Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Councils urged to trust faith groups to deliver local services
Councils should put their faith in community-based religious groups to deliver value for money public services, a leading think tank has urged.
According to a Demos report entitled 'Faithful Providers', the willingness of volunteers from such bodies to work long hours for little pay, could result in greater cost efficiencies for commissioning authorities.
Faith-based providers are also particularly good in tackling social issues such as drug rehabilitation programmes where a spirit of perseverance in helping vulnerable people overcome challenges is helpful, the findings reveal.
Other benefits to be reaped from such a holistic approach include the forging of stronger links between residents and local community organisations, the report claims.
This finding suggests funding for faith-based providers should be conditional on them working with different faith-groups to tackle local problems and boost community cohesion, Demos argues.
Report author, Jonathan Birdwell said: 'This research clearly dispels the myth that all faith-based service providers are only interested in preaching, or helping those who match their particular creed.
'Government and local authorities can't afford to be squeamish about the religious aspect of faith-motivated services, said Mr Birdwell, who is head of the citizens programme at Demos.
'If Government and local authorities are serious about fostering a greater sense of community and interfaith dialogue then they should practise what they preach and support faith-based service delivery,' he added
Article taken from LGA Website
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Faith based soldiers are amazing too. Forget working hard, they're perfectly happy to die for their faith.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Faith-based council service provision?
It's a slippery slope when you go down this road.
The prime motivation for the suggestion (like reducing the prison population) is saving money and it shouldn't be pretended that otherwise. The most damning aspect of the argument is the inclusion of the word "holistic".
It's an empty word. It should be banned. It's no substitute for argument. The writer normally means 'good' or 'desirable' - when as often as not, its neither.
I admire the French for their separation of Church and State. Whenever its mixed up - as in Putin's Russia of today – it leads to trouble.
-
Permalink Reply by Bethany Burrow Atherton on
-
This just reads to me like someone's had the bright idea that "good" people* will work for no money or less money than "bad" people*, and it's OK to exploit those people with a conscience/guilt complex/heart (depending on your point of view) for the greater good. Faith groups can have a (very productive) place in providing services to tackle social issues, of course, but not as a cost-saving exercise, surely?
* note the quotes - I'm not suggesting at all that I think that all those with faith are good, or that all those without are bad, it's just the simplistic way this article comes across to me.
-
Permalink Reply by Old-Age-Emporium(OAE) on
-
Is it the word 'faith' or the weakly punning title of 'Faithful Providers' that dissuades four intelligent posters from even reading the report? John, try harder. Pam, a look at the 20 case studies Demos instances does not suggest that the UCKG outfit is about to make a killing under a Big Society umbrella. Clive, in those paragraphs where the report uses 'holistic' it's given a context, does not seem to be an empty word or a damning word or a substitute for argument. The dangers of "a slippery slope" are pretty well canvassed in the space given to criticisms by faith and humanist groups and from comment by a variety of users and bods from Dept for Communities & Local Govt, both Labour and Coalition. Bethany, none of the 20 Muslim, Hindu, CofE, Catholic etc groups touched upon here are are about to leave themselves open to exploitation. And they don't seem to be weighed down by some awful 'guilt complex'. Your main point ("but not as a cost-saving exercise, surely?") is given a fair airing. There is an acknowledgement, too, that the very virtues and stamina inherent in doing something worthwhile from a faith-based motivation can be lost when the same project is scaled up, funded at a low level, subject to the temporary whim or wheeze of local govt here-today-gone-tomorrow money, or enmeshed in the jargon and targets of secular provision. Read the report, Bethany - it's not so simplistic - though the writer makes it plain that Demos's think-tanking has only touched upon the whole area of faith-based contribution to local services.
-
-
OAE - you've missed my point - it was the actual article I was commenting on, not the underlying report. If you knew anything at all about me, you'd know I would be more likely than most to read something with the word "faith" in it and I have indeed read the report.
-
-
Bethany, I do indeed know something about you! So I was surprised you were so taken up with the silliness of the article from the LGA rather than the Demos report itself.
-
-
And now you know how much I dislike sloppy reporting too!
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
