Following the publication of my Blog Skiver or Striver, the Methodist Recorder asked me to write an article based on the blog. This was published on 24th January. But as the Recorder isn't available on line I've been asked to publish the article via my blog. So here it is!
Are you a Skiver or a Striver? These two words have featured widely in the tabloid press and in the speeches of politicians recently as the debate about the fairness of the benefit cap continued.
If you’ve missed these terms, put simply the Skivers might be described as those who rely on benefits. And the Strivers are those who work.
But the trouble with labels like this is that life isn’t as simple.
The Skivers label implies that all those on benefits are workshy or perhaps on the fiddle. Whereas the reality is that some people receive benefits they are entitled to because they work in low paid jobs. And very few benefit claimants are fraudulent.
Prior to entering ministry I spent much of my working life in the banking sector. But during the 4 years I was training for ministry part time, I worked for a local council as the manager of a benefit fraud investigation team. It was our job to investigate people suspected of receiving benefit illegally and bring prosecutions. Each year we identified around 100 people in our borough who were claiming fraudulently. And this fraud amounted to perhaps a couple of hundred thousand pounds in our area. Nationally, I’ve seen it estimated that benefit fraud costs between £1billion and £3 billion each year.
That’s a lot of money. And people need to be stopped from claiming benefits they are not entitled to. But in 2010 (the last figures I’ve found) the total benefit claim for the country was £148 billion.
So here’s the uncomfortable truth. Very few people receiving benefits are skivers on the fiddle. And most people who are unemployed would prefer to be in work, not least, because in many cases, they’d be better off. I’m sure the 800 people recently made redundant from Honda in Swindon for example, aren’t skivers. But as many of those will soon be claiming benefits, some newspapers and politicians would regard them as skivers.
So Skivers aren’t as easy to identify after all. Whereas it is easy to spot the Strivers. They’re those who work hard to earn an honest crust. Unfortunately though, I think some of the apparent Strivers are in fact Skivers, albeit in a different way.
As the benefit cap debate was happening, another news item caught my eye although it didn’t get much publicity.
Accountancy firm BDO published a report in which they estimated that £10 billion a year in VAT was being lost, of which £3.3 billion was down to VAT fraud. In the same report HM Revenue & Customs was quoted as estimating that the total tax gap each year is £32bn. That is, the tax not paid as corporation tax, VAT and by individuals in the UK amounts to £32 billion a year.
Meanwhile those Strivers at the bank Goldman Sachs suggested they would not pay out annual bonuses in March as usual but would wait until April when the top rate of income tax in the UK fell to 45%.
Not all Strivers strive as hard as some would have us think.
As the saying goes “What would Jesus do?” A search of the Bible shows that Jesus was silent on the matter of multinational companies avoiding paying corporation tax. (Though he did say people were to pay just taxes.) And he said nothing about people on benefits.
We know Jesus had plenty to say about rich people and poor people. A quick look in a concordance shows over 20 references by Jesus to the poor and how they should be treated. There are over 20 references to rich and riches and how the rich should use their wealth. So we can draw a pretty good idea about what Jesus’ feelings would be about our situation today. Jesus’ stance would be that the poor must be cared for, and the rich should use their money wisely and justly to assist.
Terms like Skiver and Striver or indeed Pleb or Toff, make good copy for tabloid newspapers and useful sound bites for politicians. But such labels only demonise people and cause division.
My concordance also has no references to Skivers and Strivers but then again Jesus would not have used those terms as he showed respect to all people. Jesus was not afraid to criticise people he disagreed with or challenge values he disagreed with, but he did so by avoiding insults (though I suspect the Pharisees might see things differently!)
Jesus’ kingdom is a place where all people are accepted for who they are whatever their status and where all people act fairly and justly. Jesus’ kingdom has no place for insults. The values of the Kingdom mean that people should only claim benefits they are entitled to and those benefits are set at a fair level. And people will pay the taxes they (and their companies) are supposed to pay and not seeking ways to avoid taxes.
600 or so years before Jesus the Prophet Micah wrote these words:
Micah 6:8 The Message
8 But he’s already made it plain how to live, what to do,
what GOD is looking for in men and women.
It’s quite simple: Do what is fair and just to your neighbour,
be compassionate and loyal in your love,
And don’t take yourself too seriously—
take God seriously.
Wise words for Strivers and Skivers, plebs and toffs, alike.
