Bradford's poorest families have a debt mountain of almost £50m

WARNING: Thousands of families in the Bradford district have been plunged into problem debt, a new survey has revealed.

WARNING: Thousands of families in the Bradford district have been plunged into problem debt, a new survey has revealed.

(9166037)

First published in News Bradford Telegraph and Argus: Photograph of the Author by , T&A Reporter

THOUSANDS of Bradford district families in 'problem debt' owe a total of nearly £50 million, a survey revealed today.

There are 8,803 families in dire financial straits in the parliamentary constituencies of Bradford South, Bradford East, Bradford West, Keighley and Shipley , with 19,941 children in these households for a total sum of £48,349,098.

The first-time research, carried out by The Children's Society and StepChange Debt Charity, found each struggling family is behind on payments by an average of £4,229 and across Yorkshire and the Humber families owe a total of £562m in bills and loans.

A family in 'problem debt' is one which has fallen behind on the repayments of bills or credit commitments. Families with debt, but are keeping up with payments, were not included.

In Bradford East, there are 2,419 families in debt, which includes 4,219 children, and totals £10,977,091.

David Ward MP (Lib Dem, Bradford East) said: "These figures are still too high.

"I see people are still struggling on a daily basis in my constituency.

"These figures are a reality check for us. There are still many families that are struggling.

"The only way out of it is for an increase in employment and increasing income that people can live on."

In Shipley, the study found 1,912 families are in the red, featuring 3,334 children for a total debt of £8,083,131.

Philip Davies MP (Con, Shipley) said: "I feel for all of the families who have been finding it extremely tough over the years. There is no painless way to pay off debts.

"When you get in debt, you have to pay it off. The issues in Shipley have been the same right across the community.

"There are lots of people in Shipley who have been struggling.

"The only way to deal with that is to get the economy growing. Hopefully now the economy is on the right track."

Meanwhile, a total of 1,652 families, featuring 2,881 children, are struggling and owe a total debt of £6,985,422 in Bradford West.

A spokesman for George Galloway (Respect, Bradford West MP) said: "These figures are hardly surprising.

"The figures might even be an underestimate given the amount of people we know about with financial problems in the constituency."

The Bradford South figures are even higher with 2,820 in debt of £11,925,113.

The figure in Keighley sees 2,631 families struggling, with 4,589 children affected for a total sum of £11,126,779.

The total figures for Yorkshire and the Humber finds 132,922 families in debt, featuring 231,827 children for a total debt figure of £562m.

The report, The Debt Trap: Exposing the impact of problem debt on children' showed how family debt causes children to suffer from bullying, worry and anxiety and miss out on essentials.

Nationally, the survey found almost two and a half million children across the country live in families owing a total of £4.8 billion in bills and loans.

The Children's Society and StepChange Debt Charity are using the findings to lobby the Government to: The Children’s Society and StepChange Debt Charity are calling on the Government to:

• Consider developing a ‘breathing space’ scheme to give struggling families an extended period of protection from additional charges, further interest and enforcement action

• Review whether the protection for children against the harm caused by debt collection – including evictions, bailiffs and court action – is working

• Provide earlier and wider access to debt support and advice to help families put the brakes on a downward cycle of debt and reduce the impact on children.

• Impose tighter restrictions on advertising loans to children.

Bradford-based debt charity Christians Against Poverty (CAP), which works with some of the poorest families in the district, welcomed the publication of the report which highlights low income as being the biggest single reason for people being plunged into debt.

A CAP spokesman said: "Just under half of all the clients we helped last year were those with children who do feel that knock-on effect whether it's among strained relationships in the home or not having the basics provided.

"Our own research found that before getting CAP's help, 67 per cent of parents were struggling to provide their children with three meals a day and adequate clothing.

"The good news is that CAP negotiates with creditors on the clients' behalf with the aim of having them debt free within five years and in that time, every family learns to budget and save."

Comments (25)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:50am Tue 12 Aug 14

Albion. says...

There is still too much of a "you can have what you want" culture, combined with loans that are too easily accessible. People would live within their means no matter what, years ago, now they don't seem to have the same levels of discipline and self-respect.
There is still too much of a "you can have what you want" culture, combined with loans that are too easily accessible. People would live within their means no matter what, years ago, now they don't seem to have the same levels of discipline and self-respect. Albion.
  • Score: 36

7:38am Tue 12 Aug 14

Cityman23 says...

It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain!
It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain! Cityman23
  • Score: -5

8:05am Tue 12 Aug 14

llos25 says...

