Food bank debate: 20 things you need to know about food banks and hunger in Britain

First topic message reminder :



Campaign: Trussell Trust Chairman Chris Mould, Rachel Reeves MP, Jack Monroe, Unite's James Bevan, Maria Eagle MP and Mirror's Ros Wynne-Jones.
In the House of Commons today, MPs face a critical debate on the rise of food bank use and the increase in hunger levels in the UK today.

The Labour Party are using Opposition Day to discuss the food bank petition I launched with the Daily Mirror and Unite the Union – that gained an astonishing 100,000 signatures in just two days, demonstrating an overwhelming strength of public feeling.

At lunchtime, I’ll be speaking to MPs and campaigners before the debate, sharing my own experiences of poverty in a supposedly developed country.

Since starting to raise awareness of food bank use in the press last April with Oxfam’s “Walking The Breadline” report, I’ve realised how many lies and how much propaganda is out there. And I hear the same tired rhetoric again and again, from everyone from ordinary people to MPs and Lords.

So, on the day of the Opposition Day food bank debate, here’s 20 things you should know about food banks and hunger in Britain today.

1. Food bank use in the South East, the region known for its wealth and relative prosperity, is up over 60% this year.

2. A decade ago, food banks were almost unheard of in the UK. The Trussell Trust, the UK’s largest network of food banks, now opens new food banks in Britain every week to cope with the increase in referrals.

3. The Government commissioned a report into the rise in food bank use in June this year. DEFRA investigated, and the Government are refusing to publish the report.

4. Thousands of families face the prospect of relying on emergency food handouts this Christmas.

5. Some people who are in full time work are using food banks to support themselves and their families. Many of these work zero hour contracts – people are employed, but can work little or no hours in a week. They have no financial stability, and are not guaranteed enough to pay their rent, bills, or buy food.

6. Half a million people received emergency food assistance from a Trussell Trust food bank between April and December 2013. This is more than the number assisted in the entire year before (346,992).

7. Robin Aitkin in the Telegraph claims that: “A new service is being offered to more and more communities, and naturally people are using it. The sustained media interest in food banks has acted as a giant advertising campaign.” This is simply untrue. People cannot simply turn up to a food bank and ask for help, they need to be identified as being in need by a healthcare professional or social services or similar, and referred with a form or a voucher. It isn’t, as certain politicians would have you believe, an opportunist desire for free food.

8. Figures from the Trussell Trust show that changes to the benefit system are the most common cause for food bank use in Britain. Nearly a third had been referred after benefits had been delayed, and a further 19% due to their benefits being cut or stopped.

9. 3 in 10 people say they are now struggling to feed themselves and their family because of the rising cost of food.

10. Lord Freud (again) thinks that food banks are a good thing and that local authorities should ‘ramp up support in kind’. Speaking at a recent conference on welfare reform, he said that it is “absolutely appropriate” that charities should provide free food parcels to people hit by benefit cuts and delays.

11. Niall Cooper, the national co-ordinator of Church Action On Poverty, says: “Where are we as a society that people in work are having to turn to food banks? It’s a big question but it does not feel like one the Government wants to answer.”

12. All 152 councils in England have set up welfare assistance schemes to replace the crisis loan and community care grant elements of the social fund, which until April were provided by the DWP. Some schemes offer food vouchers in place of cash assistance, and a number are working in partnership with food banks. Despite 87% of benefit claimants being in work, almost two-thirds of the local council welfare schemes stipulate that working people are not eligible for their help.

13. Nottinghamshire council is proposing to close its welfare assistance scheme in April, and will cease to refer people to food banks or offer additional support.

14. Lord Freud (again!) claims that there is no robust evidence of a link between welfare reform and the rise in food bank use. However over half of the people referred to food banks are there due to delays and cuts in benefits, and benefit sanctions.

15. Today there are more than 400 food banks across Britain, with new ones opening every couple of days.

16. Some food banks now open twice a day in order to meet the number of referrals in their local community. The Storehouse, in Southend, changed its opening times earlier this year to accommodate the growing number of people in need in their community. The Storehouse is an independently run food bank, part of the Vineyard church, and not affiliated with the Trussell Trust.

17. Since April this year the number of people referred to food banks because they can’t afford to feed themselves due to benefit changes has increased. Over half of food bank referrals are due to welfare issues, such as cuts and changes to benefits, delays, and sanctions.

