BS: Charities and Oxfam

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Nigel Parsons
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 07:00 AM

From: Steve Shaw - PM
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 05:44 AM
In my opinion that would be a very undesirable thing and a perfect example of how we will actually have lost control, not taken it back.

You seem to be confusing the issues.
Brexit is not about whether we have control over the EU (Why should we have it? Why would we want it?), but about whether the EU has control over UK.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 09:22 AM

Rob Naylor. What you say is backed up by what I have seen. I wonder why so many brand new UN badged Toyota Landcruisers clutter up the carparks of the only 5 star hotels in these countries? The wastage is phenomenal.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 09:37 AM

How it is:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/07/what-has-the-un-achieved-united-nations

Several years old but nothing has changed.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 09:40 AM

Well Nigel, it's neither, it never was and was never planned to be. If by "control" you mean adhering to high standards of animal welfare and food safety, environmental protection, human rights, democracy and the rule of law, then I must admit I'd much prefer to be "controlled" by those things than to cut loose from them and let Tory philosophy control us. The Tory track record on the NHS, on housing, on the disabled and on austerity doesn't exactly fill me with optimism that they'd be much use when it comes to replacing those EU "controls" (which, as I keep reminding you, we play a major and influential part in drawing up, over which we have a veto if we don't like what's proposed and which we overwhelmingly agree with - and which we will hang on to lock, stock and barrel almost, once we're out). Taking back control is an illusion and always was.

Incidentally, we are discussing this in the wrong thread.

That is a distressing catalogue of wrongdoing, Rob. What I'd like to know is how it stands in proportion to the actual amount of good that charities do. I take your point about supporting smaller projects with better oversight. Is there a solution for larger charities or should we stop supporting them, and if so how should we urgently redistribute their work? They are big questions. I see that the Mail is still on the attack this morning. Seems to me that that approach is simply going to sharply diminish charities' income, with deleterious consequences for the people they help.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 10:46 AM

"European Superstate"???

Who is behind that plot, Steve? The Illuminati? The UN? (they're after 'One World Government' after all) The Jesuits?? The Masons? The Shriners?

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 03:08 PM

Getting back to Oxfam, how dare idiots like Mprdaunt suggest that money that people have donated which they are expecting that it would be directly spent on relief be used to pick up the tab for withdrawn government funding. If this happens then the government should be refunding donations and there own expense, including the cost of identifying where every single penny donated has come from, so that donors have the opportunity to re-donate the money elsewhere. That works out about £178 as a poll tax for each tory party member, maybe double that to account for administering the refunds.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 04:20 PM

It is not just Oxfam that is guilty of malpractise, many other organisations are tainted from the UN on down. It has been going on for years and runs the entire gamut from misuse of funds, to theft of food aid, to child abuse all the way up to and including UN peacekeeping forces. It may only be a small minority but the damage they cause is immense. The existing oversight mechanisms are totally inadequate.

https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/audio/2018/feb/14/oxfam-allegations-are-tip-of-iceberg-sexual-harassment-and-aid-

.aljazeera.com/news/2017/07/peacekeepers-hit-allegations-sex-abuse-170701133655238.html
and for those that like to judge a book by its cover. Wikipedia below tells a similar story.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_sexual_abuse_by_UN_peacekeepers.
and even worse western forces seem to turn turn a blind eye to below:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacha_bazi

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: SPB-Cooperator
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 04:34 PM

Put NGOs and Charities into some for of special measures by all means, but the government should not be threatening to withdraw aid funding which i the end will harm the intended recipients. And if this results in even more rafts of compliance reporting, then I trust that central government will pay the costs for smaller charities like those I work with, and charities that provide trust funding.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 05:33 PM

SPB-Cooperator. I do not think anyone would like to see government withdraw funding. Perhaps there is a case for redirecting some of it.
The reports are too widespread and far to well substantiated for the numerous allegations to be dismissed. The case for reform is clear. How to go about it is a discussion that has yet to start. From what I have seen it is the larger bodies that cause the most havoc. International bodies seem to have to operate on a cross between national self interest and Buggin's turn. This creates a downward spiral of administrative ineptitude from the top on down. Without reforming the administration oversight is merely a joke. For NGO's such as Oxfam it would seem to me they have to put their house in order rapidly before their funding dries up. Why would any rational person continue to donate to a corrupt organisation?