I so agree.
I so agree. llos25
  • Score: 0

8:38am Tue 12 Aug 14

otleygent says...

Cityman23 wrote:
It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain!
Absolutely spot on. Too much victim blaming, encouraged by Ian Duncan Smith and his obnoxious cronies.
[quote][p][bold]Cityman23[/bold] wrote: It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain![/p][/quote]Absolutely spot on. Too much victim blaming, encouraged by Ian Duncan Smith and his obnoxious cronies. otleygent
  • Score: -7

8:59am Tue 12 Aug 14

albioff says...

spot on the above comments. but why is it on here that any reports similar to this attract a wave of hostility, is everyone brainwashed by Cameron and his cronies. i.e if working then its i'm alright jack and if not then its all your own fault and if genuinely] sick/disabled then you are a drain on society.
spot on the above comments. but why is it on here that any reports similar to this attract a wave of hostility, is everyone brainwashed by Cameron and his cronies. i.e if working then its i'm alright jack and if not then its all your own fault and if genuinely] sick/disabled then you are a drain on society. albioff
  • Score: -11

9:11am Tue 12 Aug 14

Bone_idle18 says...

albioff wrote:
spot on the above comments. but why is it on here that any reports similar to this attract a wave of hostility, is everyone brainwashed by Cameron and his cronies. i.e if working then its i'm alright jack and if not then its all your own fault and if genuinely] sick/disabled then you are a drain on society.
Think you'll find the majority of people struggling actually work. It's a poor do when workers are sometimes worse off than people relying solely on benefits.
[quote][p][bold]albioff[/bold] wrote: spot on the above comments. but why is it on here that any reports similar to this attract a wave of hostility, is everyone brainwashed by Cameron and his cronies. i.e if working then its i'm alright jack and if not then its all your own fault and if genuinely] sick/disabled then you are a drain on society.[/p][/quote]Think you'll find the majority of people struggling actually work. It's a poor do when workers are sometimes worse off than people relying solely on benefits. Bone_idle18
  • Score: 34

9:16am Tue 12 Aug 14

Avro says...

Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?
Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident? Avro
  • Score: 16

10:03am Tue 12 Aug 14

linebacker2 says...

Cityman23 wrote:
It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain!
In the 50's & 60's living standards were far lower than now, yet few people borrowed - they made do with repairing items, getting second hand items etc.

Nowadays, even the poor see it as their right to get the latest gadgets and designer clothing.
[quote][p][bold]Cityman23[/bold] wrote: It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain![/p][/quote]In the 50's & 60's living standards were far lower than now, yet few people borrowed - they made do with repairing items, getting second hand items etc. Nowadays, even the poor see it as their right to get the latest gadgets and designer clothing. linebacker2
  • Score: 47

10:16am Tue 12 Aug 14

They only do damage! says...

Avro wrote:
Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?
Why did Bradford council give a loan, for the construction of the new provident building which was over £6,000,000. This is the same company the Christian church pulled money out of because of the burden they put on the poor.
[quote][p][bold]Avro[/bold] wrote: Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?[/p][/quote]Why did Bradford council give a loan, for the construction of the new provident building which was over £6,000,000. This is the same company the Christian church pulled money out of because of the burden they put on the poor. They only do damage!
  • Score: -4

10:28am Tue 12 Aug 14

Avro says...

They only do damage! wrote:
Avro wrote:
Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?
Why did Bradford council give a loan, for the construction of the new provident building which was over £6,000,000. This is the same company the Christian church pulled money out of because of the burden they put on the poor.
Their business ethos relies on keeping customers hooked with rolling credit, which can only mean a lifetime of spiraling debt!
[quote][p][bold]They only do damage![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Avro[/bold] wrote: Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?[/p][/quote]Why did Bradford council give a loan, for the construction of the new provident building which was over £6,000,000. This is the same company the Christian church pulled money out of because of the burden they put on the poor.[/p][/quote]Their business ethos relies on keeping customers hooked with rolling credit, which can only mean a lifetime of spiraling debt! Avro
  • Score: -2

10:47am Tue 12 Aug 14

bradfordian says...

The same old spiel have to get the economy going, But the rich will reap the reward from that. What about putting people and the common good first?
The same old spiel have to get the economy going, But the rich will reap the reward from that. What about putting people and the common good first? bradfordian
  • Score: -3

10:58am Tue 12 Aug 14

linebacker2 says...

