A report from 41 wildlife charities has criticised the Coalition’s environmental performance, saying that there’s a perception that environmental improvement is often at the cost of economic growth. How true is this?
A fairly even spread of opinion from the 420 respondents to last week’s poll. The largest group of respondents, around a third, said that the environment needs to be seen as a resource to be conserved, while the next largest, 27 per cent, chose the option saying that techniques to protect the environment could themselves be a business opportunity to earn income. A fifth of respondents thought that improving environmental performance often led to companies improving efficiency, but a similar proportion took the option saying that environmentalists’ demands put too much of a strain on businesses.
41 seperate charities, each with their chunk of admin costs eating into our donations. A big reduction in their numbers may make me a little more inclined to support such as these. At present my, some might say cynical, view is that it’s a lot of people trying to get my money to support their lifestyles rather than for charitable purposes.
Ed. you are too charitable. Check out the annual balance sheets and salaries of a lot of the Directors and other staff in many so-called charities. Let me know what you find please.