1st Radlett Scouts awarded Lloyds Bank Community Fund grant

A Scout group will be able to refurbish its headquarters thanks to the support of the local community.

1st Radlett Scout Group has received £300 from the Lloyds Bank Community Fund after being voted for by members of the public.

The scout group, based in Kent Lodge in Scrubbitts Park Road, was founded in 1918 and provides activities and adventures for 90 children.

Its headquarters, built 50 years ago, is in need of repair and the money will be used to make the hut more up to date.

The organisation’s next project will be improving the toilets within the building, including replacing water heaters with plumbed hot water.

Four local organisations were shortlisted for the community grant, based on votes from members of the public.

The organisation with the most votes, Borehamwood Foodbank, received £3,000.

Group Scout leader Jackie Glover said she was pleased 1st Radlett Scouts had been shortlisted for the grant.

She said: "It is great that the Scout Group has been recognised in the community."

Comments (4)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

2:51pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Phil Cox (UKIP) says...

I applaud Barclays Bank for making community grants available in this way. It is a good thing to do if money is available and it should do Barclays no harm whatsoever in terms of improving its image with the general public. Who knows, it may even gain itself more customers by being such a good egg in the community it serves.

By the same measure, grants from local politicians must be said to work in the same way, just more generously as they have a higher amount of money they "grant" - our money, £10,000 each, each year. It is entirely possible that people will think more highly of the said politician and said politician may even gain votes by such generosity.

Is it therefore right or fair for local politicians to use our tax money (not their own, Like Barclays, but money paid by us, almost a million pounds spent by the County Council) which is likely to improve their own image with voters? I would say not.

Anyway, well done Barclays, for a private business to do such a thing is marvellous and an example to others.
I applaud Barclays Bank for making community grants available in this way. It is a good thing to do if money is available and it should do Barclays no harm whatsoever in terms of improving its image with the general public. Who knows, it may even gain itself more customers by being such a good egg in the community it serves. By the same measure, grants from local politicians must be said to work in the same way, just more generously as they have a higher amount of money they "grant" - our money, £10,000 each, each year. It is entirely possible that people will think more highly of the said politician and said politician may even gain votes by such generosity. Is it therefore right or fair for local politicians to use our tax money (not their own, Like Barclays, but money paid by us, almost a million pounds spent by the County Council) which is likely to improve their own image with voters? I would say not. Anyway, well done Barclays, for a private business to do such a thing is marvellous and an example to others. Phil Cox (UKIP)

5:08pm Wed 4 Dec 13

LSC says...

I disagree in this case. I'm sure it is a worthy cause, but the banks in the current climate should not be gifting money out to anyone. It's hard enough to get them to loan money, and when they do they are very quick to call it back when people struggle.
I'm all for charity, and I'm all for community, but I don't personally think the banks have a part to play in either.
In this day and age it is virtually impossible to function without a bank account, I certainly don't have a choice if I want a wage. Yes, you can choose a bank, but you can't choose no bank. Then they take MY money and invest it to make profit, or they charge me when things get sticky to make profit or if they do lend me money, charge interest to make profit.
It just doesn't seem right that they then give some of this profit away.

Of course they have to make money; staff have to be paid, buildings maintained, yachts for the CEOs. But it still just doesn't sit right with me somehow.
I disagree in this case. I'm sure it is a worthy cause, but the banks in the current climate should not be gifting money out to anyone. It's hard enough to get them to loan money, and when they do they are very quick to call it back when people struggle. I'm all for charity, and I'm all for community, but I don't personally think the banks have a part to play in either. In this day and age it is virtually impossible to function without a bank account, I certainly don't have a choice if I want a wage. Yes, you can choose a bank, but you can't choose no bank. Then they take MY money and invest it to make profit, or they charge me when things get sticky to make profit or if they do lend me money, charge interest to make profit. It just doesn't seem right that they then give some of this profit away. Of course they have to make money; staff have to be paid, buildings maintained, yachts for the CEOs. But it still just doesn't sit right with me somehow. LSC

5:30pm Wed 4 Dec 13

Phil Cox (UKIP) says...

It's rare that I would disagree with LSC, in fact this may be a first, but I do.

If Barclays are making a profit on their enterprises, then any charitable donations are taken from the profits that would otherwise, after tax, be issued to shareholders as dividends. Banks are no different in that respect to any other business.

If the shareholders are happy with this arrangement, and I doubt they have much choice in reality, then I do not see the problem. It's good PR, and banks need to look better than they have of late.

Handing out a few hundred or thousand here and there will make no noticeable difference to their day to day work or overall profitability.

To me, it's a win-win, except for the shareholders who would probably not notice the small amounts given out in grants.

I'd rather have this than some grubby councillor giving the money away from our taxes in the hope of looking better next time there's an election, because that's what currently happens.

Incidentally, Barclays made these grants based on public votes for good causes. Who would have suspected that Barclays grants, which cost us nothing, were dished out in a more democratic way than councillor grants which are not dished out at all democratically?

I'm almost tempted to vote Barclays!
It's rare that I would disagree with LSC, in fact this may be a first, but I do. If Barclays are making a profit on their enterprises, then any charitable donations are taken from the profits that would otherwise, after tax, be issued to shareholders as dividends. Banks are no different in that respect to any other business. If the shareholders are happy with this arrangement, and I doubt they have much choice in reality, then I do not see the problem. It's good PR, and banks need to look better than they have of late. Handing out a few hundred or thousand here and there will make no noticeable difference to their day to day work or overall profitability. To me, it's a win-win, except for the shareholders who would probably not notice the small amounts given out in grants. I'd rather have this than some grubby councillor giving the money away from our taxes in the hope of looking better next time there's an election, because that's what currently happens. Incidentally, Barclays made these grants based on public votes for good causes. Who would have suspected that Barclays grants, which cost us nothing, were dished out in a more democratic way than councillor grants which are not dished out at all democratically? I'm almost tempted to vote Barclays! Phil Cox (UKIP)

8:17pm Wed 4 Dec 13

LSC says...

I agree that they are doing nothing wrong within the framework of how they are currently set up. I suppose I am dreaming of a rather Utopian world where banks didn't even have shareholders.
I'm not a financially minded bloke, and perhaps my vision is laughable to those who are in the know, but I'd like the banks to look after my money as cheaply as possible, pay a good interest rate, and if they have a massive profit from investing my money use it to make loans to mortgage customers and businesses at low interest rates.
Seems to me everybody wins that way, but as I say, there is probably some fundemental flaw in my idea.
I agree that they are doing nothing wrong within the framework of how they are currently set up. I suppose I am dreaming of a rather Utopian world where banks didn't even have shareholders. I'm not a financially minded bloke, and perhaps my vision is laughable to those who are in the know, but I'd like the banks to look after my money as cheaply as possible, pay a good interest rate, and if they have a massive profit from investing my money use it to make loans to mortgage customers and businesses at low interest rates. Seems to me everybody wins that way, but as I say, there is probably some fundemental flaw in my idea. LSC

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree