nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Belvedere Students Criticised for Sleepout

MadsL

Apparantly Irish Times poet and posh girl Rosita Boland believes Belvo students are not suffering enough.

http://www.irishtimes.com/opinion/is-a-school-sleepout-best-way-to-raise-awareness-of-homelessness-1.2047725

Clearly the level of schoolchildren's comfort, texting and chocolate are the key issues in the issue of homelessness.

Obnoxious article...(The opinion piece isn't great either)

Oh and...

https://twitter.com/RositaBoland/status/547343118014898176

"And the irony is, they're actually taking up space where real homeless people sleep."

Oh Jesus....facepalm.

Find more posts tagged with

hot button topic

Quick Links

Comments

ProfessorPlum

Jawgap wrote: »

Well not just these kids parents - all kids parents pay taxes. Even people who are not parents pay taxes.

Given the total enrolment in private schools in 2013 combined with the reduced P/T ratios the kids it is easy to see how they could easily be subsumed into the Free Scheme at no cost to the exchequer.

In any event it's likely private education would continue - discretionary income attributable to private schools is about 80% of the State subvention. If the State subsidy was removed wouldn't the discretionary income simply be mainlined to make up for any deficit?

In other words the State subsidy allows private schools to maintain an extreme (some might even say obscene) level of discretionary income.

God talk about missing the point!

And iirc, even the Department of Education acknowledges that it couldn't possibly afford to bring all fee paying schools into the free education scheme.
But anyway, that's not the subject of this thread.
You crib at the Belvo boys just rattling buckets on OConnell bridge and not 'actually doing anything'. The fact is they do lots of stuff for the less well off, throughout the school year that few people ever hear of.

Jawgap

ProfessorPlum wrote: »

God talk about missing the point!

And iirc, even the Department of Education acknowledges that it couldn't possibly afford to bring all fee paying schools into the free education scheme.
But anyway, that's not the subject of this thread.
You crib at the Belvo boys just rattling buckets on OConnell bridge and not 'actually doing anything'. The fact is they do lots of stuff for the less well off, throughout the school year that few people ever hear of.

Not really, the point being there's plenty of discretionary funding sloshing about in the sector so it's unlikely that a the greater proportion of kids would transfer into the Free Scheme from fee paying schools. The likely impact is that some kids would transfer and discretionary income would decrease.

Increasing the P/T ratio (by 33%) to bring it in line with what schools in the Free Scheme have to operate to was estimated to impact discretionary income by a 20% reduction - still leaving about €60 million for fee paying schools to play with.

Interestingly, one of the few areas where we score well in education is public funding of private schools - we're in the top tranche for that one, at 80 to 90%, compared to, for example, the UK & US where no public funding is provided for private schools and NZ where less than 10% of funding for private school comes from the public purse.

evolving_doors

Jawgap wrote: »

Again, if they want to actually intervene in a meaningful way there is so much more they could do - why not, for example, go help from 7 until 8? And if you think O'Connell Bridge is where homeless people congregate in any significant numbers you don't know the city, but as I said it's a place that gets a lot of footfall.

When you boil it back, they are sitting around, rattling buckets to get other people to donate so they can give other people's money to charity. Which is great in as far as it goes - let's not build it up to be any more than that.

Aside from the SDP kids, the rest will return to their comfortable existence to regale friends and family over the Christmas break about their 'time' on the streets.

As I've already pointed out there is tons more they could do with the time committed to this publicity stunt and they could be much more interventionist, and make a meaningful difference in people's lives.

Your right Jawgap, theyre simply not doing enough, those pesky students should stay at home and be like all the other conscientious students.

If your not up to Jawgap's standards folks just dont bother.

tritium

Jawgap wrote: »

Well done them. Why O'Connell Bridge? If the want to PM me I can give them a list of areas where rough sleeping is much more prevalent, just a bit more low profile.......

