Joy for needy as the shelves fill with food

Worcester News: HELPING HAND: Steve Geal with some of the donated food that is being stored at Malvern’s new foodbank. HELPING HAND: Steve Geal with some of the donated food that is being stored at Malvern’s new foodbank.

STORAGE shelves are heaving after Malvern’s new foodbank opened.

Having leapt into operation to provide emergency food to families in need over the Christmas holidays, the new charity has formally opened this week.

Over the past few weeks donations have enabled it to build up a stockpile of almost 1.5 tonnes of food – although chairman David Wareing said this will need constant replenishing and has no idea how quickly stocks will run out.

The charity, set up in partnership with the Trussell Trust, has also amassed a small army of about 70 volunteers who have now been trained to help sort and distribute the food.

The foodbank, on Howsell Industrial Estate, Malvern Link, will initially be opening its doors twice a week, on Monday and Thursday mornings. Volunteers will prepare food parcels between 9am and 11am and then distribute them to referred clients between 11am and 1pm.

Those referrals will come from a wide range of agencies, including Sunshine and Evergreen children’s centres in Malvern, Hope Unlimited, Christians Against Poverty and the Citizens Advice Bureau. Mr Wareing said more referral agencies would be added as the foodbank gets up and running and there is a better idea of overall need and demand.

He said: “Opening days will also be added depending upon demand and as we get volunteers trained up. We are also putting in place a system for providing emergency parcels outside of these hours.”

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:11pm Sat 26 Jan 13

pronstar says...

It all sounds very complicated
It all sounds very complicated pronstar

11:20am Sun 27 Jan 13

chapski75 says...

pronstar wrote:
It all sounds very complicated
It has to be complicated. If the charity gave food out to just anyone then it will be abused, and then it will lose credibility and not receive donations.

Look at the benefits system and the number of cases we see of that being abused, if there's something going for free then it attracts the wrong sort of people and not just those in desperate need.
[quote][p][bold]pronstar[/bold] wrote: It all sounds very complicated[/p][/quote]It has to be complicated. If the charity gave food out to just anyone then it will be abused, and then it will lose credibility and not receive donations. Look at the benefits system and the number of cases we see of that being abused, if there's something going for free then it attracts the wrong sort of people and not just those in desperate need. chapski75

1:08pm Sun 27 Jan 13

induby says...

whats complicated about that?, its sounds like common sense to me, you get referred to them by one of the nominated agencies and after they have made the parcels up in the morning they are handed out.
whats complicated about that?, its sounds like common sense to me, you get referred to them by one of the nominated agencies and after they have made the parcels up in the morning they are handed out. induby

4:00pm Sun 27 Jan 13

pronstar says...

chapski75 wrote:
pronstar wrote:
It all sounds very complicated
It has to be complicated. If the charity gave food out to just anyone then it will be abused, and then it will lose credibility and not receive donations.

Look at the benefits system and the number of cases we see of that being abused, if there's something going for free then it attracts the wrong sort of people and not just those in desperate need.
From the DWP web site: -

"For 2011/12 it is estimated that 2.1 per cent of total benefit expenditure was overpaid due to fraud and error, the same as the 2010/11 estimate.

For 2011/12, it is estimated that 0.8 per cent of total benefit expenditure was underpaid due to fraud and error, the same as the 2010/11 estimate."

So if we apply your comparison then not very much of the food would end up in the wrong hands.

I just don't think it's right that when people are reduced to living off food hand-outs they are then forced to jump through hoops to get it.
[quote][p][bold]chapski75[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pronstar[/bold] wrote: It all sounds very complicated[/p][/quote]It has to be complicated. If the charity gave food out to just anyone then it will be abused, and then it will lose credibility and not receive donations. Look at the benefits system and the number of cases we see of that being abused, if there's something going for free then it attracts the wrong sort of people and not just those in desperate need.[/p][/quote]From the DWP web site: - "For 2011/12 it is estimated that 2.1 per cent of total benefit expenditure was overpaid due to fraud and error, the same as the 2010/11 estimate. For 2011/12, it is estimated that 0.8 per cent of total benefit expenditure was underpaid due to fraud and error, the same as the 2010/11 estimate." So if we apply your comparison then not very much of the food would end up in the wrong hands. I just don't think it's right that when people are reduced to living off food hand-outs they are then forced to jump through hoops to get it. pronstar

9:58pm Sun 27 Jan 13

chapski75 says...

pronstar wrote:
chapski75 wrote:
pronstar wrote:
It all sounds very complicated
It has to be complicated. If the charity gave food out to just anyone then it will be abused, and then it will lose credibility and not receive donations.

Look at the benefits system and the number of cases we see of that being abused, if there's something going for free then it attracts the wrong sort of people and not just those in desperate need.
From the DWP web site: -

"For 2011/12 it is estimated that 2.1 per cent of total benefit expenditure was overpaid due to fraud and error, the same as the 2010/11 estimate.

For 2011/12, it is estimated that 0.8 per cent of total benefit expenditure was underpaid due to fraud and error, the same as the 2010/11 estimate."

So if we apply your comparison then not very much of the food would end up in the wrong hands.

I just don't think it's right that when people are reduced to living off food hand-outs they are then forced to jump through hoops to get it.
Statistics are one thing but when you're talking about half of the treasury spending on benefits then even 0.8 per cent is a ridiculously large number. Also "fraud and error" is not the same as "morally justified" or "acceptable to tax payers". We've all seen the headlines of some people living a much better life on benefits than many people in work.

If there were a case of someone who could easily afford their own food getting free handouts that will make the headlines and be damaging to the charity's good work.

They'll balance the risk with the impact to the claimant. I'm sure the claimant would rather that than be turned away as they'd ran out. They then open the paper to see man in 4 bedroom detached house, with BMW on the drive, gets food handouts!

DWP makes people jump through hoops and there are plenty of artists out there manipulating the system.
[quote][p][bold]pronstar[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]chapski75[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]pronstar[/bold] wrote: It all sounds very complicated[/p][/quote]It has to be complicated. If the charity gave food out to just anyone then it will be abused, and then it will lose credibility and not receive donations. Look at the benefits system and the number of cases we see of that being abused, if there's something going for free then it attracts the wrong sort of people and not just those in desperate need.[/p][/quote]From the DWP web site: - "For 2011/12 it is estimated that 2.1 per cent of total benefit expenditure was overpaid due to fraud and error, the same as the 2010/11 estimate. For 2011/12, it is estimated that 0.8 per cent of total benefit expenditure was underpaid due to fraud and error, the same as the 2010/11 estimate." So if we apply your comparison then not very much of the food would end up in the wrong hands. I just don't think it's right that when people are reduced to living off food hand-outs they are then forced to jump through hoops to get it.[/p][/quote]Statistics are one thing but when you're talking about half of the treasury spending on benefits then even 0.8 per cent is a ridiculously large number. Also "fraud and error" is not the same as "morally justified" or "acceptable to tax payers". We've all seen the headlines of some people living a much better life on benefits than many people in work. If there were a case of someone who could easily afford their own food getting free handouts that will make the headlines and be damaging to the charity's good work. They'll balance the risk with the impact to the claimant. I'm sure the claimant would rather that than be turned away as they'd ran out. They then open the paper to see man in 4 bedroom detached house, with BMW on the drive, gets food handouts! DWP makes people jump through hoops and there are plenty of artists out there manipulating the system. chapski75

9:15am Mon 28 Jan 13

pronstar says...

Your reasoning is flawed since the man with the BMW is very unlikely to want to have the stigma attached to receiving hand-outs if he can really afford his own food.
Your reasoning is flawed since the man with the BMW is very unlikely to want to have the stigma attached to receiving hand-outs if he can really afford his own food. pronstar

12:47pm Mon 28 Jan 13

Andy-Apache says...

So, you believe statistics from DWP, related to their OWN performance?

Really?...
So, you believe statistics from DWP, related to their OWN performance? Really?... Andy-Apache

9:40pm Mon 28 Jan 13

pronstar says...

Not really, but they are the best estimates available don't you think?

I was merely pointing out that benefit fraud was relatively low when it was used to compare possible wrongful claims on this charity.
Not really, but they are the best estimates available don't you think? I was merely pointing out that benefit fraud was relatively low when it was used to compare possible wrongful claims on this charity. pronstar
Post a comment

Remember you are personally responsible for what you post on this site and must abide by our site terms. Do not post anything that is false, abusive or malicious. If you wish to complain, please use the ‘report this post’ link.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree