiti cleaners and litter pickers as before, but then there is not enough financing capacity left for meals-on-wheels. etc, etc. (the principle of communicating vases, i.e. Council budget balancing against core and mandatory requirements). The proverbial rock and a hard place.

The simplest solution is, therefore, don't clean the graffiti or pick up the litter (since the service cannot be paid for anymore). That way, no ex-graffiti cleaner or litter-picker made redundant needs to feel bad about it.

Of course, in addition to your 10-hour work day, you'll now have to take on whatever leisure time (including any current volunteering) you had left, to do your own graffiti-cleaning and litter-picking for your home/community, if you can be bothered.

If you're happy with that solution in the name of pseudo-socialist ideals, fair enough.

EDIT: note that there was a time, and not so many moons ago, when Councils did not need to pay (or certainly nowhere near as much) towards such services, as most 'normal' people used to do exactly that (clean graffiti/pick litter/etc. nearby of their own initiative), out of pride for their home and surroundings and out of community spirit. It's not taken recent governments very long at all to turn everybody into nanny-dependent drones expecting every aspect and facet of their life to be government-assisted (and -regimented). For shame.

'' One volunteer is worth ten pressed men ''.

can I shed some light on this..

There are many jobs that are done by the council ( streetforce are currently responsible for the removal of some graffitti depending on where the graffitti is.)

The issue is though that many jobs that are done by the council are done on a budget that is set by the Cabinet.
If we all paid more council tax( which no one really wants to do ) then more money would be spent on things like cleaning up the streets,litter picking etc.
So where there is a need in a local community to clean up an area(Like the local spring cleans) then people can get involved in their community to keep their own streets tidy etc, so in a way that is taking on the role of a volunteer and taking some responsibility for your own community.
Doesnt mean that the Council doesnt do any of this, more of a partnership with the local community.

If you seriously believe that silly statement you really have lost the plot.

Please tell me which bit of it is silly?

And where would this 'real pay' have come from, a bottomless pit of money?

There is actually plenty of money left in the public purse. This explains why David Cameron has increased our annual EU contribution by many hundreds of millions of pounds every year - after claiming that he would freeze or cut it!

There is plenty of money left in the public purse because David Cameron has massively increased our foreign aid (international development) payments to corrupt and super wealthy regimes. Such as over £1 billion going to India - a country with nuclear weapons, a space programme and even an aid programme of it's own!

There is plenty of money left in the public purse because David Cameron is creating 500 jobs - paying a minimum of £20,000 per year - to be Big Society 'volunteer' organisers. This 'Big Society' scheme will cost the taxpayer many £millions, just to satisfy the vanity of a super wealthy Tory weakling.

There is actually plenty of money left in the public purse. This explains why David Cameron has increased our annual EU contribution by many hundreds of millions of pounds every year - after claiming that he would freeze or cut it!

There is plenty of money left in the public purse because David Cameron has massively increased our foreign aid (international development) payments to corrupt and super wealthy regimes. Such as over £1 billion going to India - a country with nuclear weapons, a space programme and even an aid programme of it's own!

There is plenty of money left in the public purse because David Cameron is creating 500 jobs - paying a minimum of £20,000 per year - to be Big Society 'volunteer' organisers. This 'Big Society' scheme will cost the taxpayer many £millions, just to satisfy the vanity of a super wealthy Tory weakling.

I'm sure there is money in the public purse - I'd expect it.

But that's not a reason to spend it, just because it's there.

And you aren't really saying you're so naive that you believe we give our aid to other countries for nothing are you?

And your last bit just sounds like a childish rant.

I'm sure there is money in the public purse - I'd expect it.

But that's not a reason to spend it, just because it's there.



Of course it isn't but when pay rises are less than inflation, the economic inactive population is rising. What people need, what the country needs are proper paid jobs to get the economy moving, get us out of recession and to increase tax returns.

http://www.tuc.org.uk/economy/tuc-19194-f0.pdf

The very last we need is to be forcing reluctant people to work for below minimum wage.

Our problem is not taking part in made up jobs, its creating real jobs. We don't make anything any more. In particular governments have let young people down. There's nothing for them to do except work in shops and call centre or further their education, Improve unemployment figures more like.

Anyone who takes part in this charade, is a mug in my opinion...

You're right, our young people have been let down. That's an entirely different topic though.

The very last we need is to be forcing reluctant people to work for below minimum wage.
Nobody is forcing anyone. People have choices. As independent people they an do what they wish.

There are so many positives to the proposals it's difficult to see issues before it is put into practice. Quite rightly people will be encouraged to contribute to their communities and the people around them, given support to get back into the habit of work and work routines.

Time will tell how successful it is but the days when we could afford to have millions of people living at others expense are gone forever.

Forever.

Westminster, the richest Tory Council is putting the boot in to the homeless seeking to ban vagrants around Victoria and banning the Salvation Army and Pret A Manger from handing out food.

So much for the Tories conception of a Big Society.... it looks like the reality of encouraging charity is rather different from their claims.

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2011/02/27/tory-council-to-make-homelessness-illegal/

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/02/28/why-banning-soup-kitchens-is-only-the-start-of-the-attack-on-homeless/

No I won't be volunteering, I think he's passing the buck

Westminster, the richest Tory Council is putting the boot in to the homeless seeking to ban vagrants around Victoria and banning the Salvation Army and Pret A Manger from handing out food.

So much for the Tories conception of a Big Society.... it looks like the reality of encouraging charity is rather different from their claims.

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2011/02/27/tory-council-to-make-homelessness-illegal/

http://liberalconspiracy.org/2011/02/28/why-banning-soup-kitchens-is-only-the-start-of-the-attack-on-homeless/

Oh come on be fair, if you were them would you want to see the homelss and vagrants as you drive round in your Rolls, they don't want to see anything that might prick their conscience. Mind you saying that most of them don't have one.

Oh come on be fair, if you were them would you want to see the homelss and vagrants as you drive round in your Rolls, they don't want to see anything that might prick their conscience. Mind you saying that most of them don't have one.

Isn't that roughly the area where Britain's costliest street is, where the avergae house price is around £6.5m. With that amount of money they'd probably all have rollers.

Isn't that roughly the area where Britain's costliest street is, where the avergae house price is around £6.5m. With that amount of money they'd probably all have rollers.

Many of them have their own private jet and homes all over the world. These rich people are the BIG society, and they want the small society, the little man and woman, to clear off out of their gated community...

Actually, it's more accurate to state that the 'High' society (super wealthy David Cameron and his Eton chums) have created the 'Big' society in order to exploit the 'Small' society - ordinary working class people who were not born with a silver spoon in their mouth.

"Look at the king! Look at the king! Look at the king, the king, the king!
The king is in the all together
but all together the all together
he's all together as naked as the day that he was born.
The king is in the all together
but all together the all together
it's all together the very least the king has ever worn."

"Jellyfish" Dave still believes we can't see through him. :huh:

Dave is suffering from a bad case of The Emperor's New Clothes.