Monday, February 25, 2013

Charities using forced labour supplied by the DWP

I would avoid giving anything to a charity which uses labour supplied free by the DWP. Nor would I buy from a charity shop which used forced labour. The very word “charity” has been emptied of meaning by organizations which now employ highly paid executives that were founded and run by volunteers who worked for nothing.

Saint Paul wrote that “the love of money is the root of all evil” and when one sees charities using forced labour provided by the DWP it’s hard not to sympathise with his sentiments. The very word “charity” is derived from the latin “caritas” which means love. Today we have in the U.K so called charities which are instrumental in the issuing of welfare sanctions against the poorer segments of society, using forced labour and running what are really businesses set up for the benefit of their executives.

I am no longer taken in by the misuse of words like “charity” to cover the wrongdoings of people motivated by greed and not love. I wonder if we will ever see a political party which will tackle this problem. I think it’s unlikely to happen in the near future so long as politicians see the charity sector as a tool for underming welfare and keeping downward pressure on wages through using forced labour.

When shopping at a charity shop I will ask politely if they are taking on anyone under the Work Programme. If the shop says yes then I will explain that in good conscience I cannot shop there since I believe it to be morally wrong that people are being forced to work for nothing by a so called charity.

Dame Vera Lynn called for charities to go back to being what they were in the past, i.e run by people who did the work out of love and not for money. Sue Ryder who set up the charity associated with her name later blamed the trustees of the Sue Ryder Foundation of hijacking the charity and accusing them of betraying its volunteer helpers and splashing out on new offices in central London.

Several years ago I worked with people who had an association with the Salvation Army and who were really trying to help people with big problems. They would have been as astonished as me to find out that the Salvation Army was using forced labour supplied by the DWP and incredulous that one of the directors of the Salvation Army trading company ran an external company which had made millions out of the clothes donated to the Salvation Army.

The Salvation Army has tried to backtrack on the forced labour issue by referring to its voluntary nature. Let’s be very clear about this. If the Salvation Army is using people supplied by the DWP who are subject to sanctions if they refuse to attend then there is nothing voluntary about it. To take away the welfare benefits of anyone if they refuse to work unpaid is not voluntary but a form of forced/coerced labour.

Iain Duncan-Smith proclaimed his Catholicity on a recent Question Time BBC programme. How he or the Salvation Army can reconcile their Christianity with what they are, or have been, involved in needs some explaining.

Perhaps one of the single biggest causes of the Christianization of the Roman Empire was love given to the poor by the early Christian communities. Charity, in its true and traditional meaning, might be considered Christianity’s unique selling point in the ancient world through it’s scale over and above any spiritual influences. It particularly took hold amongst the poorest and marginalised sectors of society: slaves, women and children. The message of the gospel had a particular meaning and resonated strongly with the poor and oppressed. Today it often seems that the gospel of the poor proclaimed by Jesus has been turned into the Gospel of the Rich – a form of Mammon Worship.

Welfare Sorrows