Jump to content

£100,000 to India


Recommended Posts

I was reading somthing the other day about the £100,000 the council donated to India for the tsunami relief. It struck me a that this is somthing that people themselves should donate to, not local authorities with peoples money. Is surley up to the individiual and not the Council. I would think that Shetlands money should be spent on Shetland, if they had a extra £100,000 they should divide it up between all the old age pensioners in shetland or towards the CAT scanner or somthing like that. Not donateing it to somthing which has nothing to do with Shetland.

 

I think people should give to charity, but just feel that its shouldent be the Shetland Islands Council so that some councillors can feel good about themselves and go on a jolly. I see that Orkney Council voted to not give money as they didnt want to set a precident and felt they couldent be seen giveing away money when they are complaining about excessive expenditure.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous

Here, here Styles - I agree. Let the public decide!

 

Orkney Islands Council declined making any donation and left it to the people to decide if/how much they wanted to contribute.

 

What I find even more laughable was the recent visit to India by an elected member and SIC employee 'to make links between India and Shetland'.

 

Is that the best they could come up with? I'd love to know what these 'links' are? Erm, perhaps they were discussing our similar climates..........................mmmm............................???

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Anonymous
I was reading somthing the other day about the £100,000 the council donated to India for the tsunami relief. It struck me a that this is somthing that people themselves should donate to, not local authorities with peoples money. Is surley up to the individiual and not the Council. I would think that Shetlands money should be spent on Shetland, if they had a extra £100,000 they should divide it up between all the old age pensioners in shetland or towards the CAT scanner or somthing like that. Not donateing it to somthing which has nothing to do with Shetland.

 

I think people should give to charity, but just feel that its shouldent be the Shetland Islands Council so that some councillors can feel good about themselves and go on a jolly. I see that Orkney Council voted to not give money as they didnt want to set a precident and felt they couldent be seen giveing away money when they are complaining about excessive expenditure.

 

I see your point, but if it's just oil-revenue money or cash that has not directly come from the taxpayer then £100,000 seems fair enough.

 

Esp when you consider that those killed when the tsunami hit were mainly folk living in small to medium towns by the sea, who depended on fishing for their lively hoods. Sound familiar? Shetland takes in about £30 Million in fishing a year. If something like that happened to us, it would be shame if governments around the world denied us aid, saying it was the responsibility of the individual.

 

Even if that donation came directly from our pockets (which I highly doubt) it would cost you about 10p a week for a year to pay it back.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I was reading somthing the other day about the £100,000 the council donated to India for the tsunami relief. It struck me a that this is somthing that people themselves should donate to, not local authorities with peoples money. Is surley up to the individiual and not the Council. I would think that Shetlands money should be spent on Shetland, if they had a extra £100,000 they should divide it up between all the old age pensioners in shetland or towards the CAT scanner or somthing like that. Not donateing it to somthing which has nothing to do with Shetland.

 

I think people should give to charity, but just feel that its shouldent be the Shetland Islands Council so that some councillors can feel good about themselves and go on a jolly. I see that Orkney Council voted to not give money as they didnt want to set a precident and felt they couldent be seen giveing away money when they are complaining about excessive expenditure.

 

I see your point, but if it's just oil-revenue money or cash that has not directly come from the taxpayer then £100,000 seems fair enough.

 

Esp when you consider that those killed when the tsunami hit were mainly folk living in small to medium towns by the sea, who depended on fishing for their lively hoods. Sound familiar? Shetland takes in about £30 Million in fishing a year. If something like that happened to us, it would be shame if governments around the world denied us aid, saying it was the responsibility of the individual.

 

Even if that donation came directly from our pockets (which I highly doubt) it would cost you about 10p a week for a year to pay it back.

 

The comment above was by me - I forgot to log in. crapolla.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...