They only do damage! wrote:
Avro wrote:
Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?
Why did Bradford council give a loan, for the construction of the new provident building which was over £6,000,000. This is the same company the Christian church pulled money out of because of the burden they put on the poor.
You're getting mixed up on two fronts.

The council lent money to the developer of the building that is Provvies HO, not the company itself.

The C of E sold it's shareholding in Wonga, nothing to do with the Provvy
[quote][p][bold]They only do damage![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Avro[/bold] wrote: Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?[/p][/quote]Why did Bradford council give a loan, for the construction of the new provident building which was over £6,000,000. This is the same company the Christian church pulled money out of because of the burden they put on the poor.[/p][/quote]You're getting mixed up on two fronts. The council lent money to the developer of the building that is Provvies HO, not the company itself. The C of E sold it's shareholding in Wonga, nothing to do with the Provvy linebacker2
  • Score: 23

11:41am Tue 12 Aug 14

sunnysidedown says...

linebacker2 wrote:
Cityman23 wrote:
It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain!
In the 50's & 60's living standards were far lower than now, yet few people borrowed - they made do with repairing items, getting second hand items etc.

Nowadays, even the poor see it as their right to get the latest gadgets and designer clothing.
Typical snide comment from the property owning rich. Since the Tories destroyed the country's industrial base in the 1980's our economy has depended on consumerism and debt. If everybody lived with their means the economy would collapse. The money owed by the poor is sitting in the bank accounts of the rich. The recovery Cameron keeps banging on about is a sham, an illusion. Very little of true value is being generated. And, as usual, it's the poor who carry the can.
[quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cityman23[/bold] wrote: It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain![/p][/quote]In the 50's & 60's living standards were far lower than now, yet few people borrowed - they made do with repairing items, getting second hand items etc. Nowadays, even the poor see it as their right to get the latest gadgets and designer clothing.[/p][/quote]Typical snide comment from the property owning rich. Since the Tories destroyed the country's industrial base in the 1980's our economy has depended on consumerism and debt. If everybody lived with their means the economy would collapse. The money owed by the poor is sitting in the bank accounts of the rich. The recovery Cameron keeps banging on about is a sham, an illusion. Very little of true value is being generated. And, as usual, it's the poor who carry the can. sunnysidedown
  • Score: -10

11:50am Tue 12 Aug 14

mad matt says...

Until there is either a change of heart in government or a change of government itself, things will only get worse.
People working hard on "minimum wag"e or in many cases even less than minimum wage don't stand a chance.
There are a lot of greedy employers out there who always exploit their workers and they get the full backing of the government - disgusting!
I'm retired but I do make ends meet by being sensible with money and if necessary a bit of "make do and mend" a skill I learned from my grandparents who had to survive through two world wars and the depression of the 1930s.
Perhaps this is the new depression.
Until there is either a change of heart in government or a change of government itself, things will only get worse. People working hard on "minimum wag"e or in many cases even less than minimum wage don't stand a chance. There are a lot of greedy employers out there who always exploit their workers and they get the full backing of the government - disgusting! I'm retired but I do make ends meet by being sensible with money and if necessary a bit of "make do and mend" a skill I learned from my grandparents who had to survive through two world wars and the depression of the 1930s. Perhaps this is the new depression. mad matt
  • Score: -2

12:50pm Tue 12 Aug 14

Robin of Loxley says...

Here's something :

Stop having kids!!
Here's something : Stop having kids!! Robin of Loxley
  • Score: 17

2:58pm Tue 12 Aug 14

allinittogether says...

Robin of Loxley wrote:
Here's something :

Stop having kids!!
Your irony meter must have just exploded
[quote][p][bold]Robin of Loxley[/bold] wrote: Here's something : Stop having kids!![/p][/quote]Your irony meter must have just exploded allinittogether
  • Score: 11

5:06pm Tue 12 Aug 14

Class_War says...

What do you expect when Government policies are designed to spiral the majority of wealth upwards to the top 1% ?
What do you expect when Government policies are designed to spiral the majority of wealth upwards to the top 1% ? Class_War
  • Score: -1

6:33pm Tue 12 Aug 14

tinytoonster says...

sunnysidedown wrote:
linebacker2 wrote:
Cityman23 wrote:
It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain!
In the 50's & 60's living standards were far lower than now, yet few people borrowed - they made do with repairing items, getting second hand items etc.