Instead of 36 hours at Christmas why don't they do one hour a week say helping to clean in some of the hostels, or helping prepare food - maybe some of the older lads can help those involved with advocacy work? Or is that type of 'background' work lacking in glamour?

Perhaps the school could help anchor families by providing more than the token SDP bursary places they currently provide to the children of families who get back into some form or permanent accommodation?

And perhaps even during the next cold spell they could open up their gym to provide some respite and temporary sleeping accommodation to help get people off the streets during the worst of the weather?

Those 36hours at Christmas are I suspect 36 hours more than the vast majority of people who bleat on about the homelessness problem.

They're to some extent victims of their own success. Theyre so well known for this event that it was only a matter of time till some twit like the IT decided they'd make a good target (and an easier one than actually researching the homeless problem itself). Who knows, perhaps they do actually do far more during the year, either individually or as a group- they're kind of damned either way though, if they publicise it they're criticised for doing it if they don't they're criticised for not......

evolving_doors

Jawgap wrote: »

Not really, the point being there's plenty of discretionary funding sloshing about in the sector so it's unlikely that a the greater proportion of kids would transfer into the Free Scheme from fee paying schools. The likely impact is that some kids would transfer and discretionary income would decrease.

Increasing the P/T ratio (by 33%) to bring it in line with what schools in the Free Scheme have to operate to was estimated to impact discretionary income by a 20% reduction - still leaving about €60 million for fee paying schools to play with.

Interestingly, one of the few areas where we score well in education is public funding of private schools - we're in the top tranche for that one, at 80 to 90%, compared to, for example, the UK & US where no public funding is provided for private schools and NZ where less than 10% of funding for private school comes from the public purse.

Oh I get it now. because of the above the students shouldn't bother with charity!

Big Bag of Chips

If the homeless people think it should be stopped, then it should be stopped. Has anyone asked them?

If they are happy for it to continue being an annual event should it still be stopped because others with little or no input into the homeless community find it outdated?

Jawgap

Armelodie wrote: »

Your right Jawgap, theyre simply not doing enough, those pesky students should stay at home and be like all the other conscientious students.

If your not up to Jawgap's standards folks just dont bother.

Well if you read what I wrote, you'd see I'm acknowledging their contribution - what's irritating is that it is being built up to be more than it is.

I'm also not advocating that they stay at home, simply that they re-configure their time commitment and instead of focusing on a 36/48 hour window in December - spread it throughout the year.

Older lads can get involved and volunteer help in a very practical and personal way with individuals and families who are homeless, at risk of homelessness or just getting out of it. In fact, clever upstanding lads like they are could do a lot with the latter category of family or individual.

Younger lads can help volunteers (and the paid staff) by assisting them with admin tasks and freeing up their time, especially the paid staff's time which is precious and always in scarce supply.

wyndham

Jawgap wrote: »

No, I'm pointing out that they've made a 36 hour commitment (fair play to them) - that 36 hour commitment could be spread through out the year (perhaps an hour or so a week during term time) to help a bit closer to the coalface.

The lads aren't 'volunteering' - they are fund raising (again, fair play to them, but let's not elevate it to more than it is).

And again, if you think that homeless services are run be salaried staff you are mis-informed. Core services are run by paid staff but a lot of 'add-on' stuff is provided by volunteers who give freely of their time (anything from two hours a month upwards).

And maybe the State would have a bit more to spend on preventing and remedying homelessness, as well as helping those who find themselves in that position, if they weren't pumping €100m + per year into private fee paying schools........

You mean like the Vincent de Paul Society in the school that has visits elderly people living alone in the area/families in need and has carried out thousands, if not tens of thousands of such visits on a weekly basis? Ditto the collection/distribution of food and monetary assistance year round by the same students.Or The Belvedere Youth Club? Or the flat decorating for Christmas in the locality? Or the annual block pull to Galway for Temple St Childrens Hospital? Or the annual trip to help street children in India?