Tuesday 29 January 2013
Sunday 27 January 2013
Setting the oppressed free
"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free”
Luke 4: 18 – 19
It has been said that the words Jesus quoted from Isaiah were his Purpose, or his Mission Statement, or the Agenda for his ministry.
I think that traditionally the Methodist Church in this country and other countries has tried to heed to Jesus’ agenda. From the earliest days John Wesley felt it was important for Christians to be concerned for the poor and marginalised hence why the New Room in Bristol not only served as a chapel but as a dispensary and clinic for the sick and a school. Hence why Wesley went to where the marginalised were; the coal miners at Kingswood or the tin miners of Cornwall for example.
But we in this denomination should not be self-righteous. For Jesus’ words are challenging for all of us who are not amongst the poor, the marginalised, the oppressed or imprisoned in our society. And if we really hear Jesus’ words, and really listen to them, we can begin to feel threatened as the words mean we’ll need to change. The words are a challenge to each of us.
The story is told of a Franciscan monk in Australia assigned to be the guide and personal assistant to Mother Teresa when she visited New South Wales. Thrilled and excited at the prospect of being so close to this great woman, he dreamed of how much he would learn from her and what they would talk about. But during her visit, he became frustrated. Although he was constantly near her, the friar never had the opportunity to say one word to Mother Teresa. There were always other people for her to meet.
Finally, her tour was over, and she was due to fly to New Guinea. In desperation, the Franciscan friar spoke to Mother Teresa: ”If I pay my own fare to New Guinea, can I sit next to you on the plane so I can talk to you and learn from you?” Mother Teresa looked at him. “You have enough money to pay airfare to New Guinea?” she asked.
“Yes,” he replied eagerly. "Then give that money to the poor," she said. "You'll learn more from that than anything I can tell you." Mother Teresa understood that Jesus' ministry was to the poor and she made it hers as well. She knew that they more than anyone else needed good news.
Hearing Jesus’ agenda we are reminded how he had a great affinity with the poor or perhaps a better way of putting it is a great love for the poor. And in Luke’s gospel the poor feature more prominently than in the other gospels.
So it is right that we should focus on the poor. But whilst the poor feature first, let’s not forget that in Jesus’ agenda other vulnerable people in society feature too
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free,
And the fundamental part of our Christian DNA means we are to consider all of these and be prepared to help them and / or speak up for them.
And those words come as an important reminder to us on how we must react to those who are oppressed and to their oppressors – especially on Holocaust Memorial Day. The day reminds us of the horror of the Nazi Holocaust during World War Two when millions of Jews perished. But let’s not forget the Nazis systematically imprisoned, oppressed and murdered others too – Gypsies, Communists, Jehovah’s Witnesses and over 90,000 homosexuals.
70 years on thankfully homosexuals are not oppressed in most countries as they once were. Though that is not true everywhere. In many African countries for example homosexuality can lead to being murdered or executed. And in this country, although there is a much greater tolerance of homosexuality than there once was, homophobia is still present amongst some.
I think I have mentioned before a group on the Internet I belong to called “Red Letter Christians”. http://www.redletterchristians.org/
The phrase was first used by a radio journalist interviewing American theologian Jim Wallis. The interviewer was trying to pigeonhole Wallis as a certain type of Christian – Evangelical, Liberal or Charismatic. Having failed to do so, the journalist said to Wallis “So you’re one of those Red Letter Christians – you know – the ones who are really into the verses of the Bible that are in red letters.” Wallis agreed he was.
In some versions of the Bible, the words spoken by Jesus are printed in red. So Red Letter Christians seek to follow the teachings of Jesus and are committed to living out the things that Jesus taught. Sounds good to me!
One of the main voices in the Red Letter Christian movement is Tony Campolo. His most recent book is called “Red Letter Christians – living the words of Jesus no matter what the cost”.
In one section of the book he sets out what he considers to be Red Letter Living. In other words, how we should engage with some of the topics we face today using the Red Letters as our way of approach. The topics he covers include Families, Racism, Women and Environmentalism. And in this section he has a chapter on Homosexuality.
In the chapter on Homosexuality he discusses the topic with his co-author Shane Claiborne. And they discuss whether homosexuality is a sin. Campolo says a helpful way of thinking about what is sinful is whether something dehumanises. And by dehumanise I believe Campolo means something that goes away from what God would like humans beings to be or to do. So for example lying is sinful as it dehumanises. Adultery too dehumanises. Sin, Campolo says, is not about the violation of this law or that law. It is about whether an act dehumanises.
