Our Targeted Income Grant Scheme (TIGS) offers desperately needed support to millions of business people who have been frozen out of Covid support, but … /

…it represents a beginning not an end. It’s an important first step in the right direction, but by no means delivers parity for those who find themselves unfairly excluded from help in these difficult times.
We will continue to fight for justice for all those who have fallen through the gaps.
A one-off TIGS grant will offer some groups desperately-needed help in the short-term, and allow the Treasury a little time to examine additional proposals in more detail /
If adopted by government, TIGS would be a huge step forward. But people are excluded from help for countless reasons, and we are happy to aid the Treasury in identifying solutions that reach everyone who needs support /
The APPG's proposals are based on the impressive range of expertise and evidence we have been able to draw on from our family of groups, policy advisers and APPG members… /
…and our solutions also meet Treasury qualifications. We believe the TIGS plan should be accepted, opening up opportunities for further dialogue around additional schemes /
We are all frustrated – and, yes, angry – that this process continues to be so drawn-out, and we are painfully aware of how dire the situation is for many of the people we’re championing /
But we have to start winning some battles as we continue to fight for the right of millions of taxpayers to be treated fairly /
That means helping the Treasury to support taxpayers who, through no fault of their own, have been cast aside while millions of others have quite rightly received Government support.
We hope that TIGS will be adopted by government, and we look forward to achieving wins for other excluded groups soon too.

More from Finance

Having made over 1000 boxes for vulnerable families in Cambridge via @RedHenCambridge (thanks to our customers 🙏🏽) My thoughts on the £30 box thing. Lots of factors at play here. 1/

If the pics in this @BootstrapCook thread are true and correct then the Govt/taxpayers & families in need are getting absolutely SHAFTED 👇🏽 2/


There are some mitigating circumstances. A £30 box won’t ever contain £30 (retail) worth of food - people aren’t factoring in
-the cost of the box
-paying someone to fill it
-rent & rates
-& most expensive the *transport/distribution*

3/

If you’re doing the above at scale. Delivering *across the UK* it’s not cheap BUT IMHO there should be at LEAST £20 worth of groceries in a £30 box. To get more value they need more fresh produce. Just carrots & apples is terrible. 4/

I’m gonna put my rep on the line here & say something about these big national catering companies whose names I’ve seen mentioned. They are an ASSHOLE to deal with & completely shaft small businesses like mine with their terms which is why I won’t deal with them. 5/

You May Also Like

Great article from @AsheSchow. I lived thru the 'Satanic Panic' of the 1980's/early 1990's asking myself "Has eveyrbody lost their GODDAMN MINDS?!"


The 3 big things that made the 1980's/early 1990's surreal for me.

1) Satanic Panic - satanism in the day cares ahhhh!

2) "Repressed memory" syndrome

3) Facilitated Communication [FC]

All 3 led to massive abuse.

"Therapists" -and I use the term to describe these quacks loosely - would hypnotize people & convince they they were 'reliving' past memories of Mom & Dad killing babies in Satanic rituals in the basement while they were growing up.

Other 'therapists' would badger kids until they invented stories about watching alligators eat babies dropped into a lake from a hot air balloon. Kids would deny anything happened for hours until the therapist 'broke through' and 'found' the 'truth'.

FC was a movement that started with the claim severely handicapped individuals were able to 'type' legible sentences & communicate if a 'helper' guided their hands over a keyboard.
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x


The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x

Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x

The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x

It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x