Tweet

You might genuinely believe that the training for the personal finance initiatives is nothing more than a waste of government money. However experience shows us that there are plenty of people that would greatly benefit from some sort of financial training. These people come from all walks of life and they present an image of a society that needs to look after them.

When you see a single parent that is in a total financial meltdown then it is time to consider training that parent in budgeting. It is not about patronizing the parent but giving them the skills that they need to ensure that they do not destroy their personal finances. Of course such training needs to be given in a sensitive manner and in a way that respects the basic human dignity of that person.

They also have the right to refuse the training if they believe that it is not going to be advantageous to them. You should ensure that you are in a position to take up all the issues that have been discussed.

We then move to the substantive issue of costs. I think that it is in the interests of government to provide some sort of free training in personal finance. Most of the people that fall into serious financial difficulties will end up on the dole. That represents a huge cost for the government. It is far better to deal with this problem before it escalates.

That is the way that I would deal with the situation. It is preferable to grandstanding and refusing to fund a project that is clearly worthwhile. Part of the social fund should be dedicated to improving the personal finance training of people in the low income groups. I know that the conservatives will be up in arms about this because it seems to be yet another entitlement program. However it is far better to get people off benefits by providing them with the skills to manage their own finances.

If we just say no to any entitlement programs that are out there we could end up causing more problems for the welfare system that has to deal with these people when they are unable to pay their bills. That is a situation that is clearly not desirable in any sense of the word. We need to review the way that we operate these schemes with a view to improving the general outcomes and the specific issues that we find so important in the grand scheme of things.

That is the best way forward and it is what will make all the difference between our different criteria items and the ability to make money on a grand scale. Those issues are raised systematically with a view to improving the general climate for processes and outcomes for people on the low income scale. It is about smart government and smart choices. We can afford to work on this issue in tandem with the other charities that work in this area.