He points out that a marriage can be sinful if say the husband dehumanises the wife by beating her.
Using his definition of sin, Campolo concludes that he does not regard being homosexual as sinful. Or being in a homosexual relationship as sinful. Provided that relationship does not dehumanise those involved. In other words, if no one is harmed or exploited in a homosexual relationship it can’t be harmful.
“Regardless of what differences Christians may have on the subject of homosexuality, there should be agreement that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people are neighbours who, according to the red letters of the Bible, we are to love as we love ourselves.”
Red Letter Christians – living the words of Jesus no matter what the cost”. Page 135.
I have carefully avoided speaking from the pulpit on the topic of gay marriage. Partly because it can be a difficult issue for some and, if truth be told, also because I really do not know what God is saying to me on the topic.
It is a topic I wrestle with. On the one hand we have Bible teaching and 2,000 years of Church tradition that suggest it would be wrong to allow gay marriage. But then on the other hand we have Bible teaching and Church tradition that makes it clear we are to “Love our neighbour” and “Set the oppressed free”
Now whether that means allowing gay marriage is open for debate. And, as it stands, I feel my own conscience is telling me to oppose gay marriage - IN CHURCH. However, personally I do not have a problem with the state marrying gay couples and I think I am at a stage where I would feel comfortable blessing a gay couple in church were I allowed to do so. Though under current Methodist discipline this is not possible.
But whilst Christians have been right to express our views on gay marriage I have felt very uncomfortable with the way this has been done – especially by some in the Church of England and Catholic churches. There has seemed a lack of love.
Pastor Martin Niemoeller was a Protestant pastor imprisoned in Germany during the Second World War for speaking out against the injustices of the Nazi regime. After the war he expressed regret over how he had not done more to oppose the Nazis. In fact for a while he’d been welcomed the Nazis as he was opposed to Communism. Though he soon changed his views. He wrote these words:
“First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”
It is clear that as Christians we are called
to proclaim good news to the poor.
to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
To give a voice for those without a voice; to speak out against injustice of all kinds and to show love to all our neighbours.
Eli Wiesel, is a renowned Jewish theologian and prolific author. In his book, All Rivers Run To The Sea he tells of his family, living in Hungary during the dark days of the WWII. His family was waiting for their time to come, for the Nazis to arrive at their door and take them to the concentration camp.
He tells about a peasant woman by the name of Maria. Maria was almost like a member of the family. She was a Christian. During the early years of the war she continued to visit them, but eventually non-Jews were no longer allowed entrance to the ghettos. That did not deter Maria. She found her way through the barbed wire and she came anyway, bringing the Wiesels fruits, vegetables, and cheese.
One day she came knocking at their door. There was a cabin that she had up in the hills. She wanted to take the children, of which Eli was one, and hide them there before the SS came. They decided after much debate to stay together as a family, although they were deeply moved at this gesture. He writes of her:
Dear Maria. If other Christians had acted like her, the trains rolling toward the unknown would have been less crowded. If priests and pastors had raised their voices, if the Vatican had broken its silence, the enemy's hand would not have been so free. But most thought only of themselves. A Jewish home was barely emptied of its inhabitants before they descended like vultures.
I think of Maria often, with affection and gratitude, and with wonder as well. This simple, uneducated woman stood taller that the city's intellectuals, dignitaries and clergy. My father had many acquaintances and even friends in the Christian community, not one of them showed the strength of character of this peasant woman. Of what value was their faith, their education, their social position, if it did not arouse their love. It was a simple and devout Christian woman who saved the town's honour.
St Paul said If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging symbol. If I have prophetic powers and a faith so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give everything I have to the poor, but have not love, I am nothing.
to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners
and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free”
Luke 4: 18 – 19
It has been said that the words Jesus quoted from Isaiah were his Purpose, or his Mission Statement, or the Agenda for his ministry.
I think that traditionally the Methodist Church in this country and other countries has tried to heed to Jesus’ agenda. From the earliest days John Wesley felt it was important for Christians to be concerned for the poor and marginalised hence why the New Room in Bristol not only served as a chapel but as a dispensary and clinic for the sick and a school. Hence why Wesley went to where the marginalised were; the coal miners at Kingswood or the tin miners of Cornwall for example.