Nowadays, even the poor see it as their right to get the latest gadgets and designer clothing.
Typical snide comment from the property owning rich. Since the Tories destroyed the country's industrial base in the 1980's our economy has depended on consumerism and debt. If everybody lived with their means the economy would collapse. The money owed by the poor is sitting in the bank accounts of the rich. The recovery Cameron keeps banging on about is a sham, an illusion. Very little of true value is being generated. And, as usual, it's the poor who carry the can.
what about labour destroying the country in the 90's and 00's?
go to foodbank's but have pc's, xbox, mobile phone and designer clothing!
last time they had someone on tv about it she had a bigger tv than me and we both work!
poverty and uk poverty are 2 different things!
[quote][p][bold]sunnysidedown[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cityman23[/bold] wrote: It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain![/p][/quote]In the 50's & 60's living standards were far lower than now, yet few people borrowed - they made do with repairing items, getting second hand items etc. Nowadays, even the poor see it as their right to get the latest gadgets and designer clothing.[/p][/quote]Typical snide comment from the property owning rich. Since the Tories destroyed the country's industrial base in the 1980's our economy has depended on consumerism and debt. If everybody lived with their means the economy would collapse. The money owed by the poor is sitting in the bank accounts of the rich. The recovery Cameron keeps banging on about is a sham, an illusion. Very little of true value is being generated. And, as usual, it's the poor who carry the can.[/p][/quote]what about labour destroying the country in the 90's and 00's? go to foodbank's but have pc's, xbox, mobile phone and designer clothing! last time they had someone on tv about it she had a bigger tv than me and we both work! poverty and uk poverty are 2 different things! tinytoonster
  • Score: 11

7:31pm Tue 12 Aug 14

Robin of Loxley says...

allinittogether wrote:
Robin of Loxley wrote:
Here's something :

Stop having kids!!
Your irony meter must have just exploded
Hi there buddy.

Please don't put me in the same bracket as those with about 20 kids (who are running around like wild animals whilst the 'parents' are either too drunk or stoned to notice).

Cheers.
[quote][p][bold]allinittogether[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Robin of Loxley[/bold] wrote: Here's something : Stop having kids!![/p][/quote]Your irony meter must have just exploded[/p][/quote]Hi there buddy. Please don't put me in the same bracket as those with about 20 kids (who are running around like wild animals whilst the 'parents' are either too drunk or stoned to notice). Cheers. Robin of Loxley
  • Score: -4

8:15pm Tue 12 Aug 14

SinnerSaint says...

allinittogether wrote:
Robin of Loxley wrote:
Here's something :

Stop having kids!!
Your irony meter must have just exploded
😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂
😂😂😂😂😂
😂
[quote][p][bold]allinittogether[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Robin of Loxley[/bold] wrote: Here's something : Stop having kids!![/p][/quote]Your irony meter must have just exploded[/p][/quote]😂😂😂😂😂 😂😂😂😂😂 😂😂😂😂😂 😂😂😂😂😂 😂😂😂😂😂 😂😂😂😂😂 😂😂😂😂😂 😂 SinnerSaint
  • Score: 6

11:14pm Tue 12 Aug 14

They only do damage! says...

linebacker2 wrote:
They only do damage! wrote:
Avro wrote:
Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?
Why did Bradford council give a loan, for the construction of the new provident building which was over £6,000,000. This is the same company the Christian church pulled money out of because of the burden they put on the poor.
You're getting mixed up on two fronts.

The council lent money to the developer of the building that is Provvies HO, not the company itself.

The C of E sold it's shareholding in Wonga, nothing to do with the Provvy
The Christian church had over 12 million invested in the provvy, wonga came much later.
Has for the money lent to develop, the provident were booming at that time, they needed more room because of there credit card business. Bradford council have no business lending taxpayers money on the previse that the poor would prop up this loan, by provident continuing to do well. What would happen in the provident were to move, or there business fail. Who would of rented the building!!. How would the taxpayers get a return on there money?. All the information is there to be read, see the big picture?, otherwise your argument is insignificant.
[quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]They only do damage![/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Avro[/bold] wrote: Wonder how much of the debt is owed to the likes of Provident?[/p][/quote]Why did Bradford council give a loan, for the construction of the new provident building which was over £6,000,000. This is the same company the Christian church pulled money out of because of the burden they put on the poor.[/p][/quote]You're getting mixed up on two fronts. The council lent money to the developer of the building that is Provvies HO, not the company itself. The C of E sold it's shareholding in Wonga, nothing to do with the Provvy[/p][/quote]The Christian church had over 12 million invested in the provvy, wonga came much later. Has for the money lent to develop, the provident were booming at that time, they needed more room because of there credit card business. Bradford council have no business lending taxpayers money on the previse that the poor would prop up this loan, by provident continuing to do well. What would happen in the provident were to move, or there business fail. Who would of rented the building!!. How would the taxpayers get a return on there money?. All the information is there to be read, see the big picture?, otherwise your argument is insignificant. They only do damage!
  • Score: 2

11:15pm Tue 12 Aug 14

They only do damage! says...

