Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Adrian Essex on October 8, 2011 at 21:12

Apparently the CAB has 28,500 staff, 21,500 of whom are volunteers.

According to the Citizens Advice Bureau website the top five problems are:

Top five CAB client problems in 2009/10 (England and Wales)

• Debt (2,374,000)
• Benefits and tax credits (2,074,000)
• Employment (586,000)
• Housing (468,000)
• Relationships and family (333,000)

I think that means that CAB dealt with over 2 million cases involving debt in 2009/10 and apparently over 7 million new problems in total. 

That's quite astonishing really for a discreet charity - I had no idea.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Richard McKeever on October 13, 2011 at 15:03

Adrian

It is remarkable how much work specialist work is done by volunteers at the Citizens Advice Bureau - and what an impact it has, not only for those in reciept of advice, but for their wider communities. 

Resolving errors in the benefits and tax-credit system will generate significant additional income in previously unclaimed benefits - much of which will be spent localy, in-cash supporting the local economy.

So it is useful work - but I can't help thinking it should at least in part be funded by the statutory agencies that make the mistakes in the first place. If we were to apply the Polluter Pays Principle that applies in environmental law, the vital work of the CAB and other welfare rights advice agencies would be funded by a levy on the agencies whose errors have caused the problems - and not rely so heavily on volunteers stepping in to clear up the mess left by "professionals".

 

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Adrian Essex on October 16, 2011 at 12:11

As far as I can make out the tax credit system is nothing but pollution - there is a complex and barely understood system where by the government takes your money from you (tax) which is a system often resulting in very well publicised (and probably lots of other) errors. There is then an equally complex system (tax credits) whereby some or all or more of that money is given back - a system often resulting in very well publicised (and probably lots of other) errors. Errors multiplied by errors will at the very least amount to errors squared. The polluter here is very clearly the inventor of this madcap scheme.

I also remember reading of an occasion on which one of the victims/beneficiaries of this system was awarded too much of his/her own (and possibly some of my  and your) money, because he/she had not notified the tax collectors of a change in circumstances. The 'solution' to this problem was to change the threshold at which notification was required to be an increase in annual income of £25,000 - i.e. a change of more than the average wage! This would seem to be the same solution adopted by the housemaid who lifts the edge of the carpet to hide away the dust.

• ▶ Reply