Haverhill charity faces £18k bill due to National Insurance rise
"[Charities] are all in the same boat, everyone is finding it tough, everyone is surprised, everyone is disappointed, and everyone is struggling to find funds," she told the Local Democracy Reporting Service. "It's tough anyway being a charity right now, we are grateful for every single penny we get, but it is hard to get every single penny - it's going to be tough on us."Although known for its foodbank operations, Reach also provides free financial advice in schools, homelessness support and cookery classes for cheap, healthy meals.Ms Chappell said the extra bill could impact on whether the charity wanted to expand and potentially put its operations at risk."There are a lot of people out there who would just be finding life incredibly tough without our help," she added.
Reeves' changes included raising the NI rate paid by employers to 15%, a 1.2% hike, and reducing the threshold at which businesses are required to pay to £5,000, down from £9,100.Alongside her announcement was an increase in the employment allowance, providing relief of up to £10,500 a year.Joe Mason, Conservative county councillor for Haverhill, said although the relief was welcomed, many charities would still be negatively affected."We must do everything we can to help them continue their invaluable work, not make it harder for them to operate," he added.He also believed local businesses would also struggle with the higher rates.The Treasury has been approached for comment.
Follow Suffolk news on BBC Sounds, Facebook, Instagram and X.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Edinburgh Reporter
an hour ago
- Edinburgh Reporter
Name of new cycle hire company to be announced on Monday
The council will announce the name of the new operator of the city's new cycle hire scheme on Monday afternoon. It is expected that the trial e-bike scheme will be up and running just a few days later. As already announced, several companies, including Dott and also a company called Lime, bid for the contract to run the service at zero cost to the council. The council had set next week as a target launch date for the trial, with the scheme set to start on a small scale. It is not yet known clear if bikes will be on the street next week, but it is understood the council are confident the scheme will be up and running by the end of August. Edinburgh's transport convener previously said the scheme would be implemented 'diligently', and in a way that fits the capital's 'specific needs'. The trial will last for two years, and the council aims to retain the service permanently after that. A few e-bikes will be available for hire first in the central part of the city, and the number of bikes and coverage area will then expand. Just Eat e-bikes. Photo: Martin P. McAdam The city's last cycle hire scheme, latterly sponsored by Just Eat, collapsed almost four years ago due to a range of issues, including the vandalism of many bikes. The council and private operator Serco could not agree a deal to continue running it, and those docking stations which still existed (many had been removed due to vandalism) were fully cleared from the city. Large numbers of bikes were thrown in the Water of Leith or stolen. Efforts to reintroduce a cycle hire scheme have been underway since the previous scheme failed four years ago, but there have been concerns that it would not be feasible to reintroduce one in the city. In 2022 one option was to approve a docked system on a 'managed service' basis but that would have required an initial capital investment of £8.36 million deemed not possible. Among the concerns was the cost that running a scheme could have involved, with the Just Eat bikes scheme costing the city £1.8 million in pure financial terms. By using the dockless model which both Dott and Lime use, the new scheme will be run at no cost to the city, with hire fares for the bikes subsidising the costs of running the service. In May 2025, Cllr Stephen Jenkinson, the city's Transport Convener, said that neither company on the shortlist required any kind of finance to deliver the service. Following an intervention by the Conservative group on the council at the May Transport and Environment Committee meeting, The City of Edinburgh Council will seize any cycle hire bikes parked inappropriately, (outwith geofenced locations) and charge whichever company is running the scheme to get them back. This type of 'fine' is used in the City of London, where the council holds misplaced hire bikes for 24 hours and then charges operators £235 for their return. Any data collected during the pilot will include the number of bikes parked in the wrong place. It was also agreed that the operator chosen for the scheme will provide an assessment of ways to minimise street clutter. Both Dott and Lime run cycle hire schemes in other parts of the UK, as well as in Europe. There are 40+ cycle hire schemes in the UK and six were selected for appraisal of the options in February 2023 after an initial decision in November 2021 to obtain information about what a new Edinburgh scheme might look like. Transport and Environment Committee convener Stephen Jenkinson said last month: 'Our initial target was to launch the trial cycle hire scheme during the month of August, and I remain confident that we'll deliver this. 'As ever, we'll work closely with summer festival operators and our other partners to minimise disruption during this busy period. 'We're determined that any cycle hire scheme is implemented diligently and in the right way for the specific needs of Edinburgh.' When final approval for a scheme was given in May, Cllr Jenkinson said he would 'not apologise' for placing council officers under significant time pressure to launch it. It is council officers who will decide which of the bids is successful. The Transport and Environment Committee last met in June 2025 and the next scheduled meeting is in September. by Joseph Sullivan Local Democracy Reporter . Lime Bikes offer a scheme in London. They are one of the providers which is on the shortlist in Edinburgh Like this: Like Related
