To preserve contracts. Charities that surrender campaigning voices to safeguard government contracts leave us chasing the shadows of disaster. Zoe catching up with news we deaf are aware of 8 years ago ,the façade of national deaf charities leading deaf campaigns is exposed as a sham, money talks ! AOHL actually withdrew work seeking support to deaf, because there was no profit in it.
What she said: "'Everybody knew that the Work Programme wasn’t working as it was supposed to, that unemployed people were being stuck in a room with no expertise and a computer that didn’t work.' A charity sector reliant on government contracts would find it difficult to criticise government policy – that's the central message of a new report by the Panel on the Independence of the Voluntary Sector, chaired by the former head of Barnardo's, Sir Roger Singleton.
Sometimes, it's because there are gagging orders in government contracts. It's not a matter of discretion, it's a matter of law. Other times, they self-censor, on the basis that this dance never ends – they will always be bidding for new contracts. The need to be looked on favourably by the UK Border Agency, or the local authority, or the Department for Work and Pensions, will never go away. You might ignore Grant Shapps while he's housing minister, thinking "Shelter can worry about him, I'm an addiction charity", only to find that he's been moved to health three months later.
Very large charities have, for some time, been operating like very large businesses. They have to; they're bidding against G4S or A4e for the same work; they have to be competitive on price (which is to say, drive down wages in their own organisation) and they have to practise the distinctive discretion of the business world, where all statements are anodyne, because opinions cost customers but generate no revenue."
No secret either ATR and other bloggers who have been raising this point for years,only to be told we were undermining 'good works' by others. We are now questioning the input on charity 'surveys' released that failed to actually consult anyone, was consultation faked ? to suggest they were doing more campaigning than they are ? and to keep their contracts intact ? If the state is blackmailing charities to prevent campaigns forming, we demand to know. It is costing deaf people jobs, access, equalities, and support.