Severe povety. Another devalued phrase.

Julia has already given this one the shredding it deserves, but seen as it appeared in my local paper, I thought I would have a pop at it too.

AROUND 37,000 children in Lancashire are growing up in ‘severe’ poverty, according to new figures released by a leading charity.

No body is growing up in Britain, or the western world for that matter, in severe poverty. With all the cheap food, clothing and consumer goods, Britain has not had it better. So what are they basing this outlandish statement on?
Save the Children has found that these youngsters have no proper heating, are not eating a proper meal on a regular basis and do not have proper school uniforms.

If that is what defines severe poverty in modern Britain, what was Bob Geldof up to in Ethiopia?

Severe poverty is people who are starving, never mind missing the odd proper meal. It's people with no education, never mind a proper school uniform, and it certainly isn't a lack of proper heating, it's people whose only source of heat is an open fire in the middle of a mud hut that strips out their lungs because there is no ventilation.

“No child should be born without a chance. It is a national scandal that 1.6 million children are growing up in severe poverty."

What is a national scandal is that Save the Children can come out with such blatant scare mongering rubbish and follow it up with a demand for taxpayer handouts to "Solve the problem".

Save the Children is calling on the government to set up an emergency plan to help tackle the problem and warns that the problem could get worse with rising unemployment and cuts are being made to services.

This part of the statement never made it into the Telegraph but Julia reported it in her blog after spotting it in the Metro:
This means a single parent family with one child aged under 14 on an income of less than £7,000 – or a couple with two children under 14 on less than £12,500 – and going without things such as separate bedrooms for older boys and girls, proper birthday celebrations and having friends round for tea.

This is what we class as severe poverty now? Give me strength. All you are doing here, is devaluing the lives of people around the world who really do live in poverty. A starving child in Africa would not know what to do with a separate bedroom in their mud hut, and as for friends round for tea, is that supposed to be some kind of childhood right now? Can children claim their human rights are being violated just because mommy won't spend her benefits catering for all the other brats in the street?

I have a hard time believing people actually speak this waffle.

In Julias words:
Now, if I were the head of policy at a large charity, I’d be utterly ashamed to open my mouth on the subject of ‘severe poverty’ if my definition of it would be not having balloons and cake on my birthday, instead of living in squalor in some Third World hellhole.
14 per cent are living in poor conditions in Lancashire, which equates to about 31,000 children.

That also equates to about 31,000 playstations, TV's, motor vehicles, mobile phones and MP3 players. It probably equates to about half a million packets of fags, two million litres of booze and a large quantity of Burberry track suits.

How much of our money do we give to these leeches to spout such utter crap? I don't know, but the Angry Exile does:
Angry Exile said...

Just got Save The Chiiiiildren's 09 report. Here's a quote:

Institutional income continued to grow.We received £90.9 million from governments, multilateral institutions – including the European Union and the United Nations – and major foundations.

Total income that year was £170.9m.

BZZZZZZZT! Fake charity.
23 February 2011 13:48

I could cry. I really could.

This rubbish outpouring from an obvious fake charity was so bad, even Jack Straw is skeptical:

“I would like a breakdown of the survey as the overall figures seem surprising.

“If children’s parents are on benefits they are for example entitled to school uniform grants.

It takes a lot for Man of Straw to crawl out of the hole on the left and question the bleatings of the righteous, but it looks like this has done it. I would also like to see that breakdown.

“The benefit system Labour left in place, which has not yet been dismantled, provides adequate support especially in areas where housing is less expensive.

He couldn't resist that subtle dig at the government though.

They couldn't even rally the lefty Telegraph commenters to the cause either:
Letter2u, says...
12:16pm Wed 23 Feb 11
There is no such thing as poverty in the UK.
Children begging for food and wearing no clothes is REAL poverty as i have witnessed.

But I could ;-)

happycyclist, Darwen says...
12:12pm Wed 23 Feb 11
Must admit my thoughts are similar to Bucko's.

dont blame me i voted ukip, darwen says...
1:36pm Wed 23 Feb 11
Brilliantly accurate post from BuckoTheMoose.

The science is settled :-)

But it doesn't end there.

1 in 5 children in Bolton also live in severe poverty.
And according to the Telegraph themselves,the scale of deprivation is scandalous. Yep, they've subscribed to this nonsense, hook, line and sinker. Who says journalism needs to be accurate and impartial?

But in an era when footballers earn £250,000 a week and bankers get millions of pounds in bonuses it is nothing short of a disgrace.

You have got to be kidding me. Seriously, what date is it? 1st of April?

The age old cry of the socialist. It's not fair that this person has got more money than me.

It doesn't matter if this person studied economics for years and makes millions of pounds for their company by investing cash on stock markets across the world, it doesn't matter if this person has a skill that many many people will pay good money to come and watch. All that matters is that after you failed in school, got pregnant and opted for a life on benefits, you think you are more entitled than them.

Wake up. Life is not supposed to be equal across the board. Some people can make a lot of money, others can't.

I'll leave you with this letter to the editor.

Most people are not in real poverty

WHAT a load of nonsense that one in five children living in this town live in severe poverty.

Why is the charity Save the Children allowed to make its own definition of what severe poverty means?

Their made-up definition of severe poverty is: parents don’t have enough shoes, not being able to afford to decorate their home, pay for house insurance and repair household electrics. They also claim children’s basic needs include having their friends around, swimming lessons and going out on school trips.

These people don’t know the meaning of “basic need” or “severe poverty”

— take a long hard at other countries that don’t have clean water, a home, safe place to live, food or clothes.

Every week, every parent in this country gets child benefit — £20.30 for their first child and £13.40 for every child thereafter.

You can feed and clothe a child for this every week and have change. Asda, Tesco, etc, do nice cheap affordable clothing and shopping at the right places.

You can buy fresh fruit, veg and food — it means getting up and out and spending wisely. I know, I have been a single parent.

I’d like to ask town hall chiefs, Cllr Madeline Murray and Sally Copley of Save the Children: Have they also asked the same families they asked to gain these statistics whether they smoke, drink or go out?

Name and address withheld


William said...

microdave said...

Bucko said...

Bucko said...

William said...

will said...

Bucko said...

Francis Urquhart said...

Bucko said...