[TV] Captain Sir Tom Moore - *Died 2 Feb 2021*

[AIT76]

I don't know anything about the Sir Tom thing though, so couldn't comment on that. It would be sad if his name was being tarnished by bad practice.

An informative write up here : https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/captain-tom-moore-covid-fundraising-b2369872.html

 

[Seagull58]

I think they keep corruption down by delivering actual food to the schools, not money. The modus operandum is that they build kitchens at poor schools and then the work is done by volunteer mothers at the schools. Under authority of the teachers, presumably. They get food delivered rather than given cash to but it.

It isn't food like we would call food. A sort of maize porridge, in Malawi, for example. But when you have no food at all ...

Mealie meal (maize porridge) is the staple food in most of southern Africa. It contains, protein, carbohydrates, fat and fibre. It's pretty tasteless whether served as a porridge or in a more solid form known as pap or nshima.

 

[Beach Hut]

As and when almost daily the daughter was on BBC Breakfast TV it always appeared to me that she was the one who was taking centre stage and self-promoting

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The family are in trouble again for money-grubbing.

Capt Tom Moore’s daughter's company was paid for charity event

Hannah Ingram-Moore's company received money for an event, rather than the Captain Tom Foundation charity.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Beach Hut]

The family are in trouble again for money-grubbing.

Capt Tom Moore’s daughter's company was paid for charity event

Hannah Ingram-Moore's company received money for an event, rather than the Captain Tom Foundation charity.

www.bbc.co.uk

Doesn't surprise me one bit

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Doesn't surprise me one bit

Me neither she has always come over as a bit odd. Money corrupts.

 

[Icy Gull]

She looks a wrong ‘un to me.

 

[Algernon]

Don't "celebrities" get paid for bringing attention to charitable causes?
And hosts of Children in need etc?

I think they used to but do they still?

Services rendered in return for grubby money.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Don't "celebrities" get paid for bringing attention to charitable causes?
And hosts of Children in need etc?

I think they used to but do they still?

Services rendered in return for grubby money.

She's no celebrity.

 

[Beach Hut]

Don't "celebrities" get paid for bringing attention to charitable causes?
And hosts of Children in need etc?

I think they used to but do they still?

Services rendered in return for grubby money.

Wogan was paid every time he did Children in Need, every other presenter provided their services free

 

[clapham_gull]

Wogan was paid every time he did Children in Need, every other presenter provided their services free

Until it was pointed out and they stopped paying him.

 

[The Clamp]

Edit

 

[Algernon]

She's no celebrity.

Absolutely. I agree.
But should it be only "celebrities" that warrant getting paid for services rendered?
I've read of companies and individuals that leech off the back of charitable events and donations, taking their cut and reducing the nett percentage that gets to "the cause".

For the record, I don't agree with any of the greedy beggars getting paid but I understand why these hanger-on companies are needed, more so than the slebs.

 

[Algernon]

Until it was pointed out and they stopped paying him.

Good to hear.

 

[Nobby]

Absolutely. I agree.
But should it be only "celebrities" that warrant getting paid for services rendered?
I've read of companies and individuals that leech off the back of charitable events and donations, taking their cut and reducing the nett percentage that gets to "the cause".

For the record, I don't agree with any of the greedy beggars getting paid but I understand why these hanger-on companies are needed, more so than the slebs.

Difficult one.
Where’s the line
Employees that work for charities or others who get paid for bringing more funds in.
This foundation was set up in haste and you can make your own mind up whether they’re naive or on the make.

 

[Lenny Rider]

This is all so sad, the dear old man did something that won the hearts of a nation, then its turned into this.

Pure greed has effectively ruined her life but also tarnished the memory of a very special person.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

Difficult one.
Where’s the line
Employees that work for charities or others who get paid for bringing more funds in.
This foundation was set up in haste and you can make your own mind up whether they’re naive or on the make.

Yes I’ve made my mind up, didn’t take long.

 

[A1X]

Made me chuckle

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Absolutely. I agree.
But should it be only "celebrities" that warrant getting paid for services rendered?
I've read of companies and individuals that leech off the back of charitable events and donations, taking their cut and reducing the nett percentage that gets to "the cause".

For the record, I don't agree with any of the greedy beggars getting paid but I understand why these hanger-on companies are needed, more so than the slebs.

We have a very simple phenomenon here. Someone, not a celebrity but one of the trustees representing a charity, received money that was reasonably assumed to be being paid to the charity, and trousered it. Now they are doing the equivalent of hiding in Johnson's fridge.

In the wider context, the larger and more organized a charity becomes, the greater the need for paid staff. I have been on the executive of a charity (a research society) with a turnover of several million pounds per year. Officers could claim expenses, for example travel to executive meetings. Meanwhile the charity had paid employees including a CEO. More than half the income of the charity was spent on salary for the CEO and 'head of' departments, and their assistants. Over the years the CEO got the executive to agree to doubling the size of the office, with multiple departments and assistants. It was all above board, but it never felt right. The income of the charity was more than 85% from a single source, and the remit of the charity was to promote a scientific discipline, and quite often the CEO was scoping around looking for things to spend the income on. Lots of people enjoyed comfortable and well paid employment, and to me that doesn't fit well with the notion of a charity.

In the present case it would seem to be a much simpler case of.....well, we can all think of an appropriate word I'm sure.

 

[PILTDOWN MAN]

We have a very simple phenomenon here. Someone, not a celebrity but one of the trustees representing a charity, received money that was reasonably assumed to be being paid to the charity, and trousered it. Now they are doing the equivalent of hiding in Johnson's fridge.

In the wider context, the larger and more organized a charity becomes, the greater the need for paid staff. I have been on the executive of a charity (a research society) with a turnover of several million pounds per year. Officers could claim expenses, for example travel to executive meetings. Meanwhile the charity had paid employees including a CEO. More than half the income of the charity was spent on salary for the CEO and 'head of' departments, and their assistants. Over the years the CEO got the executive to agree to doubling the size of the office, with multiple departments and assistants. It was all above board, but it never felt right. The income of the charity was more than 85% from a single source, and the remit of the charity was to promote a scientific discipline, and quite often the CEO was scoping around looking for things to spend the income on. Lots of people enjoyed comfortable and well paid employment, and to me that doesn't fit well with the notion of a charity.

In the present case it would seem to be a much simpler case of.....well, we can all think of an appropriate word I'm sure.

Herein is the issue many have with charities. The one you were involved in I'm sure was set up with the best intention but once it was control by that CEO they created an empire that I doubt they had to answer for.

I witnessed first hand the RSPCA and just would never give them a penny. It's a huge shame but it is a huge sham.