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Bridge93

Some people just love to have something to moan about, all the better when it involves private school kids. They're 16 years old for **** sake, just doing the little they can to help out.
Some of the arguments against them are mindblowingly stupid. I don't want to get into it as it'll only anger me more but this Bolsnd one and a couple of keyboard warriors seem keen to make it private v public as usual. Way to belittle a wonderful act, I wonder have any of those complaining raised €1m for charity?

Bridge93

Jawgap wrote: »

Well if you read what I wrote, you'd see I'm acknowledging their contribution - what's irritating is that it is being built up to be more than it is.

I'm also not advocating that they stay at home, simply that they re-configure their time commitment and instead of focusing on a 36/48 hour window in December - spread it throughout the year.

Older lads can get involved and volunteer help in a very practical and personal way with individuals and families who are homeless, at risk of homelessness or just getting out of it. In fact, clever upstanding lads like they are could do a lot with the latter category of family or individual.

Younger lads can help volunteers (and the paid staff) by assisting them with admin tasks and freeing up their time, especially the paid staff's time which is precious and always in scarce supply.

The 36 hour block allows them to collect far more money to help out homelessness than random 1 hour assignments through the year where by the time they've gotten into it the hour is up.
You're also clueless if you think that Belvedere, Rock etc etc do nothing else through the year.
But enlighten me what activities do you get up to in your weekly visits to homeless shelters or elderly homes or collections?

sotisme

Sorry, but I don't understand how anyone can criticise this. We have people here, sitting on there a***s beside their hot fires, fast wifi, cup and tea and mince pie in hand no doubt, commenting on how "there are better ways to do it" and "it's not right because its lads from a fee-paying school" This fundraiser has raised over one million euro for the homeless, whether it has minor flaws or not. People who are raising money for charity should be encouraged, no matter how much or little they manage to raise. If attempts to help other charities continue to be critiqued as harshly as this, it is really going to slow down the process of people using their initiative to think of new fundraising ideas, as they will fear being targeted like this.

Also- I needed to state this, whether off topic or not. Just because someone goes to a fee-paying school does NOT mean that they are well off. Both parents might have been saving since college to afford their fees, putting their child's education before anything else. I don't know about Belvedere, but lots of private schools offer scholarships also. So please, enough of the private school=stuck up rich kids.

Jawgap

Armelodie wrote: »

Oh I get it now. because of the above the students shouldn't bother with charity!

I'm sure as good Catholics, the Jesuits have already taught them what Aquinas said about charity - it's more than just benevolent giving

Jawgap

wyndham wrote: »

You mean like the Vincent de Paul Society in the school that has visits elderly people living alone in the area/families in need and has carried out thousands, if not tens of thousands of such visits on a weekly basis? Ditto the collection/distribution of food and monetary assistance year round by the same students.Or The Belvedere Youth Club? Or the flat decorating for Christmas in the locality? Or the annual block pull to Galway for Temple St Childrens Hospital? Or the annual trip to help street children in India?

You really have no idea what you are talking about.

Actually I do, and I know the Belvo SVdP branch is the largest in Dublin (possibly Ireland).

But we're talking about homelessness and we're talking about whether the Sleepout is useful beyond it being a simple fundraiser.

I was also suggesting that, perhaps, the older students might like to get involved in advocacy work - I'm sure as articulate, studied young men they could make a genuine difference if they were minded to spread their time throughout the year instead of focusing the few days before Christmas.

Big Bag of Chips

Jawgap wrote: »

I'm also not advocating that they stay at home, simply that they re-configure their time commitment and instead of focusing on a 36/48 hour window in December - spread it throughout the year.

How many times do you need to be told they DO other stuff all year round. This is their annual Christmas fundraiser. All year round they do other stuff... Those things you mentioned they should be doing.

So, you have come up with suggestions. They are things the lads already do. So now, finding out that they actually do the stuff you think they should do, can you give them any credit... Or is there something wrong with the things they do that you have suggested they should do?

Or are you giving out about them "just because"?