Rhyl Journal
an hour ago
- Rhyl Journal
Ricky Jones case should not be compared to Lucy Connolly
Ricky Jones, 58, faced trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court after he described far-right activists as 'disgusting Nazi fascists' in a speech at an anti-racism rally last year, in the wake of the Southport murders. The now-suspended councillor, surrounded by cheering supporters in Walthamstow, east London, on August 7 2024, was filmed stating: 'They are disgusting Nazi fascists. We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.' Jurors deliberated for just over half-an-hour and found him not guilty on Friday. This caused Conservative and Reform politicians to brand the decision 'two-tier justice' – with shadow home secretary Chris Philp comparing the case to that of Mrs Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months after she posted a tweet calling for 'mass deportation' of asylum seekers and to 'set fire to all the f****** hotels' on the day of the Southport attacks. Former home secretary and Tory leadership candidate Sir James Cleverly also called the jury's decision to clear Ricky Jones 'perverse' in an X post, adding: 'Perverse decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system.' Lawyers have said the cases should not be conflated as Connolly and Jones faced allegations of a different nature – and Jones faced trial where Connolly, having pleaded guilty, did not. Peter Stringfellow, a solicitor at Brett Wilson, told the PA news agency: 'Both (Jones and Connolly) said pretty unpleasant things. 'However, I'm afraid the conflation of the two after that is a problem. It comes from people who've got some sort of political agenda, in my view. 'They were facing completely different allegations and a massive part of those different allegations is the racial element. 'If you look at the Connolly case … her intention is of a racial nature.' Connolly pleaded guilty last year to a charge of inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing 'threatening or abusive' written material on X. On July 29 last year, she posted: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care … if that makes me racist so be it.' 'She directs everybody to the fact that this was a racial comment,' Mr Stringfellow said. 'She pleads guilty to that intention … she accepted that she had intended to stir racial hatred. 'The Jones case is different because one, he's facing a completely different allegation: he's facing encouraging violent disorder. 'And the difference with him is he's saying: 'That's not what I was intended to do'.' Mr Stringfellow added that, in the case of Connolly, racially aggravated discourse on social media did translate into real-life violence across the country – whereas Mr Jones' comments at a rally did not cause a violent disorder. 'What she (Connolly) did, what followed her comments about threatening to burn people in hotels, is that that's precisely what then happened – and people were attempting to burn people in hotels.' Ernest Aduwa, partner at Stokoe Partnership Solicitors, said comparisons between Jones' and Connolly's cases were 'misplaced'. 'We need to be honest about what is going on here. The verdict in the Ricky Jones case was not political, it was legal,' he said. 'A jury listened to the evidence, tested it and decided unanimously he was not guilty. 'That is not bias or 'two-tier justice' – it is the justice system doing what it is supposed to do: separating facts from noise. 'Comparisons with the Lucy Connolly case are misplaced. 'Lucy Connolly pleaded guilty. There was no trial, no cross-examination, no jury. She admitted the specific offence: stirring up racial hatred online. 'Ricky Jones faced a different charge … with a high burden of proof. 'The jury decided the Crown had not met it. 'That does not mean the protest was not passionate or loud – it means there was not enough evidence to prove intent to incite violence. That distinction matters. 'I understand why emotions run high. But flattening two different situations into one misleading narrative does no favours to justice. 'The fact that a black man at a protest can receive a fair trial and be acquitted should be seen not as an injustice, but as proof the system can still get it right.' He added: 'The law is not perfect, but it must rest on evidence – not opinion, pressure, or politics.' Laura Allen, head of the protest and public order team at Hodge, Jones and Allen lawyers, said the two cases involved different decisions that need to be put in their legal context and it is 'frankly offensive' to the ordinary members of the public who sat on the jury to suggest they had not acted appropriately. If there is anything close to a two-tier system in the British justice sector it is one that historically 'has not favoured ethnic minorities', although work has been done to try to repair that situation, according to Ms Allen. A judge made a ruling on Connolly's sentence after she had said she was guilty, while a jury listened to the evidence during the trial and found him not guilty. Ms Allen said they are 'just two very different things and it is not possible to compare them in the way that Nigel Farage is choosing to do as part of his political grandstanding'. She said: 'He (Farage) is suggesting that these 12 people, about whom I assume he knows nothing, have not made their decision on the evidence but on some other ulterior motive. 'They are 12 members of the jury, picked at random, who have done their civic duty, have listened to the evidence in the case and concluded they could not be sure that Ricky Jones was guilty. 'Due to the way our jury system works they are not required, and certainly are not permitted, to explain the reasons for their decision.' She added: 'All we know is that the jury found Ricky Jones not guilty. We don't know why. We also don't know the political background of any of these people. We don't know their views on immigration or on race. 'We don't know any of that stuff and that is the whole point.'