18. A mum of two whose husband is in work was referred to Chiltern food bank for help after the council made a mistake with her housing benefit. “I was really embarrassed at first, but the volunteer at the food bank really boosted my confidence and self esteem. She made me feel like I was worth something.”

19. Food banks don’t just hand out emergency food, they also provide other essentials such as nappies, formula milk and sanitary towels.

20. Food banks do not encourage a cycle of dependency. Molly Hodson from the Trussell Trust says: “Our food banks are different to American and Canadian food banks, they are an emergency service. Where there is a welfare provision, nobody should be at a point where they can’t put food on the table long term. We help people out of poverty by working with local agencies and charities for example if someone has debt problems, we put them in touch with a debt counselling charity. We want to help resolve the issues, and make sure people have a route out of poverty.”

You can still sign the petition at www.change.org/foodbanks – and tweet your MP right now to demand they attend the debate



Check out all the latest News, Sport & Celeb gossip at Mirror.co.uk http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/food-bank-debate-jack-monroes-2937649#ixzz2npOTXUUg
Follow us: @DailyMirror on Twitter | DailyMirror on Facebook

   A further indictment on this awful coalition..Time to get rid

Sassy wrote:OFGS!   In one ear and out the other.

Indeed that is the case here where I am showing how people are ignoring the glaring point being made, others can do this on little, my family had even less, we never had the need for a food bank.

As yet no answer to this point once or how others do this daily on as little

Sassy wrote:OFGS!   In one ear and out the other.

Typical Tory trait.

Again no answer it seems, because nobody has an answer, because people can manage on little money and do not need to go to food banks.

Point being avoided and also Catman as seen this problem was as bad under Labour, thus both being culpable.

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:OFGS!   In one ear and out the other.

Indeed that is the case here where I am showing how people are ignoring the glaring point being made, others can do this on little, my family had even less, we never had the need for a food bank.

As yet no answer to this point once or how others do this daily on as little

The cost of living is much higher now than it was then.

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:OFGS!   In one ear and out the other.

Indeed that is the case here where I am showing how people are ignoring the glaring point being made, others can do this on little, my family had even less, we never had the need for a food bank.

As yet no answer to this point once or how others do this daily on as little

How on earth did your parents manage 9 lots of school uniform not to mention 'normal' clothes?

PhilDidge wrote:Again no answer it seems, because nobody has an answer, because people can manage on little money and do not need to go to food banks.

Point being avoided and also Catman as seen this problem was as bad under Labour, thus both being culpable.

Some people can rely on the support of family or friends and neighbours to get by at times of crisis.

NemsAgain wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Indeed that is the case here where I am showing how people are ignoring the glaring point being made, others can do this on little, my family had even less, we never had the need for a food bank.

As yet no answer to this point once or how others do this daily on as little

How on earth did your parents manage 9 lots of school uniform not to mention 'normal' clothes?

We got what the others had worn, hand me downs!


Only when I got to my to be 10 was things getting better as others had finished Uni and were helping my parents, but before then, we rented a house, which was later condemned, my father used all the money on food, clothing and the bills and rent and even managed to save a little.

We got a council house when I was 13, so again I do know what real poverty is, hence my many points

NemsAgain wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Indeed that is the case here where I am showing how people are ignoring the glaring point being made, others can do this on little, my family had even less, we never had the need for a food bank.

As yet no answer to this point once or how others do this daily on as little

How on earth did your parents manage 9 lots of school uniform not to mention 'normal' clothes?

Never mind 9 lots of bus fares every day to get to school.

Sassy wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

How on earth did your parents manage 9 lots of school uniform not to mention 'normal' clothes?

Never mind 9 lots of bus fares every day to get to school.

We walked, 3 miles everyday, either to church or school!

Catman wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:Again no answer it seems, because nobody has an answer, because people can manage on little money and do not need to go to food banks.

Point being avoided and also Catman as seen this problem was as bad under Labour, thus both being culpable.

Some people can rely on the support of family or friends and neighbours to get by at times of crisis.

You said that already, I am talking about people who don't and still manange

PhilDidge wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

How on earth did your parents manage 9 lots of school uniform not to mention 'normal' clothes?

We got what the others had worn, hand me downs!


Only when I got to my to be 10 was things getting better as others had finished Uni and were helping my parents, but before then, we rented a house, which was later condemned, my father used all the money on food, clothing and the bills and rent and even managed to save a little.

We got a council house when I was 13, so again I do know what real poverty is, hence my many points

Did you have school uniforms that you were only allowed to buy from certain shops?

Was the school near enough for you to walk to.