But we in this denomination should not be self-righteous. For Jesus’ words are challenging for all of us who are not amongst the poor, the marginalised, the oppressed or imprisoned in our society. And if we really hear Jesus’ words, and really listen to them, we can begin to feel threatened as the words mean we’ll need to change. The words are a challenge to each of us.
The story is told of a Franciscan monk in Australia assigned to be the guide and personal assistant to Mother Teresa when she visited New South Wales. Thrilled and excited at the prospect of being so close to this great woman, he dreamed of how much he would learn from her and what they would talk about. But during her visit, he became frustrated. Although he was constantly near her, the friar never had the opportunity to say one word to Mother Teresa. There were always other people for her to meet.
Finally, her tour was over, and she was due to fly to New Guinea. In desperation, the Franciscan friar spoke to Mother Teresa: ”If I pay my own fare to New Guinea, can I sit next to you on the plane so I can talk to you and learn from you?” Mother Teresa looked at him. “You have enough money to pay airfare to New Guinea?” she asked.
“Yes,” he replied eagerly. "Then give that money to the poor," she said. "You'll learn more from that than anything I can tell you." Mother Teresa understood that Jesus' ministry was to the poor and she made it hers as well. She knew that they more than anyone else needed good news.
Hearing Jesus’ agenda we are reminded how he had a great affinity with the poor or perhaps a better way of putting it is a great love for the poor. And in Luke’s gospel the poor feature more prominently than in the other gospels.
So it is right that we should focus on the poor. But whilst the poor feature first, let’s not forget that in Jesus’ agenda other vulnerable people in society feature too
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free,
And the fundamental part of our Christian DNA means we are to consider all of these and be prepared to help them and / or speak up for them.
And those words come as an important reminder to us on how we must react to those who are oppressed and to their oppressors – especially on Holocaust Memorial Day. The day reminds us of the horror of the Nazi Holocaust during World War Two when millions of Jews perished. But let’s not forget the Nazis systematically imprisoned, oppressed and murdered others too – Gypsies, Communists, Jehovah’s Witnesses and over 90,000 homosexuals.
70 years on thankfully homosexuals are not oppressed in most countries as they once were. Though that is not true everywhere. In many African countries for example homosexuality can lead to being murdered or executed. And in this country, although there is a much greater tolerance of homosexuality than there once was, homophobia is still present amongst some.
I think I have mentioned before a group on the Internet I belong to called “Red Letter Christians”. http://www.redletterchristians.org/
The phrase was first used by a radio journalist interviewing American theologian Jim Wallis. The interviewer was trying to pigeonhole Wallis as a certain type of Christian – Evangelical, Liberal or Charismatic. Having failed to do so, the journalist said to Wallis “So you’re one of those Red Letter Christians – you know – the ones who are really into the verses of the Bible that are in red letters.” Wallis agreed he was.
In some versions of the Bible, the words spoken by Jesus are printed in red. So Red Letter Christians seek to follow the teachings of Jesus and are committed to living out the things that Jesus taught. Sounds good to me!
One of the main voices in the Red Letter Christian movement is Tony Campolo. His most recent book is called “Red Letter Christians – living the words of Jesus no matter what the cost”.
In one section of the book he sets out what he considers to be Red Letter Living. In other words, how we should engage with some of the topics we face today using the Red Letters as our way of approach. The topics he covers include Families, Racism, Women and Environmentalism. And in this section he has a chapter on Homosexuality.
In the chapter on Homosexuality he discusses the topic with his co-author Shane Claiborne. And they discuss whether homosexuality is a sin. Campolo says a helpful way of thinking about what is sinful is whether something dehumanises. And by dehumanise I believe Campolo means something that goes away from what God would like humans beings to be or to do. So for example lying is sinful as it dehumanises. Adultery too dehumanises. Sin, Campolo says, is not about the violation of this law or that law. It is about whether an act dehumanises.
He points out that a marriage can be sinful if say the husband dehumanises the wife by beating her.
Using his definition of sin, Campolo concludes that he does not regard being homosexual as sinful. Or being in a homosexual relationship as sinful. Provided that relationship does not dehumanise those involved. In other words, if no one is harmed or exploited in a homosexual relationship it can’t be harmful.