South Wales Guardian
3 hours ago
- South Wales Guardian
Ricky Jones case should not be compared to Lucy Connolly
Ricky Jones, 58, faced trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court after he described far-right activists as 'disgusting Nazi fascists' in a speech at an anti-racism rally last year, in the wake of the Southport murders. The now-suspended councillor, surrounded by cheering supporters in Walthamstow, east London, on August 7 2024, was filmed stating: 'They are disgusting Nazi fascists. We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.' Jurors deliberated for just over half-an-hour and found him not guilty on Friday. This caused Conservative and Reform politicians to brand the decision 'two-tier justice' – with shadow home secretary Chris Philp comparing the case to that of Mrs Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months after she posted a tweet calling for 'mass deportation' of asylum seekers and to 'set fire to all the f****** hotels' on the day of the Southport attacks. Former home secretary and Tory leadership candidate Sir James Cleverly also called the jury's decision to clear Ricky Jones 'perverse' in an X post, adding: 'Perverse decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system.' Lawyers have said the cases should not be conflated as Connolly and Jones faced allegations of a different nature – and Jones faced trial where Connolly, having pleaded guilty, did not. Peter Stringfellow, a solicitor at Brett Wilson, told the PA news agency: 'Both (Jones and Connolly) said pretty unpleasant things. 'However, I'm afraid the conflation of the two after that is a problem. It comes from people who've got some sort of political agenda, in my view. 'They were facing completely different allegations and a massive part of those different allegations is the racial element. 'If you look at the Connolly case … her intention is of a racial nature.' Connolly pleaded guilty last year to a charge of inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing 'threatening or abusive' written material on X. On July 29 last year, she posted: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care … if that makes me racist so be it.' 'She directs everybody to the fact that this was a racial comment,' Mr Stringfellow said. 'She pleads guilty to that intention … she accepted that she had intended to stir racial hatred. 'The Jones case is different because one, he's facing a completely different allegation: he's facing encouraging violent disorder. 'And the difference with him is he's saying: 'That's not what I was intended to do'.' Mr Stringfellow added that, in the case of Connolly, racially aggravated discourse on social media did translate into real-life violence across the country – whereas Mr Jones' comments at a rally did not cause a violent disorder. 'What she (Connolly) did, what followed her comments about threatening to burn people in hotels, is that that's precisely what then happened – and people were attempting to burn people in hotels.' Ernest Aduwa, partner at Stokoe Partnership Solicitors, said comparisons between Jones' and Connolly's cases were 'misplaced'. 'We need to be honest about what is going on here. The verdict in the Ricky Jones case was not political, it was legal,' he said. 'A jury listened to the evidence, tested it and decided unanimously he was not guilty. 'That is not bias or 'two-tier justice' – it is the justice system doing what it is supposed to do: separating facts from noise. 'Comparisons with the Lucy Connolly case are misplaced. 'Lucy Connolly pleaded guilty. There was no trial, no cross-examination, no jury. She admitted the specific offence: stirring up racial hatred online. 'Ricky Jones faced a different charge … with a high burden of proof. 'The jury decided the Crown had not met it. 'That does not mean the protest was not passionate or loud – it means there was not enough evidence to prove intent to incite violence. That distinction matters. 'I understand why emotions run high. But flattening two different situations into one misleading narrative does no favours to justice. 'The fact that a black man at a protest can receive a fair trial and be acquitted should be seen not as an injustice, but as proof the system can still get it right.' He added: 'The law is not perfect, but it must rest on evidence – not opinion, pressure, or politics.' Laura Allen, head of the protest and public order team at Hodge, Jones and Allen lawyers, said the two cases involved different decisions that need to be put in their legal context and it is 'frankly offensive' to the ordinary members of the public who sat on the jury to suggest they had not acted appropriately. If there is anything close to a two-tier system in the British justice sector it is one that historically 'has not favoured ethnic minorities', although work has been done to try to repair that situation, according to Ms Allen. A judge made a ruling on Connolly's sentence after she had said she was guilty, while a jury listened to the evidence during the trial and found him not guilty. Ms Allen said they are 'just two very different things and it is not possible to compare them in the way that Nigel Farage is choosing to do as part of his political grandstanding'. She said: 'He (Farage) is suggesting that these 12 people, about whom I assume he knows nothing, have not made their decision on the evidence but on some other ulterior motive. 'They are 12 members of the jury, picked at random, who have done their civic duty, have listened to the evidence in the case and concluded they could not be sure that Ricky Jones was guilty. 'Due to the way our jury system works they are not required, and certainly are not permitted, to explain the reasons for their decision.' She added: 'All we know is that the jury found Ricky Jones not guilty. We don't know why. We also don't know the political background of any of these people. We don't know their views on immigration or on race. 'We don't know any of that stuff and that is the whole point.'