ProfessorPlum

Jawgap wrote: »

Not really, the point being there's plenty of discretionary funding sloshing about in the sector so it's unlikely that a the greater proportion of kids would transfer into the Free Scheme from fee paying schools. The likely impact is that some kids would transfer and discretionary income would decrease.

Increasing the P/T ratio (by 33%) to bring it in line with what schools in the Free Scheme have to operate to was estimated to impact discretionary income by a 20% reduction - still leaving about €60 million for fee paying schools to play with.

Interestingly, one of the few areas where we score well in education is public funding of private schools - we're in the top tranche for that one, at 80 to 90%, compared to, for example, the UK & US where no public funding is provided for private schools and NZ where less than 10% of funding for private school comes from the public purse.

Your premis is without foundation. If you want to see a truly elitist fee paying school system like they have in the UK, go ahead. Most parents whose kids currently attend fee paying schools couldn't afford the kind of fees that would be demanded, so they would transfer to the free scheme. And be a burden to the taxpayer. But you've done a good job derailing the thread. How about answering the points made about what these kids actually do do. You clearly have no idea.

Jawgap

Bridge93 wrote: »

The 36 hour block allows them to collect far more money to help out homelessness than random 1 hour assignments through the year where by the time they've gotten into it the hour is up.
You're also clueless if you think that Belvedere, Rock etc etc do nothing else through the year.
But enlighten me what activities do you get up to in your weekly visits to homeless shelters or elderly homes or collections?

Sometimes you find those who volunteer rarely look at their watches, and quite often the one hour becomes four.

And I'm not getting into what I do or who I do it - beyond saying I am involved in advocacy and admin work (on a voluntary basis) for an organisation that deals with housing and, to a lesser degree, people coming out of homelessness. My time commitment is about 2 to 4 hours a month with them and another couple of hours each week dealing with issues remote from them. I do about 2 home visits per month, as required.

Fair play to them for raising the money, but lets not pretend it's more than that.

ProfessorPlum

Jawgap wrote: »

Sometimes you find those who volunteer rarely look at their watches, and quite often the one hour becomes four.

And I'm not getting into what I do or who I do it - beyond saying I am involved in advocacy and admin work (on a voluntary basis) for an organisation that deals with housing and, to a lesser degree, people coming out of homelessness. My time commitment is about 2 to 4 hours a month with them and another couple of hours each week dealing with issues remote from them. I do about 2 home visits per month, as required.

Fair play to them for raising the money, but lets not pretend it's more than that.

Why not go find out what these do throughout the year. You seem unable to listen to what's been told to you here.

Bridge93

Jawgap wrote: »

Sometimes you find those who volunteer rarely look at their watches, and quite often the one hour becomes four.

And I'm not getting into what I do or who I do it - beyond saying I am involved in advocacy and admin work (on a voluntary basis) for an organisation that deals with housing and, to a lesser degree, people coming out of homelessness. My time commitment is about 2 to 4 hours a month with them and another couple of hours each week dealing with issues remote from them. I do about 2 home visits per month, as required.

Fair play to them for raising the money, but lets not pretend it's more than that.

Maybe I haven't paid enough attention to it and haven't noticed and apologies if I'm wrong, but have the school/kids/SVP anyone associated with it, come out and ever said it is more than a money raising project? I don't know what else it could be perceived as?

hfallada

Jawgap wrote: »

Sometimes you find those who volunteer rarely look at their watches, and quite often the one hour becomes four.

And I'm not getting into what I do or who I do it - beyond saying I am involved in advocacy and admin work (on a voluntary basis) for an organisation that deals with housing and, to a lesser degree, people coming out of homelessness. My time commitment is about 2 to 4 hours a month with them and another couple of hours each week dealing with issues remote from them. I do about 2 home visits per month, as required.

Fair play to them for raising the money, but lets not pretend it's more than that.