“Regardless of what differences Christians may have on the subject of homosexuality, there should be agreement that gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people are neighbours who, according to the red letters of the Bible, we are to love as we love ourselves.”
Red Letter Christians – living the words of Jesus no matter what the cost”. Page 135.
I have carefully avoided speaking from the pulpit on the topic of gay marriage. Partly because it can be a difficult issue for some and, if truth be told, also because I really do not know what God is saying to me on the topic.
It is a topic I wrestle with. On the one hand we have Bible teaching and 2,000 years of Church tradition that suggest it would be wrong to allow gay marriage. But then on the other hand we have Bible teaching and Church tradition that makes it clear we are to “Love our neighbour” and “Set the oppressed free”
Now whether that means allowing gay marriage is open for debate. And, as it stands, I feel my own conscience is telling me to oppose gay marriage - IN CHURCH. However, personally I do not have a problem with the state marrying gay couples and I think I am at a stage where I would feel comfortable blessing a gay couple in church were I allowed to do so. Though under current Methodist discipline this is not possible.
But whilst Christians have been right to express our views on gay marriage I have felt very uncomfortable with the way this has been done – especially by some in the Church of England and Catholic churches. There has seemed a lack of love.
Pastor Martin Niemoeller was a Protestant pastor imprisoned in Germany during the Second World War for speaking out against the injustices of the Nazi regime. After the war he expressed regret over how he had not done more to oppose the Nazis. In fact for a while he’d been welcomed the Nazis as he was opposed to Communism. Though he soon changed his views. He wrote these words:
“First they came for the Communists, but I was not a Communist so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Socialists and the Trade Unionists, but I was neither, so I did not speak out. Then they came for the Jews, but I was not a Jew so I did not speak out. And when they came for me, there was no one left to speak out for me.”
It is clear that as Christians we are called
to proclaim good news to the poor.
to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind,
to set the oppressed free,
To give a voice for those without a voice; to speak out against injustice of all kinds and to show love to all our neighbours.
Eli Wiesel, is a renowned Jewish theologian and prolific author. In his book, All Rivers Run To The Sea he tells of his family, living in Hungary during the dark days of the WWII. His family was waiting for their time to come, for the Nazis to arrive at their door and take them to the concentration camp.
He tells about a peasant woman by the name of Maria. Maria was almost like a member of the family. She was a Christian. During the early years of the war she continued to visit them, but eventually non-Jews were no longer allowed entrance to the ghettos. That did not deter Maria. She found her way through the barbed wire and she came anyway, bringing the Wiesels fruits, vegetables, and cheese.
One day she came knocking at their door. There was a cabin that she had up in the hills. She wanted to take the children, of which Eli was one, and hide them there before the SS came. They decided after much debate to stay together as a family, although they were deeply moved at this gesture. He writes of her:
Dear Maria. If other Christians had acted like her, the trains rolling toward the unknown would have been less crowded. If priests and pastors had raised their voices, if the Vatican had broken its silence, the enemy's hand would not have been so free. But most thought only of themselves. A Jewish home was barely emptied of its inhabitants before they descended like vultures.
I think of Maria often, with affection and gratitude, and with wonder as well. This simple, uneducated woman stood taller that the city's intellectuals, dignitaries and clergy. My father had many acquaintances and even friends in the Christian community, not one of them showed the strength of character of this peasant woman. Of what value was their faith, their education, their social position, if it did not arouse their love. It was a simple and devout Christian woman who saved the town's honour.
St Paul said If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am a noisy gong or a clanging symbol. If I have prophetic powers and a faith so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. If I give everything I have to the poor, but have not love, I am nothing.
Sunday 13 January 2013
Are you a Skiver or a Striver?
Are you a Skiver or a Striver? These two words have featured widely in the tabloid press and in the speeches of politicians over the last week. As the debate about the fairness of benefit cap continued.
Put simply the Skivers might be described are those who rely on benefits. And the Strivers are those who work.
But the trouble with labels like this is that life isn’t as simple.
The Skivers label implies that those on benefits were workshy or perhaps on the fiddle. Whereas some people receive benefits they are entitled because they work in low paid jobs. And very few benefit claimants are on the fiddle.
Although I spent much of my working life in the banking sector, for 4 years, whist training for ministry part time, I worked for a local council as the manager of a benefit fraud investigation team. It was our job to investigate people suspected of receiving benefit illegally. Each year we identified around 100 people in our borough who were “on the fiddle”. And this fraud amounted to perhaps a couple of hundred thousand pounds. Nationally, I’ve seen it estimated that there is around £3 billion of benefit fraud each year.
That’s a lot of money. And people need to be stopped from claiming benefits they are not entitled to.
But here’s an uncomfortable truth. Very few people receiving benefits are on the fiddle. And most people who are unemployed would prefer to be in work, not least because in many cases they’d be better off. I’m sure the 800 people just made redundant from Honda aren’t skivers.
But Strivers are far easier to identify aren’t they? They’re those who work hard to earn an honest crust. Unfortunately though I think some of the apparent Strivers are Skivers albeit in a different way.
As the benefit cap debate was happening, another news item caught my eye. Though it didn’t get much publicity. Accountancy firm BDO published a report in which they estimated that £10 billion a year in VAT was being lost, of which £3.3 billion was down to VAT fraud.
In the same report HM Revenue & Customs are quoted as estimating that the total tax gap each year is £32bn. That is, the tax not paid as corporation tax, VAT and by individuals in the UK amounts to £32 billion a year.
As the saying goes “What would Jesus do?” The trouble is a search of the Bible shows that Jesus was silent on the matter of multinational companies avoiding paying corporation tax. Though he did say people were to pay just taxes. And he said nothing about people on benefits.
But he had plenty to say about rich people and poor people. In 25 places in the New Testament he talks of the poor and how they should be treated. In 20 places he talks about the rich how they should use their wealth. So we can draw a pretty good idea about what his feelings would be about our situation today. Firstly, he wouldn’t use the terms Skiver and Striver as he showed respect to all people. And put simply, Jesus’ stance would be that the poor must be cared for, and the rich should use their money wisely and justly.
In fact Jesus’ starting point was for ALL people to act fairly and justly. In our context that would mean people only claiming benefits they are entitled to and those benefits being at a fair level. And rich people paying the taxes they (and their companies) are supposed to pay.
600 or so years before Jesus a prophet by the name of Micah wrote these words:
Micah 6:8 New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised (NRSVA)
8 He has told you, O mortal, what is good;
and what does the LORD require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?
Or as a modern translation of the Bible puts it:
Micah 6:8 The Message (MSG)
8 But he’s already made it plain how to live, what to do,
what GOD is looking for in men and women.
It’s quite simple: Do what is fair and just to your neighbour,
be compassionate and loyal in your love,
And don’t take yourself too seriously—
take God seriously.
Wise words for Strivers and Skivers alike.
Put simply the Skivers might be described are those who rely on benefits. And the Strivers are those who work.
But the trouble with labels like this is that life isn’t as simple.
The Skivers label implies that those on benefits were workshy or perhaps on the fiddle. Whereas some people receive benefits they are entitled because they work in low paid jobs. And very few benefit claimants are on the fiddle.
Although I spent much of my working life in the banking sector, for 4 years, whist training for ministry part time, I worked for a local council as the manager of a benefit fraud investigation team. It was our job to investigate people suspected of receiving benefit illegally. Each year we identified around 100 people in our borough who were “on the fiddle”. And this fraud amounted to perhaps a couple of hundred thousand pounds. Nationally, I’ve seen it estimated that there is around £3 billion of benefit fraud each year.
That’s a lot of money. And people need to be stopped from claiming benefits they are not entitled to.
But here’s an uncomfortable truth. Very few people receiving benefits are on the fiddle. And most people who are unemployed would prefer to be in work, not least because in many cases they’d be better off. I’m sure the 800 people just made redundant from Honda aren’t skivers.
But Strivers are far easier to identify aren’t they? They’re those who work hard to earn an honest crust. Unfortunately though I think some of the apparent Strivers are Skivers albeit in a different way.
As the benefit cap debate was happening, another news item caught my eye. Though it didn’t get much publicity. Accountancy firm BDO published a report in which they estimated that £10 billion a year in VAT was being lost, of which £3.3 billion was down to VAT fraud.
In the same report HM Revenue & Customs are quoted as estimating that the total tax gap each year is £32bn. That is, the tax not paid as corporation tax, VAT and by individuals in the UK amounts to £32 billion a year.
As the saying goes “What would Jesus do?” The trouble is a search of the Bible shows that Jesus was silent on the matter of multinational companies avoiding paying corporation tax. Though he did say people were to pay just taxes. And he said nothing about people on benefits.
