[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 585: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 641: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
Big Aint Allways Good. - Carers UK Forum

Big Aint Allways Good.

Share information, support and advice on all aspects of caring.
ImageI was listening to a 1960s radio sketch in which Peter Cook as E.L .Wisty,His comic creation,predicted that in times to come,"Huge,great antennas would spy on our every move".too far-fetched for his audience,they thought it a hoot,laughing out loud.In cctv ridden
2009 when your local council snoops, like some mi6 spy,with id cards comming,civil liberties
dying like bees.I muse on the growth of monolithic bodies.

We have,from the top down.The EU.The Monachy,Westminster,MPS and LORDS,Devolved bodies in Wales,Scotland,Ulster,the accompanying vast civil service for each.City,County,Town
councils and their support staff.The cost?.BILLIONS!.
Then,we have the NHS the BBC DVLA etc.etc.etc....and so on.

Then,London based admin-heavy cash-hungry monolithic CHARITIES in their expensive city
addreses.Many plugging on daytime tv the cure-all" £3.00 a month "from viewers.Ive no time
for BIG city-based charities.Local causes local folks count more.

I do back Carers UK.But,I feel that London-based offices cost too much.I dont see,in 2009,the
need for such costly settings.I think in a recession re-evaluation is vital.Government cant find
money for a decent deal for carers yet they lavishly fund themselves.

I think charity begins at home.YES I back carers UK but my LOCAL carers group on the whole,
is more in-tune with me.Its low maintaince too.Very cost effective.

In 2009 that counts.
The expression, "think global, act local" comes to mind. I think you need to work nationally to effect change in the availability and funding for social programmes and locally is where individuals are touched and helped personally.
Where an organisation needs access to Parliament in order to lobby MPs and ministers there is clearly logic in being based in the capital, location is very much a needs-based issue.
Although there is an argument for having a small base in London and the main base elsewhere: CUK has offices in places other than London...
i note and agree with your responces.online technology mean a charity can be based anywhere.it can still influence the heart of government.carers uk does have other offices.a very small cost effective office base,wherever it is,must be good.must be the right way.big government fails us all.big charities equally fail.yes local is best for local need.if a london based charity is to mean anything at all to people outside london.regional offices are a must.some have affiliate local groups.ofcourse it is not the case that major charities all fail to connect.i have a concern that just as some mps were seduced by an expence culturegone mad,so a seduction can happen when london based charities in order to lobby,cozy-upto mps etc,and soft-peddle on lobbying.in the case of hardpressed carers struggling and often in despair,i want a vital loud voice out-their and firmly holding our mps to account.strongly challenging government for carers,thats essential. Image
Interesting argument. I would like to comment.

Carers UK is anything but a "monolithic chariity". I would be interested to know what you class as "big". The number of staff working at Carers UK's London office is small - I can think of one of two local carers centres that have more staff! Our London office building was donated to the charity, so we don't pay rent. We are in a (relatively) cheap part of London. It is essential for us to have a London base for our Parliamntary, public afffairs and fundraising activity.

You raise a valid point I understand, and there are obviously examples of big charities wasting huge amounts of money but not all charities are the same. I know I'm biased but I would say Carers UK delivers exceptional value for money, for our members. We are small, efficient and the amount of press coverage and profile we get suggest we punch above our weight.

The Scottish office of C-UK / Carers Scotland, is actually in Glasgow not the capital Edinburgh. But there is a fast rail connection and Glasgow is the biggest city so many of the politicians and other key agencies are based there. I think a lot of lobbying has to be about meeting people face to face, especially as the electronic world is now so crowded with billions of communications - there is no substitute for personal connections and probably never will be.

Of course C-UK is very small. But its horses for courses, a small, tight and member-led organisation with an information/policy/lobbying remit can be far more focused and effective than a large shambolic service provider spread all over the UK because it isn't constantly having to worry about operational and contracts matters or offending the people with the money.
I am sorry Matt but what exactly has CUK done for its membersto provide "exceptional value for money"? The level of carers allowance (for those that get it) is still pitifully small despite the fact CUK has been going for at least 40 years.

What press coverage and profile _ I saw Imelda on tv the other night for about 2 minutes and she didn't mention how pitifully small carers allowance is. Still she gets a good salary eh?

I do not think that people realise how desperately difficult it is these days for charities to get media coverage of issues which either are not related to current news stories or which are not deemed to be "sexy" and carers are not "sexy", it is even extremely difficult for charities to get stories into The Guardian Society supplement. For a comparatively small charity CUK's media coverage of carers issues is pretty good both individually and in consortium with other related charities, in the current media climate any coverage of carers' issues is a bonus, stories about carers, unless they are tragedies, do not sell papers.

Apropos salaries, those paid by charities like CUK are low compared with the salaries similarly qualified employees can demand in the private sector, people do not work for charities for the money but because they believe in what they are doing, just over ten years ago someone offered me regular work as a freelance copywriter, the going rate then was £30 an hour, compare that with the salaries of charity staff today and you will see that they still do not match that hourly rate, a charity employee, unless he/she is a CEO, earns around the national average wage.
The salaries are still a helluva lot more than the carers allowance, Parsifal - and they don't work as hard as we do.