Did you have a coal fire and there didn't have to pay huge gas bill as we do today?

Did you have to supply books for school as they do today?

In fact the only thing free I got was school dinners

PhilDidge wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

How on earth did your parents manage 9 lots of school uniform not to mention 'normal' clothes?

We got what the others had worn, hand me downs!


Only when I got to my to be 10 was things getting better as others had finished Uni and were helping my parents, but before then, we rented a house, which was later condemned, my father used all the money on food, clothing and the bills and rent and even managed to save a little.

We got a council house when I was 13, so again I do know what real poverty is, hence my many points

How did your parents afford uni fees?
What happens if you have one two children one of each? £ 40 a school blazer now.

Did you?

My kids wore hand me downs, I bought uniforms from cheap shops, these days schools have set shops you have to buy the uniform from.

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

We got what the others had worn, hand me downs!


Only when I got to my to be 10 was things getting better as others had finished Uni and were helping my parents, but before then, we rented a house, which was later condemned, my father used all the money on food, clothing and the bills and rent and even managed to save a little.

We got a council house when I was 13, so again I do know what real poverty is, hence my many points

Did you have school uniforms that you were only allowed to buy from certain shops?

Was the school near enough for you to walk to.

Did you have a coal fire and there didn't have to pay huge gas bill as we do today?

Already answered, 3 miles the school and the church was from our house.

We had no central heating or a coal fire, we had electricity, I remember my dad getting a paraffin heater and that was it.

What else would you like to know about real poverty?

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:

Did you have school uniforms that you were only allowed to buy from certain shops?

Was the school near enough for you to walk to.

Did you have a coal fire and there didn't have to pay huge gas bill as we do today?

Already answered, 3 miles the school and the church was from our house.

We had no central heating or a coal fire, we had electricity, I remember my dad getting a paraffin heater and that was it.

What else would you like to know about real poverty?

They did get eight lots of family allowance though?

9 kids, £200 a uniform, £1800. Do you think your Dad would have been able to manage that on minimum wages or zero hours contract when there were weeks he didn't get paid?

PhilDidge wrote:

Catman wrote:

Some people can rely on the support of family or friends and neighbours to get by at times of crisis.

You said that already, I am talking about people who don't and still manange

How do you know that though?

NemsAgain wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

We got what the others had worn, hand me downs!


Only when I got to my to be 10 was things getting better as others had finished Uni and were helping my parents, but before then, we rented a house, which was later condemned, my father used all the money on food, clothing and the bills and rent and even managed to save a little.

We got a council house when I was 13, so again I do know what real poverty is, hence my many points

How did your parents afford uni fees?
What happens if you have one two children one of each? £ 40 a school blazer now.

Uni fees?????



All my siblings worked when they could, I have no idea how they paid I would have to ask.

I told you my parents were good with their money, my father did work but had to feed 10 children and they saved so they can buy what was needed for school.

Is this some inquisition?

Seriously bring it on, none of you have a clue of real poverty.

NemsAgain wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:


Already answered, 3 miles the school and the church was from our house.

We had no central heating or a coal fire, we had electricity, I remember my dad getting a paraffin heater and that was it.

What else would you like to know about real poverty?

They did get eight lots of family allowance though?

You look up child allowance back in the 1970's and see how much it was

You think you are the only person who knows about real poverty Didge. You think you are the only person who grew up with ice on the windows etc.

If you have ice on the windows, you normally had mould. You know how bad that is for kids?

Sassy wrote:9 kids, £200 a uniform, £1800.   Do you think your Dad would have been able to manage that on minimum wages or zero hours contract when there were weeks he didn't get paid?

in 1970, I dont think so!

PhilDidge wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

They did get eight lots of family allowance though?

You look up child allowance back in the 1970's and see how much it was

Yea, but I used to feed my kids and my husband and I on £5 a week in the seventies, that was five of us, I wonder what the bill would be now?

Sassy wrote:You think you are the only person who knows about real poverty Didge.   You think you are the only person who grew up with ice on the windows etc.

If you have ice on the windows, you normally had mould.   You know how bad that is for kids?

I have lived real poverty, even at your underhanded insulting attempts to try and mock that I have not, to be honest you thus have no respect for poverty with the questions you have asked

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:9 kids, £200 a uniform, £1800.   Do you think your Dad would have been able to manage that on minimum wages or zero hours contract when there were weeks he didn't get paid?

in 1970, I dont think so!

No Didge, NOW!!!!! If he was on minimum wage NOW, or zero hours never knowing when the next payday was NOW!

