What a cheek

[Mrs Gumboot]

Like many things suggested by governments down the years I suspect this one will be another of those 'blue sky' ideas which is totally unworkable in the real world.

As has already been mentioned, many charities are already doing work that should be covered by centrally funded areas like social services. Trying to get us to donate more time and money is not helpful. I've donated my fair share of time over the years, but working full time, and now with family commitments, really does cut down the available time you have to help other people while not neglecting your own.

What you can, when you can, where you want. Easy as  :)

[Mrs Gumboot]

[calendula]

overall it is part of the government's so called 'big society', where we have to either 'do it' for free or 'pay for it all' ourselves and if we pour money into the charities then they don't have to - soon we won't need a government at all - there's thought  :o

[caroline7758]

I think this is only at the consultation stage at the moment (green paper) so may not happen.

Also, some of the charities above are already partly funded through government, e.g. most Citizens Advice Bureaux are funded by local government- that's why they are now facing cuts in many areas! Government funded= underfunded.

[daitheplant]

I have to give the coalition credit here. This is something that taxmad New Labour never thought of, GUILT TAX. ;D ;D ;D

[PurpleHeather]

No it is this great new idea.

The people do all the work with out pay.

No more lollipop ladies a volunteer will do it (then get charged with manslaughter when a kid is killed) type of thing.

People pay for the things the government shoud. Not a problem the British Legion have been looking after the ex-servicemen for decades when the governent should have.