An astonishing 25,000 British charities receive more than three-quarters of their income from the government, and many more receive a substantial chunk. Twelve of the largest charities receive £742m a year from the taxpayer, and spend on average £400,000 each just “managing” their relationship with Government.Why, oh why, oh why do Brits find it so hard to accept that the NuLabour "project" was to use government revenues to create a one party state? And that, despite being led by a one-eyed, chippy Scotsman with the charisma of a Marabou stork, despite getting involved in two unwinnable wars, despite a sustained assault on historic civil liberties, despite encouraging unlimited immigration and despite signing up to European super state constitution without holding the referendum they promised, they nearly got away with it?
The "project" was the old Progressive ambition, first articulated by Woodrow Wilson (US president 1913-21), to become "the party of government", by which he meant more than just the party that temporarily held power. He meant the party that would penetrate the machinery of government at all levels to such an extent that it would no longer matter whether another party took office.
It is screamingly apparent that a thriving voluntary sector is an obstacle to any such ambition. So, Nu Labour co-opted it by bribery, turning the charities into government dependents. Like junkies, they no longer know how to function without their statist fix and are desperate to retain it.
Two changes to the law on charities would lance that boil:
- no organization in receipt of public money may claim the fiscal status of a charity
- no organization whose purpose is to influence public policy may claim the fiscal status of a charity
Which is sad, because the Telegraph once saw things very clearly, as I document in my next post.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment