# Why are we such wimps? - Link: https://fundraising.co.uk/2007/03/22/why-are-we-such-wimps/ - Published: 2007-03-22T11:15:12+00:00 - Author: Howard Lake In the past two weeks we have been hit by two whammies: firstly the theft of Big Lottery money to fund government budgetary incompetence and then the serious reduction in the value of Gift Aid in the budget.  Together, these form a theft on the charitable sector of hundreds of millions of pounds.  But where’s the anger – where’s the fury?  Who in our sector is beating down the doors of government and the media demanding justice?  Oh, there has been a little media coverage – Oxfam got on the radio this morning about Gift Aid. But in reality, we’ve heard no more than a whimper. Realistically, it’s difficult to moan about tax reductions – people tend to think it’s just sour grapes.  But the Big Lottery Fund?  Unless we draw a clear line in the sand now and campaign like hell about this, what happens next time the Olympic bill goes up, as it surely will.  And what happens next time the government is in a tight financial hole? ## Advertisement [⌊Posthub advert. You create the campaign. We'll handle the postal journey. Get started at post-hub.co.uk.⌉](https://fundraising.co.uk/ads/posthub-20261007-300x250/) The government must not be allowed to get away with this.  It is little short of theft from the voluntary sector.  I’m a supporter of the Olympics, but it should be paid for out of taxation and rates not out of money the public believes is going to “good causes”.  Little enough of that £1 bet goes to charities.   We cannot allow it to be whittled down even further.  As far as Gift Aid is concerned, I see little purpose in crying foul when the government lowers the basic rate of taxation.  Who in the country will support us on demanding no income tax reduction? Far better is to demand that higher rate taxpayers can declare on their form that they are so and that charities can claim the full 40% back – a sum that would hugely uplift giving at no cost to the Treasury, as currently higher level taxpayers claw back the difference themselves.  And I don’t see donations suffering significantly as a result, except with major donors who may be more tempted to set up their own trusts for tax reasons.  All round it’s a winner, but to date I’ve heard no charity leaders demand this as a quid pro quo for the loss on income that a 20% rate will bring us.  Come on Gordon, this could make you look good and yet not cost you a penny.  * **[Calling it 'reputation' rather than 'brand'](https://fundraising.co.uk/2007/03/24/calling-it-039reputation039-rather-039brand039/)**( 24 March 2007) * **[Getting full credit for inbound links to your website](https://fundraising.co.uk/2007/04/02/getting-full-credit-inbound-links-your-website/)**( 2 April 2007) * **[Institute announces shortlist for National Awards](https://fundraising.co.uk/2007/04/03/institute-announces-shortlist-national-awards/)**( 3 April 2007)