The argument about the gutter press harming the income of Oxfam is a totally false construct. If the house was in order the situation would not arise. Is criminality to be covered up in order subscriptions do not diminish. That in itself is a far greater crime!

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Greg F.
Date: 14 Feb 18 - 06:42 PM

many other organisations are tainted from the UN on down.


I KNEW it was the goddamn UN behind the Euoropean Superstate plot!

Thanks, Iains !

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 17 Feb 18 - 03:53 PM

"I KNEW it was the goddamn UN behind the Euoropean Superstate plot!"

It must be a wondrous experience to have shit for brains.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Mr Red
Date: 19 Feb 18 - 05:54 AM

Have the infamous exploits of Oxfam caused irreparable damage to all charities.
probably.

They have a problem - what you might call the Harvey Weinstein syndrome.

I heard a screenwriter (employed twice, sacked twice) recounting tales of the man. "He was a bully" - sums it up.

The point is a forceful person gets things done. And the force doesn't stop at work. Select for guys who have morals and you may find they wield less force. Get less done.

unintended consequences is a two edged sword here. In the wake of improving the morals of charity workers, there is another effect. While we welcome the trend, ignoring the co-effects is only going to surprise us.

Maxwell's Maxim "To measure is to know". Measuring should be holistic.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: JHW
Date: 19 Feb 18 - 06:42 AM

I've sent an annual direct debit to Oxfam for forty years at least. Last year they sent a standard letter asking for more but left out my second initial. Later a request for how they should write to me. Then another request for something. I insisted each time they change their cba attitude to my name. No reply. I cancelled the direct debit. A standard goodbye letter, initial omitted.
I am so sorry that all these decades I have sent donations thinking them worthwhile yet to them I am of no consequence. Why oh why did I do it so long?

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 19 Feb 18 - 06:51 AM

Having prepare accounts for charities in the past, I can assure you that it is very unusual for more than 10% of funds donated/collected to be in excess of administration costs!

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Senoufou
Date: 19 Feb 18 - 06:55 AM

An extremely elderly friend gave very generously to Oxfam (and one or two other big charities) by direct debit each month. They were perpetually ringing her asking for more, in quite an aggressive way. She was also bombarded with mail in the same vein. It got so bad she was almost reluctant to answer her phone. In the end she had to threaten them with harassment, and she stopped her contributions.
She told me she was sad for the poor folk who might have benefited, but
she just couldn't put up with any more hassle.

We resent being accosted in the street by chuggers. They follow one along the pavement and won't go away. No-one realises more than us how dire the sufferings are in so-called Third World countries, but we are supporting a huge African family and all our available spare money goes to them. I try to be polite, but sometimes one is biting one's tongue!

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: BobL
Date: 20 Feb 18 - 03:04 AM

Bonzo, do you mean that <10% usually covers the admin costs, or that <10% is what's left over after paying them? I hope it's the first, but can read your post either way.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 05:20 AM

BobL. A partial answer. The percentage reaching the intended destination seems very low in some cases. It clearly demonstrates the need for a radical overhaul, including the charity commissioners.

https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/how-much-charities-spend-good-causes

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Georgiansilver
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 07:14 AM

It strikes me as sad that the whole of the Oxfam Charity is suffering for the misbehaviour of the few. As always this thing has blown out of all proportion. People are stopping their monthly payments to Oxfam and other charities but the money is still needed to help those who are suffering and in need in third world countries. The charities have done a lot of great work. The actions of those few will possibly cause untold hardship!! It seems likely that such charities may fail to get the funds needed to continue....

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Mr Red
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 07:43 AM

unintended consequences

In just about any human endeavour, the system is so complex we don't visualise the whole, just the detail presented.

The charities spend a lot of their publicity on the suffering of victims. We react to that. Now we have a wider view, we are reacting to that.

