One spends £20 a day on tobacco, the other drinks himself into intensive care whenever he has the opportunity.
I have a friend who lives in the same building (it's like an old folk's home but with independent apartments and on-site care). The 'managers' of this council funded facility have the authority to refer anyone to a food bank and they have told my friend several times that he only has to ask. There are 60 residents in this one building and only know 6 of them to speak to, so go figure.
But mostly: If there are people depending on the food banks to get food because of their addictions, isn't that a sign that (at least for these people), food banks very much are neccessary? Unless one assumes that people would change their spending behaviour under enough pressure, but from what little I personally know, that would very much just be an assumption.
I think you know I was making a valid point initially though. I was giving an example of how readily available these schemes are to people who don't really need them. There is a perception that people have to qualify for such help when, in reality, they just need to know the system.
You may say there is always going to be minor abuse of such schemes and I will just say that I think otherwise.
"Ben je bijvoorbeeld alleenstaand en houd je minder dan € 300,- over voor eten en kleding? Dan kom je in aanmerking. Die € 300,- is ons normbedrag voor een alleenstaande zonder kinderen."
https://voedselbankennederland.nl/ik-zoek-hulp/rekenhulp-voe...