Neil McNicholas: Charities must realise people’s generosity has a limit

Having said all of that, there have just been two charity appeals on the television: one for drinking water for children in Africa followed straight after by other for Great Ormond Street (children’s) Hospital. I remember a couple of years ago after what was then a record total raised for Children in Need that same appeal on television for GOSH. So I wrote to the BBC to ask why it was necessary for GOSH to be appealing when so much had been raised for children’s causes the evening before. Wasn’t GOSH one of them? I received no satisfactory explanation. So where exactly does the Children in Need money go?

Just how much money do these charities think people have to be able to afford to keep on giving and giving? In these financially difficult times, I appreciate that charities are also struggling because there simply isn’t enough money to go round. But that doesn’t seem to stop them asking. There is a constant stream of charity appeals on television: for sick and hungry children (surely one of the more important causes), but then also in the same breath for donkeys, for tigers, for pandas, for dogs and cats… and on and on.

There seem to be no ethical guidelines about tugging at people’s heartstrings to help save sick and hungry children and then following that with appeals to help save animals. And, of course, the appeals to help hungry children are deliberately screened at a time when people are sitting down to their dinner or tea just to throw the guilt card into the equation.

There seems to be no sensitivity either for just how generous people are when, in the case of this weekend, charities are promoting their causes the very day after the people of Britain have already given at least £60m to two specific appeals. It’s the same when people give their support on a regular basis to a favourite charity only to have them send out letters asking if they would consider increasing their donations! Not only is that crass but it is an unnecessary waste, on postage, of money that should be being used for the purpose for which it was given.

And meanwhile India recently launched a probe to Mars at an estimated cost of £45m when it can’t even feed and adequately house its own people and is receiving financial help to do so once again from our deep British pockets. But isn’t there something fundamentally wrong with India squandering money on a totally unjustifiable space programme in the first place? It’s like you lending a friend some money because they were in difficulties and then finding out they have taken a holiday somewhere (while you stayed at home) and have yet to start paying back the money they borrowed.

As a nation we are still trying to recover from one of the worst financial crises in our history and yet, within the space of just a few days, as a nation we have managed to find and donate £60m (and rising) to Children in Need and disaster relief in the Philippines, and still the appeals continue. It’s as if they are saying: “Well that’s all very nice, but now we want your money too.” Why are we perceived to be a bottomless pit of spare cash for every cause that comes along – nationally and internationally?

It seems we give because we can, but sometimes – and especially when it comes to overseas aid – you have to wonder whether we should first be putting our own house in order and in particular before we contribute to India so it can send a space probe to Mars.

As a nation we could also do with sending far less (preferably none at all) of our hard earned money to the EU for them to pour it down their unaccountable drain. If the Government would be a little more careful with our money, then maybe we would have a little more of it remaining in our pockets when truly good causes come along.

• Father Neil McNicholas is a parish priest in Middlesbrough.