National charity to lose all its government cash as police admit 
			their work on the issue will also be hit.
				
					
						
						  | 
					 
					
						| 
						 
						How 
						'The Independent on Sunday' last year highlighted the 
						crisis facing the charity, Missing People  | 
					 
				 
			 
			George Osborne's multibillion-pound spending cuts threaten to sever 
			a national "lifeline" that helps tens of thousands of missing people 
			and the families they leave behind. 
			 
			Britain's biggest missing persons charity has been plunged into 
			crisis after ministers confirmed it will lose all of its £500,000 
			government funding. 
			 
			
			Missing People, which helps more than 100,000 
			callers a year, warns that the cut will cause "catastrophic" damage 
			to its work supporting "mispers", runaways and their families. 
			 
			And MPs have warned that efforts to find the 275,000 Britons who 
			disappear every year will be further hindered by a threat to the 
			sole state body focused exclusively on locating missing people. The 
			UK Missing Persons Bureau is part of the National Police Improvement 
			Agency (NPIA), one of the organisations earmarked for closure amid 
			the cull of quangos last month. Ministers admit they have not 
			decided where – or whether – the bureau's work will be continued. 
			 
			The confusion has also cast a shadow over the chances of identifying 
			the bodies of almost 1,000 people found in the UK over the past 50 
			years. 
			 
			The "dismantling of the missing persons infrastructure" has provoked 
			concern for a function that has traditionally been regarded as a low 
			police priority. The Police Federation last night confirmed that the 
			search for missing people would inevitably be hit by a reordering of 
			priorities in the face of cuts. 
			 
			The warnings come only days after the parents of Madeleine McCann 
			complained that the British authorities were not helping them to 
			find their daughter, who disappeared from a Portuguese resort in 
			2007. 
			 
			"Withdrawing funding from the only 24-hour missing persons charity 
			without saying how they are going to invest in the future has made a 
			precarious situation one that threatens to be catastrophic," said 
			Martin Houghton-Brown, Missing People's chief executive.  
			 
			The charity, whose website carries thousands of photographs and case 
			details, claims that it "directly reconnected" 450 UK families with 
			a missing relative last year, while "countless more" were indirectly 
			helped. 
			 
			An Independent on Sunday investigation last year found the charity's 
			volunteers and staff were struggling to cope. It was demanding that 
			a government department take responsibility for the issue, more 
			co-operation between statutory agencies and, crucially, more 
			resources. But it is now set to lose a £350,000 annual grant from 
			the Home Office and £150,000 from the Department for Education, 
			which helps to maintain a runaways helpline. 
			 
			Missing People's staff have attempted to play down the damage 
			presented by the cuts, partly due to fears that it could undermine 
			the confidence of the charity's private backers. 
			 
			But MPs maintain that cutting more than £80bn from Government 
			spending over four years threatens to close both organisations. 
			Labour MP Ann Coffey, chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group for 
			Runaway and Missing Children and Adults, said: "The very core of the 
			front-line missing persons services is under threat." 
			She added: "Instead of removing the missing persons infrastructure, 
			we must maintain investment and underpin it with new legislation 
			that supports existing services and does much-needed filling in of 
			gaps." 
			 
			A Home Office spokeswoman said last night: "We are looking at what 
			improvements can be made if existing agencies work together and 
			share resources more effectively." 
			 
			And a spokesman for the Department for Education said: "The 
			voluntary sector cannot be immune from reductions in public 
			expenditure."  |