TPA funding

A charity that gave more than £500,000 to the Taxpayers\’ Alliance (TPA) campaign group has been warned by the Charity Commission that its reputation risks being damaged \”if its relationship with the alliance is not properly managed\”.

This does rather amuse.

\”In instances where trustees decide to award all or the majority of its funding to one organisation they must be able to demonstrate that in doing so they have acted in the best interests of the charity,\” it said. \”They should also take appropriate steps to ensure that any risks arising from this decision are appropriately managed – this could include risks to the reputation of the charity if members of the public question the charity\’s independence from the organisation that it gives its funding to.\”

The report continued: \”Trustees should also be aware of the objectives and purpose of the non-charitable organisation and whether association with the organisation could impact negatively on the charity\’s independence or perceptions of its independence.\”

For of course the crowds will be out protesting because the TPA are baby eating bastards because they recommend that more money be left fructifying in the pockets of the populace.

The thing is, this sort of arrangement is simply not uncommon. A trawl through the Charities Commission site will show any number of charities out there whose main, indeed only, function is to raise money to run this or that think or wonk tank, campaigning group etc.

I read through the accounts of one such (having seen someone warbling in the papers about something or other) just this week although I\’ll be damned if I can remember the name of it.

4 comments on “TPA funding

  1. “…this could include risks to the reputation of the charity if members of the public question the charity’s independence from the organisation that it gives its funding to.”

    And presumably, the organisation from which it receives its funding. Unless it’s one of those fucking Astroturf fake charities like ASH or Alcohol Concern. Hypocritical bastards.

  2. Leave money to fructify in the pockets of the populace?Only it does n’t fructify ,it just stagnates.That Holy Fool the blessed Lord Young let the cat out of the bag last November when he rightly observed that a lot of variable rate mortgage holders were doing well “never had it so good”in fact, because their mortgage repayments had fallen out of sight.But instead of spending the 2year windfall in the shops as Gordon Brown and everybody else intended ,they had confounded Modern Economic practice by sitting on the money or even paying off the mortgage ahead of time with it. If they can’t spend free money perhaps they should be taxed and the money spent for them .

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.