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:You think you are the only person who knows about real poverty Didge.   You think you are the only person who grew up with ice on the windows etc.

If you have ice on the windows, you normally had mould.   You know how bad that is for kids?

I have lived real poverty, even at your underhanded insulting attempts to try and mock that I have not, to be honest you thus have no respect for poverty with the questions you have asked

I never said you hadn't, I said you were not the only one.

I am talking about back then when there was no real help, not now, not zero contract hours and we managed to pull through, do not insult the memory of my father.

You have not the first clue about real poverty

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:You think you are the only person who knows about real poverty Didge.   You think you are the only person who grew up with ice on the windows etc.

If you have ice on the windows, you normally had mould.   You know how bad that is for kids?

I have lived real poverty, even at your underhanded insulting attempts to try and mock that I have not, to be honest you thus have no respect for poverty with the questions you have asked

No one is disrespecting any thing and remember you chose to post personal info
THe fact is Didge Im sure you knew hardship and that makes your attitude to those in hardship today difficult to understand .

Really, then why the 20 question then Nems, on just about everything as if to try and catch me out?

I find that in poor taste!

PhilDidge wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

They did get eight lots of family allowance though?

You look up child allowance back in the 1970's and see how much it was

Look up the food prices back in the 1970's and see how much they were!

I know how much they were back then Catman and also wages were far less back then also and there was little to help people back then, than there is today.
People think it is harder today, sorry it was much harder in the past

PhilDidge wrote:I am talking about back then when there was no real help, not now, not zero contract hours and we managed to pull through, do not insult the memory of my father.

You have not the first clue about real poverty

I don't have a clue about real poverty? Really

I lived with my grandparents on a very old, very run down council estate in Wandsworth in London. No central heating, in fact the only heating was a coal fire in the dining room/lounge that was about 10 by 10. The kitchen was 6 by 6, no bathroom, the bath was in the kitchen with a let down top as a work top, used up most of the kitchen, could just about fit in a cooker and a sink. The coal hole was in the tiny hall, which has a loo by the front door which you could just about turn round in. The only other room was the bedroom that my Nan and Grandad had, no heating, I slept on the settee. My Grandad worked as a foreman for a building company until he was 75, getting up every day at 4. He could never afford to retire. My Nan was the cook at Chelsea football club and a char lady. They had the hardest life imaginable and I wouldn't wish that on anyone. We are supposed to have come long past that, we are not supposed to going back to the Workhouse and the 'Deserving Poor' of Victorian times. Having poverty in your past is not a badge of honour, it's something you are supposed to learn from and want better for people.

PhilDidge wrote:I know how much they were back then Catman and also wages were far less back then also and there was little to help people back then, than there is today.
People think it is harder today, sorry it was much harder in the past

No it wasn't, I've lived through both. In relation to what came in with a normal wage, what went out was far less.

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:I am talking about back then when there was no real help, not now, not zero contract hours and we managed to pull through, do not insult the memory of my father.

You have not the first clue about real poverty

I don't have a clue about real poverty?   Really

I lived with my grandparents on a very old, very run down council estate in Wandsworth in London.   No central heating, in fact the only heating was a coal fire in the dining room/lounge that was about 10 by 10.   The kitchen was 6 by 6, no bathroom, the bath was in the kitchen with a let down top as a work top, used up most of the kitchen, could just about fit in a cooker and a sink.   The coal hole was in the tiny hall, which has a loo by the front door which you could just about turn round in.   The only other room was the bedroom that my Nan and Grandad had, no heating, I slept on the settee.   My Grandad worked as a foreman for a building company until he was 75, getting up every day at 4.   He could never afford to retire.   My Nan was the cook at Chelsea football club and a char lady.   They had the hardest life imaginable and I wouldn't wish that on anyone.   We are supposed to have come long past that, we are not supposed to going back to the Workhouse and the 'Deserving Poor' of Victorian times.      Having poverty in your past is not a badge of honour, it's something you are supposed to learn from and want better for people.

So why the 20 questions to me?

Was it nice of me to say you did not know real poverty after all these questions interrogating me when you did?

You see you clearly did not believe me by the inquisition questions, of which I did not subject you too, did I? You have explained what you went through and I accept that, maybe you should show some of the same courtesy to me, and believing I did go through poverty but instead you were poor in your questions and so in the end I did the same. If you are not going to take what I have gone through in life as serious and in my view mock, then I will give the same respect back. .

