The Free Market isn't free. Its cost is measured in human despair and truncated lives. That we have a situation in one of the richest economies in the world where people, including children, do not have enough to eat, is nothing short of a crime.
While you might think that volunteering is a huge commitment and that you have to do it every week without fail, which for some, just isn't realistic. The reality is that you don't. Whatever free time you can spare to help out your local food bank or charity is always appreciated - regardless of whether you spare one hour a month, or three hours a week.
payers, government, council and local community will strain every sinew to see that a more suitable alternative is provided. Can GPs please get back to fitting suits and let others go back to supplying socks, shirts and bread?
The APPG on food poverty and hunger's seminal report goes beyond anything that's been done before on the problem of hunger in Britain. This powerful cross-party document validates what the voluntary sector has been saying for a long time about the distressing reality of hunger in the UK, and it turns the spotlight on the specific problems that need addressing.
Reducing social inequality makes far more sense socially, economically, and - if you must - morally as well. Regrettably, too few people in power seem willing to make the case for a more equal society. They would rather continue to demonise the apparently 'poor lifestyle choices' of the most socially excluded.
As 1,000 economists have pointed out, an FTT is "technically feasible" and "morally right". It is, you could say, a tax whose time has come. Even Myleene Klass might agree.
The first step in ensuring that a third generation of British-born ethnic minorities doesn't experience the same imbalance is recognising the extent of these inequalities. It's no good to argue that race doesn't matter anymore, when all the evidence shows that BME people still experience disadvantage over every significant measurement of quality of life in Britain.
The Autumn Statement was the Government's last chance to ensure the economic recovery does not bypass the worst off. This opportunity was missed.
In his Autumn Statement on Wednesday, the Chancellor reaffirmed his plan to eliminate the fiscal deficit (public sector net borrowing) by 2018/19. He is also going to put the issue to a vote in parliament. He will undoubtedly win the vote, but if the next government chooses to follow this path it could be making a huge mistake.
Osborne should have moved at least a few steps towards a simple tax code with fewer types of taxes, fewer rates, and fewer exceptions. The economic efficiency improvements could then be recycled into tax cuts across the board.
The public seem less convinced by the failed politics and failed economics of the past than ever. What people do want to see is a credible alternative to austerity that holds out hope for the future and removes fear and insecurity from people's lives.... As opinion polls show clearly, the British people don't believe in George Osborne's 'long-term economic plan'. And nor, it seems, does he.
In today's autumn statement, the Chancellor George Osborne has cleverly used a mix of spin and deceit to hide the biggest, unaddressed issues in the British economy: the national debt and deficit... Only Ukip, it seems, is being truthful and honest with the British people on the realities that we face on our budget deficit and national debt in an ever competitive world.
An advisory group to the United Nations is calling for a revolution. It won't be taking people to the streets, ousting governments or causing bloodshed, but it will overhaul the data driving governments' decisions.
Once the Autumn Statement is out later this week, the momentum towards the upcoming General Election in the UK will be gathering pace. So far, the political and media discourse around the election has been marked by a certain amount of uncertainty and negativity about the future social and economic situation in the UK...
In short, we hear what journalists and politicians think the issues are and and how it affects Londoners - but we don't hear enough from Londoners themselves. And it is only by having an inclusive debate with all parties allowed a voice, that we will together take the tough decisions needed to tackle the London housing crisis.
Last time, I discussed the need for the NHS to differentiate between 'treatment' and 'care'. In the last week, three stories have emerged to support this view