Some Children In Need.

by Rick Johansen

It’s probably just me, as per usual, but there is something about Children In Need that leaves me shifting about uncomfortably in my seat.

Let’s put this in context, first, though. A lot of people, some famous, many more who aren’t, do great things to help children who are in need, some desperately so. Hands up if some of the stories tonight don’t move you. It’s not compulsory because, as I never tire of saying, we are all different, but there is nothing quite as upsetting as seeing children suffering. And all the money raised, that 20p donated in a bucket by a senior citizen, is as valuable as the thousands handed across by very rich people for special prizes on the Chris Evans show. More about that later.

When David Cameron came to power – well actually he didn’t: it was Nick Clegg who brought him to power, but I digress – he promised us his ‘Big Society’ where people would do stuff for nothing to help people. This was a brilliant idea by Cameron and maybe he meant it. After all, he lost a severely disabled son so he must have a heart. I just don’t know where it is these days.

Actually, as Children In Need is reminding us all now, people have been helping the less fortunate for many years. For no reward save making people’s lives better or at least more bearable.

I am an unconstructed cuddly left of centre socialist, which is to say not a revolutionary nor an anarchist. My politics is not necessarily party based although there is only one party I would ever vote for. I believe in things like the NHS, dignity in old age, provision for the most vulnerable in society, that sort of thing. Not massive state nationalisation (except maybe the railways, power companies and the Royal Mail, Vince) and I wouldn’t want to change us into Cuba. So that means I don’t understand why a rich country like ours relies to such a large extent on charities like Children In Need.

I have no idea how much Children In Need will raise tonight – at a guess maybe £50m, which is sensational and testament to what generous people we are. But look at this. As ever, we are pissing away many millions in armed warfare, this time in Syria, bombing ISIS. Spending on the armed services carries on apace, as if the worldwide financial crash never happened, and whilst the rest of the public sector shrinks to the bone, the government carries on with the bottomless pit at the MOD. A single bombing mission in Syria costs £1m and god alone knows how much when you include the logistics, maintenance and servicing of the aircraft and the ever growing army of civil servants who oversee it all. In government spending terms, £50m is not even a small pimple.

What’s the argument against the government providing the help and support that Children In Need provides? That they can’t afford everything the charity does? In which case why not? Isn’t it able to provide that £50m out of our taxes? I earn absolute buttons in my part time job, in net terms way under the national minimum wage, but I’d pay extra if it meant children were not suffering, had better lives. Or is the argument that Children In Need merely scratching the surface and simply can’t deal with the problems of the vast majority of children in need? They are funding 2600 projects in the UK. How many more are there?

The great unsaid is that the argument is the latter: that Children In Need alleviates the suffering of a few needy children whilst many others and their families live miserable lives and once the day is over they get shoved to the back of our minds and tucked away out of the sight of the great British public. Certainly until the election is out of the way.

This year it seems to feature faded and fading MOR popsters, including the woeful S Club 7 (gissa job) and Ronan Keating with three other blokes who can’t sing. Oh and that Irish band who think they’re Maroon 5 and the usual EastEnders dancing crap. With ‘Sir’ Terry Wogan, who used to get paid untold riches to front this charity show, you would not expect cutting edge but most of these guests are desperate.

The little films break my heart, but does it really have to be like this? Can’t we as a society do better?

Finally, Chris Evans. I bow to no one with my admiration for the broadcaster Evans, the finest radio presenter of his generation. I couldn’t stand the young, Zoo radio Evans, but the new model is the best. But sometimes he forgets where he is from.

This week, he has been auctioning some amazing prizes on his Radio 2 show, things like a trip to the Monaco Grand Prix to be entertained by the Williams racing team. I’m not sure how much this went for but it was for many thousands of pounds, many tens of thousands. And there were plenty of auctions like this and huge sums were raised for this great cause. But hang on. Who can afford these eye-watering sums? Almost all the really big prizes went to the super rich whilst the show had a token raffle prize where listeners could text £2.50. It is all very well Evans raising huge sums of money but I am very uncomfortable about the sight of the super rich having the most fun in Children In Need. There is a kind of decadence about it. One sort of Children In Need donation is more valuable than another. No it isn’t. But the prizes make it look that way. I think the BBC needs to rethink this.

Of course it is wonderful that all this money will change the lives of thousands of people. Maybe one day, we won’t need a charity to give the most needy children a decent life but I’m not holding my breath.

You may also like