Point taken?

I hope the lesson has been learnt on this now

Again my view point which has not been answered is simple, I m not disputing that there are "genuine" people out there that need help. My view point is people can and do manage without this help in the same positions of those seeking this help. Thus there is a bigger picture here as to why some are going to food banks and it is not as clear cut as some of you are trying to make out. Even the fullfact link shows an issue going way back

PhilDidge wrote:Really, then why the 20 question then Nems, on just about everything as if to try and catch me out?

I find that in poor taste!

Because you did not seem to grasp that things are very different now from the 1970s

What? I don't give a flying f..k what fullfact says. Your father obviously did a great job, but if he was in the same situation today on minimum wage, etc he simply would not be able to do it. There are different requirements now, like school uniform etc, the cost of living is much much higher in relation to wages. It is not the same world and you can't think that because someone managed then they would manage now.

NemsAgain wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:Really, then why the 20 question then Nems, on just about everything as if to try and catch me out?

I find that in poor taste!

Because you did  not seem to grasp that things are very different now from the 1970s

I do grasp them Nems, they were way harder back then, now you have all kinds of support and benefits for people for which you did not have anywhere near the same back then.
So what you and sassy did was uncalled for, I take your view point in what you have gone through or do today to help, I did not question it did I?

Sorry that was poor Nems

Sassy wrote:What?   I don't give a flying f..k what fullfact says.   Your father obviously did a great job, but if he was in the same situation today on minimum wage, etc he simply would not be able to do it.   There are different requirements now, like school uniform etc, the cost of living is much much higher in relation to wages.   It is not the same world and you can't think that because someone managed then they would manage now.  

he would do even better today, because he was very sensible with his money just as there are others out there doing exactly the same and yes I can place comparisons because I know he would have done even better with the benefits we would have benefited from today. So would he have been worse off today, no way, we would have been way better off, in a council place with heating You seriously cannot tell me we would be worse off

://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: ://?roflmao?/: 

Right, I had my kids in the 70s, we bought a house, it cost £6,000. My husband had a very normal job and he was earning £4,000 a year. Our food bill a week was about £5, our mortgage was about £50 a month, gas and electric were about £15 each a quarter, rates about £10 a month. See the difference as a percentage of income?

Sassy wrote:Right, I had my kids in the 70s, we bought a house, it cost £6,000.   My husband had a very normal job and he was earning £4,000 a year.   Our food bill a week was about £5, our mortgage was about £50 a month, gas and electric were about £15 each a quarter, rates about £10 a month.   See the difference as a percentage of income?

Yes i do thanks, we had to rent a place, of which again was later condemned, which again might give you a clue to its condition and my father when I was very young did two jobs just so we could have food on the table.
There is no way in this day and age my family would be worse off, a family of 12 having to rent an accommodation or the child and tax benefits my family would receive with my father working.

There is no way on hell we would be worse off today!

And PS, NOBODY has mocked your family or their experience or doubted it.

You just don't seem to grasp that it is not the same now and the same rules don't apply. Christ, I should be the one living in the past at my age, not you.

Sassy wrote:And PS, NOBODY has mocked your family or their experience or doubted it.    

You just don't seem to grasp that it is not the same now and the same rules don't apply.   Christ, I should be the one living in the past at my age, not you.

Sorry you tried to with the poor countless questions, please spare me any excuses.

I am not living in the past, I have gone on asking for an explanation to something which nobody has yet been able to provide, we have even had a another poster retired who lives on a small amount of money each week and manages well.

Again the belief surrounding many people needing to use food banks is in question, as my view is if people are partly to blame with some of them for being irresponsible with money, how others manage with the same income and do not need to has not been answered, it has been glossed over. If all this thread was about was to score political points, it really was an own goal, as seen with the facts I presented, though no thing like this should be used as a political tool, being the most obvious point being missed when all governments are culpable!

What? Questioning you is mocking you? Oh right, nobody is allowed to disagree and question you, is that it. Your word is law and we must agree with everything you say? So why do you come on a forum to debate then Didge if nobody is allowed to question you when you state something that we disagree with to the bottom of our souls.

So when you keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again we are just supposed to say 'ok Didge, you have said it so many time we know it's right' even when we know it's totally wrong?

Don't be ridiculous. Man up and debate, don't go into,' oh they are being mean to me' mode, it's beneath you.