But he had plenty to say about rich people and poor people. In 25 places in the New Testament he talks of the poor and how they should be treated. In 20 places he talks about the rich how they should use their wealth. So we can draw a pretty good idea about what his feelings would be about our situation today. Firstly, he wouldn’t use the terms Skiver and Striver as he showed respect to all people. And put simply, Jesus’ stance would be that the poor must be cared for, and the rich should use their money wisely and justly.
In fact Jesus’ starting point was for ALL people to act fairly and justly. In our context that would mean people only claiming benefits they are entitled to and those benefits being at a fair level. And rich people paying the taxes they (and their companies) are supposed to pay.
600 or so years before Jesus a prophet by the name of Micah wrote these words:
Micah 6:8 New Revised Standard Version, Anglicised (NRSVA)
8 He has told you, O mortal, what is good;
and what does the LORD require of you
but to do justice, and to love kindness,
and to walk humbly with your God?
Or as a modern translation of the Bible puts it:
Micah 6:8 The Message (MSG)
8 But he’s already made it plain how to live, what to do,
what GOD is looking for in men and women.
It’s quite simple: Do what is fair and just to your neighbour,
be compassionate and loyal in your love,
And don’t take yourself too seriously—
take God seriously.
Wise words for Strivers and Skivers alike.
Tuesday 1 January 2013
One good turn
On New Year’s Eve, I heard about a woman called Judith O’Reilly. Last New Year’s Eve (2011) Judith made one New Year’s resolution. She pledged to do a good deed every day for the whole of 2012. If you have access to the internet you can read more at
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/dec/29/good-deed-every-day-volunteering
Or http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-mum-who-did-365-good-deeds-1512009
Or you can read the book she has written called “A Year of Doing Good: One Woman, One New Year's Resolution, 365 Good Deeds”
Judith O’Reilly admits that her resolution was greeted with some scepticism by her husband “When I announced my resolution to do a good deed every day for the whole year, my husband groaned – he thinks I complicate our lives.”
And there were times when she thought she might give up. But she persevered.
Among her good deeds were:
Picking up litter on the beach
Making cups of tea for other people’s builders
Rescuing a friend’s son who had got trapped on a fence
To be honest, there is nothing out of the ordinary and I can’t help feel that they are the kinds of things most people would do. And there is a bit of me that thinks many of us could write a similar book. However, I suppose the point is that there are also people who don’t do good deeds or seek to help their neighbours.
I don’t know whether or not Judith O’Reilly is a Christian. She was certainly brought up in a Christian household, and says, in one of the articles, how her parents did lots of good deeds themselves. And this has been an influence.
On reading about her I was reminded of one of John Wesley’s dictums
“Do all the good you can. By all the means you can. In all the ways you can. In all the places you can. At all the times you can. To all the people you can. As long as ever you can.”
How about we all make that our New Year’s resolution?
May 2013 be a peaceful and blessed year for you and yours.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/dec/29/good-deed-every-day-volunteering
Or http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/the-mum-who-did-365-good-deeds-1512009
Or you can read the book she has written called “A Year of Doing Good: One Woman, One New Year's Resolution, 365 Good Deeds”
Judith O’Reilly admits that her resolution was greeted with some scepticism by her husband “When I announced my resolution to do a good deed every day for the whole year, my husband groaned – he thinks I complicate our lives.”
And there were times when she thought she might give up. But she persevered.
Among her good deeds were:
Picking up litter on the beach
Making cups of tea for other people’s builders
Rescuing a friend’s son who had got trapped on a fence
To be honest, there is nothing out of the ordinary and I can’t help feel that they are the kinds of things most people would do. And there is a bit of me that thinks many of us could write a similar book. However, I suppose the point is that there are also people who don’t do good deeds or seek to help their neighbours.
I don’t know whether or not Judith O’Reilly is a Christian. She was certainly brought up in a Christian household, and says, in one of the articles, how her parents did lots of good deeds themselves. And this has been an influence.
On reading about her I was reminded of one of John Wesley’s dictums
“Do all the good you can. By all the means you can. In all the ways you can. In all the places you can. At all the times you can. To all the people you can. As long as ever you can.”
How about we all make that our New Year’s resolution?
May 2013 be a peaceful and blessed year for you and yours.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)