The Christian church had over 12 million invested in the provvy, wonga came much later.
Has for the money lent to develop, the provident were booming at that time, they needed more room because of there credit card business. Bradford council have no business lending taxpayers money on the previse that the poor would prop up this loan, by provident continuing to do well. What would happen in the provident were to move, or there business fail. Who would of rented the building!!. How would the taxpayers get a return on there money?. All the information is there to be read, see the big picture?, otherwise your argument is insignificant.
The Christian church had over 12 million invested in the provvy, wonga came much later. Has for the money lent to develop, the provident were booming at that time, they needed more room because of there credit card business. Bradford council have no business lending taxpayers money on the previse that the poor would prop up this loan, by provident continuing to do well. What would happen in the provident were to move, or there business fail. Who would of rented the building!!. How would the taxpayers get a return on there money?. All the information is there to be read, see the big picture?, otherwise your argument is insignificant. They only do damage!
  • Score: 1

11:23pm Tue 12 Aug 14

They only do damage! says...

The Christian church had over 12 million invested in the provvy, wonga came much later.
Has for the money lent to develop, the provident were booming at that time, they needed more room because of there credit card business. Bradford council have no business lending taxpayers money on the previse that the poor would prop up this loan, by provident continuing to do well. What would happen in the provident were to move, or there business fail. Who would of rented the building!!. How would the taxpayers get a return on there money?. All the information is there to be read, see the big picture?, otherwise your argument is insignificant. I didn'nt say provident borrowed any monies.
The Christian church had over 12 million invested in the provvy, wonga came much later. Has for the money lent to develop, the provident were booming at that time, they needed more room because of there credit card business. Bradford council have no business lending taxpayers money on the previse that the poor would prop up this loan, by provident continuing to do well. What would happen in the provident were to move, or there business fail. Who would of rented the building!!. How would the taxpayers get a return on there money?. All the information is there to be read, see the big picture?, otherwise your argument is insignificant. I didn'nt say provident borrowed any monies. They only do damage!
  • Score: 0

6:46am Wed 13 Aug 14

davidh66 says...

linebacker2 wrote:
Cityman23 wrote:
It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain!
In the 50's & 60's living standards were far lower than now, yet few people borrowed - they made do with repairing items, getting second hand items etc.

Nowadays, even the poor see it as their right to get the latest gadgets and designer clothing.
Exactly don't live beyond your means. Bills come before I phones, xboxes Drugs, Alcohol ,Cigs etc.
[quote][p][bold]linebacker2[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Cityman23[/bold] wrote: It's easy for people who 'have' to say "live within your means". Yes, people SHOULD do that! but when they're battling the cost of living on a daily basis, fighting to pay the bills and put food on the table, it's a different matter. Many workers don't get paid a living wage nowadays, which means they're bound to get into difficulties. All political parties, if they were serious about genuinely reducing debt should support all workers getting at least a living wage. The Government has slashed benefits of people who are in genuine need. The sick, disabled, elderly without a good pension are all suffering. In truth, it's a disgrace. We live in the 7th richest country in the world yet we've become " Foodbank Britain." There are those of a right wing viewpoint, who take the Victorian attitude of the the feckless poor, who brought it all on themselves, but this is far from true in most cases. "There but for the grace of God" would be more accurate for many living in poverty in 21st century Britain![/p][/quote]In the 50's & 60's living standards were far lower than now, yet few people borrowed - they made do with repairing items, getting second hand items etc. Nowadays, even the poor see it as their right to get the latest gadgets and designer clothing.[/p][/quote]Exactly don't live beyond your means. Bills come before I phones, xboxes Drugs, Alcohol ,Cigs etc. davidh66
  • Score: 4

11:57am Wed 13 Aug 14

MrRustyShackleford says...

Labour and Tory's destroyed Bradford with genocidal immigration that's not diverse, but destroying and replacing the native population IDIOTS.
Labour and Tory's destroyed Bradford with genocidal immigration that's not diverse, but destroying and replacing the native population IDIOTS. MrRustyShackleford
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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