Why children need us
In attacking charities such as the NSPCC, the RSPCA and Cancer Research UK (‘Bullying for charity’, 12 November) Guy Adams also harms the beneficiaries. Both larger and smaller charities have a vital role to play in the voluntary sector. Each has its strengths and they complement one another.
It is also wrong to assume that because the NSPCC is a national charity, it is not ‘local’. We have 177 projects across England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Channel Islands, all with strong links to the local community. Some of these projects work to help children rebuild their lives after abuse, and some work to prevent cruelty in the first place.
Campaigning and lobbying are a key part of preventing cruelty. Our ‘sinister advertising slogans’, as Adams describes them, are not mere slogans. They are true statements. One to two children die every week at the hands of parents or carers. Given that our name is the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children, something would be very wrong if we did not work to prevent cruelty.
As he pointed out, we manage a big budget, but what he failed to mention is that 83 per cent of this money comes from public donations. By encouraging your readers to ‘refuse to subsidise’ charities such as ours, he is putting continuation of these services at risk and, as a result, the children we help.
However, I was delighted to see that The Spectator is not actually practising what it preaches, and that your Christmas Carol Concert is in aid of Cancer Research UK. Keep up the good work.
Mary Marsh
Director and CEO,
NSPCC, London EC2
Not yet the business
In his enthusiasm about the trend for students to choose business-studies courses, Leo McKinstry (‘Young people are the business’, 12 November) never considers whether that subject is capable of offering the intellectual training that higher education is expected to provide.
Comments
Comment section temporarily unavailable for maintenance.