Well if you study organisational behavior as part of business. You will there is no such thing as a selfless act. Everything we do is based on what satisfies ourselves. Like you dont voluntary because its for the greater good, but because it makes you feel better. That can be seen in your paragraph of describing your charity work. Are the Belvo lets only doing it because it makes them feel better. Yes, but you are doing charity work for the exact same reason.

Jawgap

hfallada wrote: »

Well if you study organisational behavior as part of business. You will there is no such thing as a selfless act. Everything we do is based on what satisfies ourselves. Like you dont voluntary because its for the greater good, but because it makes you feel better. That can be seen in your paragraph of describing your charity work. Are the Belvo lets only doing it because it makes them feel better. Yes, but you are doing charity work for the exact same reason.

The question of whether selfless acts exist or not is an ethical one, not an OB / first year psychology one - and they exist. If an act is reflexive it is inherently selfless....

......volunteering, like fund raising, however, is not a selfless act.......

VinLieger

Jawgap wrote: »

The question of whether selfless acts exist or not is an ethical one, not an OB / first year psychology one - and they exist. If an act is reflexive it is inherently selfless....

......volunteering, like fund raising, however, is not a selfless act.......

By volunteering you are giving up your free time to do something good for others, what exactly do you get out of it apart from happiness due to helping your fellow man makes it not a selfless act?

anncoates

Fair play to the lads for doing it but can we stop saying 'Belvo' ?

Jawgap

VinLieger wrote: »

By volunteering you are giving up your free time to do something good for others, what exactly do you get out of it apart from happiness due to helping your fellow man makes it not a selfless act?

Can't honestly say I've ever analysed that much - I'm not sure 'happiness' is the reason people volunteer (perhaps it's a component), especially in relation to helping with homelessness (to emphasise, I don't except in a very peripheral way) - maybe it's a strong social conscience, empathy, guilt, religious conviction, boredom, an abiding sense that others' misfortune could be one's own (we're all just one or two bad decisions and a minor run of bad luck away from homelessness), or a sense that you can't save 'em all, but maybe you can help one - maybe all those, maybe none of those.

thebaz

very petty journalism , just having a go at the Belvo lads, cause its fee-paying - who cares - there doing good , much needed funds , for the real homeless.

In fact I think all fee paying students should do a night , should be mandatory , create a more just society.

The Irish Times is slowly sinking to red top tabloid style sensationalism, sadly , used to be an excellent newspaper up to a few years ago

MonsterCookie

Jawgap wrote: »

Sometimes you find those who volunteer rarely look at their watches, and quite often the one hour becomes four.

And I'm not getting into what I do or who I do it - beyond saying I am involved in advocacy and admin work (on a voluntary basis) for an organisation that deals with housing and, to a lesser degree, people coming out of homelessness. My time commitment is about 2 to 4 hours a month with them and another couple of hours each week dealing with issues remote from them. I do about 2 home visits per month, as required.

Fair play to them for raising the money, but lets not pretend it's more than that.

...and I'm sure you would be rightly pissed off if a journo decided to gave a go at you simply because you have more than the people you are trying to help...and if some gob****ery on boards suggested you aren't doing enough.

Fair play to them...full stop.

VinLieger

Jawgap wrote: »

Can't honestly say I've ever analysed that much - I'm not sure 'happiness' is the reason people volunteer (perhaps it's a component), especially in relation to helping with homelessness (to emphasise, I don't except in a very peripheral way) - maybe it's a strong social conscience, empathy, guilt, religious conviction, boredom, an abiding sense that others' misfortune could be one's own (we're all just one or two bad decisions and a minor run of bad luck away from homelessness), or a sense that you can't save 'em all, but maybe you can help one - maybe all those, maybe none of those.

Happiness would be a result of all you the motivations described, if you volunteer for any of those is it selfless?

Jawgap

VinLieger wrote: »

Happiness would be a result of all you the motivations described, if you volunteer for any of those is it selfless?

Eh, I think I've already pointed out that volunteering, given it is a conscious act, can never be selfless....

And assuaging guilt, acting out of a sense of religious duty or social conviction does not mean that 'happiness' is a consequence - some sense of satisfaction in a job well done or time well spent may be the outcome, but not necessarily 'happiness' in every circumstance somebody volunteers.

Littlekittylou

thebaz wrote: »

very petty journalism , just having a go at the Belvo lads, cause its fee-paying - who cares - there doing good , much needed funds , for the real homeless.

In fact I think all fee paying students should do a night , should be mandatory , create a more just society.

The Irish Times is slowly sinking to red top tabloid style sensationalism, sadly , used to be an excellent newspaper up to a few years ago

Belvadere is an easy target and also a pointless one. We all slag off fee paying schools and they slag off state schools. But neither are the cause of homelessness.

hfallada
Well if you study organisational behavior as part of business. You will there is no such thing as a selfless act. Everything we do is based on what satisfies ourselves. Like you dont voluntary because its for the greater good, but because it makes you feel better. That can be seen in your paragraph of describing your charity work. Are the Belvo lets only doing it because it makes them feel better. Yes, but you are doing charity work for the exact same reason.

By the way the minimum shift in the st vin de paul or the dspca for instance is four hrs and you need to be garda vetted for any of their work you have to get your copy of your passport and send it off to head office fill out the forms wait four weeks for that to come with your clearance then you do shifts when you can. It's hard work. Often at the DSPCA it is physically demanding. The work at the STvin de pal is often boring. Animals especially sick ones smell sometimes they come in such a bad way they will need to be put down.

Yes i do it partly for my own reasons. But you would not do it long purely for the enjoyment or satisfaction. Sometimes there is none. There is no pay and no appreciation. Vets Doctors solicitors people who trained years for their skills give free time when they are tired or could be spending time with family or friends. Some of the people who get helped are not easy. If you think it is full of self satisfaction all of the time you are very naive.

Ask a vet how hard their job is or a doctor and imagine then doing that then an extra shift for free once a month. It's pretty selfless.

Littlekittylou

Jawgap wrote: »

Eh, I think I've already pointed out that volunteering, given it is a conscious act, can never be selfless....

That doesn't even mean anything.

It is not 'self serving' if it was everyone would do it. As you can see there is no thanks from society you are labelled an annoying goodie goodie and to be honest the sense of 'satisfaction' wears off when you are washing poo off the floor of 40 odd kennels trust me. Reception is nice i will give you that. Some of the people who walk in are a bit wankerish.

A lot of the time it's great but particularly for those with high end skills like doctors and vets etc there is a selfless part to it. I have seen vets give hrs and no one is going to thank them because the ones they are helping cannot speak. And sometimes it's not satisfiying it's frustrating. People bring in or dump animals again and again. Animals die.

You speak about it as if there is a positive aspect for every good deed for the volunteer. No that's not true.

Jawgap

Littlekittylou wrote: »

That doesn't even mean anything.

It is not 'self serving' if it was everyone would do it. As you can see there is no thanks from society you are labelled an annoying goodie goodie and to be honest the sense of 'satisfaction' wears off when you are washing poo off the floor of 40 odd kennels trust me. Reception is nice i will give you that. Some of the people who walk in are a bit wankerish.

A lot of the time it's great but particularly for those with high end skills like doctors and vets etc there is a selfless part to it. I have seen vets give hrs and no one is going to thank them because the ones they are helping cannot speak. And sometimes it's not satisfiying it's frustrating. People bring in or dump animals again and again. Animals die.

You speak about it as if there is a positive aspect for every good deed for the volunteer. No that's not true.

We're in to real ethics / philosophy territory here. Volunteering is not self-less - it is it's own reward. If you want to be spiritual about it, you could say it nourishes the soul.

Most vets for example become vets, in my experience, because they are compassionate towards animals and want to alleviate suffering - working in animal shelters, Blue Cross etc is probably the best opportunity to act on the convictions that brought them into the profession than treating Missus Miggins' Yorkie for worms. In that sense volunteering is not self-less.