Congdon letter in Sunday Telegraph

eublues · 21-01-2007, 11:41 PM

Defector rejects Dave's 'vacuous piffle'

I am always suspicious of politicians who enthuse about "social responsibility", since implicitly that involves higher taxation. David Cameron repeatedly puts the word "social" in front of desired programmes, but denies that he wants more public expenditure. According to Matthew d'Ancona (in his rather personal attack on me), Mr Cameron is a different kind of politician (Comment, January 14). When he talks about rolling "forward the frontiers of society", he means "a radically increased role for charities and voluntary groups in the provision of welfare".

What is being suggested? That the expansion of a charity's role is to be in accordance with priorities laid down by the state (i e, by politicians)? Would there be a ministry for charities and voluntary organisations to ensure they do the extra work?

And how is the "radically increased role" to be financed? Are the public to be required to make compulsory payments to bodies which at one time were genuinely charitable? Or are charities to have a more favourable tax regime, with the obvious consequences for the public finances?

I don't think these are silly questions. I am in favour of "a radically increased role for charities and voluntary groups in the provision" of all things great and wonderful. I am in favour of motherhood, apple pie and England winning the World Cup in 2010, but — unlike Messrs Cameron and d'Ancona — I am reluctant to utter phrases which, on analysis, turn out to be vacuous piffle. If that puts me "on the margins of politics", I am delighted to be there.

(Prof) Tim Congdon, Huntley, Gloucestershire

tito · 21-01-2007, 11:57 PM

Congdon hit the nail on the head, he is great at getting things across.

mkpdavies · 22-01-2007, 09:57 AM

Yes, spot on. Give me fringe over fudge every day.

Independent UKIP · 23-01-2007, 01:14 AM

In different ways myself and Devils Kitchen were critical of the Cameron suggestion about charities & voluntary organisations increasing their involvement in the state and bureaucracy. I am very pleased that Tim Congdon has in his own rather better way of writing (at least as far as I am concerned) endorsed what I previously suggested. I am delighted that he is delighted to be on the same side as me and the other UKIP supporters on this forum.

21-01-2007, 11:41 PM	#1 (permalink)
eublues Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 3,194	Congdon letter in Sunday Telegraph Defector rejects Dave's 'vacuous piffle' I am always suspicious of politicians who enthuse about "social responsibility", since implicitly that involves higher taxation. David Cameron repeatedly puts the word "social" in front of desired programmes, but denies that he wants more public expenditure. According to Matthew d'Ancona (in his rather personal attack on me), Mr Cameron is a different kind of politician (Comment, January 14). When he talks about rolling "forward the frontiers of society", he means "a radically increased role for charities and voluntary groups in the provision of welfare". What is being suggested? That the expansion of a charity's role is to be in accordance with priorities laid down by the state (i e, by politicians)? Would there be a ministry for charities and voluntary organisations to ensure they do the extra work? And how is the "radically increased role" to be financed? Are the public to be required to make compulsory payments to bodies which at one time were genuinely charitable? Or are charities to have a more favourable tax regime, with the obvious consequences for the public finances? I don't think these are silly questions. I am in favour of "a radically increased role for charities and voluntary groups in the provision" of all things great and wonderful. I am in favour of motherhood, apple pie and England winning the World Cup in 2010, but — unlike Messrs Cameron and d'Ancona — I am reluctant to utter phrases which, on analysis, turn out to be vacuous piffle. If that puts me "on the margins of politics", I am delighted to be there. (Prof) Tim Congdon, Huntley, Gloucestershire

22-01-2007, 09:57 AM	#3 (permalink)
mkpdavies Uber Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Woking Posts: 32,078 Party: Libertarian Party	Yes, spot on. Give me fringe over fudge every day. __________________ http://brits4ronpaul.blogspot.com/ http://wokinglibertarians.blogspot.com/ http://lpuk.org My ignore list Labour, Lib Dems

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

21-01-2007, 11:57 PM	#2 (permalink)
tito Uber Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: South Pembrokeshire Posts: 3,035	Congdon hit the nail on the head, he is great at getting things across.

23-01-2007, 01:14 AM	#4 (permalink)
Independent UKIP Uber Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: London Posts: 2,492	In different ways myself and Devils Kitchen were critical of the Cameron suggestion about charities & voluntary organisations increasing their involvement in the state and bureaucracy. I am very pleased that Tim Congdon has in his own rather better way of writing (at least as far as I am concerned) endorsed what I previously suggested. I am delighted that he is delighted to be on the same side as me and the other UKIP supporters on this forum.