My favoured charities are specific and the workers are volunteers. It is the best I can do, and I choose to ignore aspects I can't see. One surprised me, I deposoted a sum with a Credit Union in the hope it helps responsible local people suffering hardship. They charge me 1 GBP as a reward for my largess. (nothing in their documentation!). When it works, they give me 0.25% interest. (once in 3 years so far). I had to laugh when I pointed-out their passbook was deficient in explaining a fairly important facet. It still makes me smile and is small beer in comparison with Oxfam's oversights.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Senoufou
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 07:53 AM

It seems to me that inappropriate behaviour, sexual harassment and abuse have been going on for ages in nearly every organisation of every kind, and it's just that people are now exposing the situation and demanding that it stops. Which is quite right. It must stop.

It's not a bit of good saying one is making too much of a fuss, or there will be collateral damage. It must be made plain that wrongdoing and exploitation are NOT acceptable at any level.

People in positions of some power (and I'm afraid it is usually men) are accountable for how they conduct themselves.
Once all this is enforced and the Augean stables cleaned out, things can resume as normal.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 08:15 AM

"As always this thing has blown out of all proportion"

That statement is a matter of opinion, many will have other views. Five minutes of internet research will show these allegations about various Internations and NGO abuse go back for years. Very little has been done to cure the rot, sometimes whistleblowers have also been victimised. Selective amnesia seems to be at play.
If charities want donations they need to be far more proactive in making themselves squeaky clean. That they feel no need to pursue allegations betrays an arrogant mindset totally at odds with their function. Those that continue to donate are merely encouraging their continued misbehaviour.
How can a normal person continue to contribute to a charity knowing that their donation is helping prolong the cycle of abuse?

https://www.thenational.ae/world/europe/save-the-children-and-irc-dragged-into-oxfam-abuse-scandal-1.704713
https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2015/mar/04/police-investigate-save-the-children-whistleblowers-over-nauru-abuse-repo
https://news.sky.com/story/oxfam-admits-it-knew-about-abuse-report-10-years-ago-11254729

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Senoufou
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 08:35 AM

Hahaha Iains, I think we must have cross-posted, and I agree with every word of your latest post.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 09:05 AM

Senoufou. We will have to be careful agreeing some of the time. You know how tongues wag on this forum!

By the way it is good you are back. Your contributions always show both insight and compassion.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 09:16 AM

TOXFAM

this is more of Rush Iain's toxic digital warfare.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 09:18 AM

Donuel. You spend too much time down rabbit holes. Just ask Alice!

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Donuel
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 09:31 AM

Of course you would say Mueller's indictment and proof of Rush Iain advanced digital warfare is a rabbit hole. You deny and lie as much as Trump.

Where can I find you folk singing or playing something?

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 21 Feb 18 - 10:22 AM

Got the right thread have you?

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 22 Feb 18 - 06:38 AM

An interesting perspective. Could it apply to other Charities? Is it the function of the RSPCA to attempt to
prosecute for alleged "blood sports transgressions?"


https://www.spectator.co.uk/2018/02/oxfams-troubles-began-when-it-became-politically-correct/?utm_source=Adestra&utm_medium=emai

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Pete from seven stars link
Date: 23 Feb 18 - 05:43 PM

I find myself giving less to the big charities these days , and more to smaller ones which I hope have less overheads and big exec salaries . Sadly , oxfams scandal will discourage giving to them. I hope it is transferred to smaller and hopefully safer organizations

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Greg F.
Date: 23 Feb 18 - 09:51 PM

I'm cure that https://creationmuseum.org/ would be glad to take your money, Pete. They might even let you ride a dinosaur in appreciation.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Mr Red
Date: 26 Feb 18 - 06:40 AM

I hope it is transferred to smaller and hopefully safer organizations

in these straightened times, I suspect the total "giving" will actually reduce. Charity begins at home, don't ya know.

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Iains
Date: 26 Feb 18 - 03:29 PM

https://www.rt.com/uk/419843-sex-abuse-charities-list/

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Pete from seven stars link
Date: 27 Feb 18 - 02:45 PM

Carry on Greg ; you must have a miserable life , attacking people at every opportunity ....

Subject: RE: BS: Charities and Oxfam
From: Pete from seven stars link
Date: 27 Feb 18 - 02:48 PM

I thought I read somewhere , mr Red , that charity giving had been increasing in the last few years, but I'm not dogmatic on that . Unfortunately these scandals may discourage some from donating