PhilDidge wrote:

NemsAgain wrote:

Because you did  not seem to grasp that things are very different now from the 1970s

I do grasp them Nems, they were way harder back then, now you have all kinds of support and benefits for people for which you did not have anywhere near the same back then.
So what you and sassy did was uncalled for, I take your view point in what you have gone through or do today to help, I did not question it did I?

Sorry that was poor Nems

Didge, you put personal info up for debate.

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:And PS, NOBODY has mocked your family or their experience or doubted it.    

You just don't seem to grasp that it is not the same now and the same rules don't apply.   Christ, I should be the one living in the past at my age, not you.

Sorry you tried to with the poor countless questions, please spare me any excuses.

I am not living in the past, I have gone on asking for an explanation to something which nobody has yet been able to provide, we have even had a another poster retired who lives on a small amount of money each week and manages well.

Again the belief surrounding many people needing to use food banks is in question, as my view is if people are partly to blame with some of them for being irresponsible with money, how others manage with the same income and do not need to has not been answered, it has been glossed over. If all this thread was about was to score political points, it really was an own goal, as seen with the facts I presented, though no thing like this should be used as a political tool, being the most obvious point being missed when all governments are culpable!

Yes it has, you just haven't read or listened. Just because you have the same amount of money coming in, does not mean you have the same outgoings, or the same emergencies, or the same conditions, You just won't accept that, it doesn't make you right, it means for some reason you refuse to understand it.

Sassy wrote:What?   Questioning you is mocking you?   Oh right, nobody is allowed to disagree and question you, is that it.   Your word is law and we must agree with everything you say?   So why do you come on a forum to debate then Didge if nobody is allowed to question you when you state something that we disagree with to the bottom of our souls.

So when you keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again we are just supposed to say 'ok Didge, you have said it so many time we know it's right' even when we know it's totally wrong?  

Don't be ridiculous.   Man up and debate, don't go into,' oh they are being mean to me' mode, it's beneath you.

Even the RW say the same thing about him!   

Sassy wrote:

PhilDidge wrote:

Sorry you tried to with the poor countless questions, please spare me any excuses.

I am not living in the past, I have gone on asking for an explanation to something which nobody has yet been able to provide, we have even had a another poster retired who lives on a small amount of money each week and manages well.

Again the belief surrounding many people needing to use food banks is in question, as my view is if people are partly to blame with some of them for being irresponsible with money, how others manage with the same income and do not need to has not been answered, it has been glossed over. If all this thread was about was to score political points, it really was an own goal, as seen with the facts I presented, though no thing like this should be used as a political tool, being the most obvious point being missed when all governments are culpable!

Yes it has, you just haven't read or listened.   Just because you have the same amount of money coming in, does not mean you have the same outgoings, or the same emergencies, or the same conditions,   You just won't accept that, it doesn't make you right, it means for some reason you refuse to understand it.

Again you are talking about different situations.

Thus that is not an answer.

We are talking about people in the same situation.

Try again

PhilDidge wrote:

Sassy wrote:And PS, NOBODY has mocked your family or their experience or doubted it.    

You just don't seem to grasp that it is not the same now and the same rules don't apply.   Christ, I should be the one living in the past at my age, not you.

Sorry you tried to with the poor countless questions, please spare me any excuses.

I am not living in the past, I have gone on asking for an explanation to something which nobody has yet been able to provide, we have even had a another poster retired who lives on a small amount of money each week and manages well.

Again the belief surrounding many people needing to use food banks is in question, as my view is if people are partly to blame with some of them for being irresponsible with money, how others manage with the same income and do not need to has not been answered, it has been glossed over. If all this thread was about was to score political points, it really was an own goal, as seen with the facts I presented, though no thing like this should be used as a political tool, being the most obvious point being missed when all governments are culpable!

The purpose of this thread was to debate the food bank crisis!   

Sassy wrote:What?   Questioning you is mocking you?   Oh right, nobody is allowed to disagree and question you, is that it.   Your word is law and we must agree with everything you say?   So why do you come on a forum to debate then Didge if nobody is allowed to question you when you state something that we disagree with to the bottom of our souls.

So when you keep repeating the same thing over and over and over again we are just supposed to say 'ok Didge, you have said it so many time we know it's right' even when we know it's totally wrong?  

Don't be ridiculous.   Man up and debate, don't go into,' oh they are being mean to me' mode, it's beneath you.

I seem to remember you saying to take people what they have experienced at face value, clearly that is not the case when you want to question then, contradiction alert.

You can disagree all you like, but to not take what someone has experienced at face value is poor when you made a big deal of this yourself did you not?



Double standards