Skydragon
Imperial Majesty
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2005
- Messages
- 10,910
- City
- London and Highlands
- Country
- United Kingdom
![Previous :previous: :previous:](https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/images/smilies/previous.gif)
That is why I said "If true".
Prince Harry's charity accused of not honouring pledge to abused African children - Telegraph
quote from the article:
But Sentebale, which supports 15 other organisations in Lesotho, has declined to hand over money because of an apparent unwillingness from the unit's management to give undertakings over the transparency of their financial procedures.
A source added: “All the other local organisations with which Sentebale works in Lesotho readily sign up to the same, basic levels of transparency.”
Didn't the same organisation make the same complaint six months or so ago? Then, the issue was over bank account details.
Otherwise we could just as easily have the story "Harry's charity gives money to an organisation that refuses to reveal details of its financial procedures".
most of the governments of these countries have very rich resources and should help their own more instead of relying on any foreign country to provide what they don´t for their population.
A secret donation from one of the Conservative Party's richest benefactors has averted a financial crisis at Prince Harry's charity to help starving children in Africa.
Prince Harry's charity saved from crisis by Lord Ashcroft donation - Telegraph
---------------------
One has to question what has happened to the money, time for new managers perhaps?![]()
^Harry is a figure head for the charity, and his job is to bring publicity and attract donnors, not to supervise how the money is managed (job he wouldn't be qualified for anyways). He isn't part of the administrative board or executive team that has seemingly wasted funds.
He also has most definitely followed through on his commitment to the charity, raising funds through polo matches, a documentary and the Diana concert.
As for the less glamorous aspects, he went last year for around a month to improve and expend the premises facilities, without photographers in tow. Before that, he made a private visit and brought the children to the circus, again without photographers.
I understand he is the face of the charity so it is easier to blame him, but in this case he cannot be held accountable for other people's incompetence (if that is the case here). He has fulfilled his part of the bargain.
^Harry is a figure head for the charity, and his job is to bring publicity and attract donnors, not to supervise how the money is managed (job he wouldn't be qualified for anyways). He isn't part of the administrative board or executive team that has seemingly wasted funds.
He also has most definitely followed through on his commitment to the charity, raising funds through polo matches, a documentary and the Diana concert.
As for the less glamorous aspects, he went last year for around a month to improve and expend the premises facilities, without photographers in tow. Before that, he made a private visit and brought the children to the circus, again without photographers.
I understand he is the face of the charity so it is easier to blame him, but in this case he cannot be held accountable for other people's incompetence (if that is the case here). He has fulfilled his part of the bargain.
To my memory this is the third story of its kind, and they all involve the same organisation. Once again, the trustees of Sentebale have refused to supply funds because the charity, again, has failed to provide full financial details. Quote from the article: "'Sentebale no longer has confidence that the current arrangements are working. Miss Martin confirmed last night that funds had been halted because of a lack of accountability."This is at least the second time that this sort of story has broken about this charity so I wonder if this is a repeat of the story or whether, the problem that surfaced earlier hasn't been resolved, making Harry look even more behind the times as he should have sought expert advice to fix the problem when the story first broke some time ago..
AndThe LCCU not only consistently failed to meet the terms of the Agreement but there were additional concerns such as some of the money being spent on private activities for the Manager, rather than the children
As Warren has already pointed out this is the 3rd time the manager at the LCCU has gone to the media basically to blackmail Sentebale into putting money in her account. The children aren't starving as Sentebale has seen that other charities who donate goods rather than money have donated food to the LCCU.Sentebale will only fund organisations which are transparent, fully accountable and honest.
To my memory this is the third story of its kind, and they all involve the same organisation. Once again, the trustees of Sentebale have refused to supply funds because the charity, again, has failed to provide full financial details. Quote from the article: "'Sentebale no longer has confidence that the current arrangements are working. Miss Martin confirmed last night that funds had been halted because of a lack of accountability."
As with the last time this story was aired (six months ago?) the same emotional blackmail was tried: "children starve while Harry's charity dithers". No responsible trustee will hand over money to organisations which refuse to comply with financial accountability requirements. It's pretty basic.
Harry cannot "fix the problem". The problem lies with the African organisation which has had over twelve months to clarify their financial affairs. As they have not done so, or more correctly refuse to do so, Sentebale will not fund them.
I don't think he has the time now to be more involved than as a figure head, since, unlike his father, he doesn't have a timetable that allows him to do so, yet.To a certain extent that is correct but he set up the charity so his responsibility does go deeper than that. He really must be keeping better tabs on where the money is going.
Yes, to the extend that he is only a figure head and isn't involved into day to day activities. If there is the problem with management then it should be fixed but Harry himself doesn't have the power nor the qualification to fix up this things. He isn't the one who conduct job interviews and hire people.Harry (the firms he employs to check the business side he perhaps does not understand) is in my opinion most certainly accountable for the actions of his charity.
Then you can certainly agree that he position of Sentebale is the correct one.[/color]I know about this problem, I am working with a charity for a hospital/school in Malawi. It takes ages for us to receive information about a schoolroom furnished. And we wait until we are satisfied and then donate the funds for a next schoolroom (an example). Life is different in Africa.
To my memory this is the third story of its kind, and they all involve the same organisation. Once again, the trustees of Sentebale have refused to supply funds because the charity, again, has failed to provide full financial details. Quote from the article: "'Sentebale no longer has confidence that the current arrangements are working. Miss Martin confirmed last night that funds had been halted because of a lack of accountability."
As with the last time this story was aired (six months ago?) the same emotional blackmail was tried: "children starve while Harry's charity dithers". No responsible trustee will hand over money to organisations which refuse to comply with financial accountability requirements. It's pretty basic.
Harry cannot "fix the problem". The problem lies with the African organisation which has had over twelve months to clarify their financial affairs. As they have not done so, or more correctly refuse to do so, Sentebale will not fund them.
I don't think he has the time now to be more involved than as a figure head, since, unlike his father, he doesn't have a timetable that allows him to do so, yet.
I expect him to get involved in a more thorough manner as time goes on.
If he didn't have the time to devote to do the job properly then the timing of the setting up was wrong.
He should have realised that setting up a charity involved far more than being a figurehead and therefore would need a lot more of his time, at the beginning, rather than later on.
Prince Harry's charity 'pulls the plug' on African orphans | Mail Online
this should have been avoided at all costs, his father could have made up the difference. You just can not take photo shoots that make you look like a nice guy and then not follow through.
It might not be about 'following through.' I know if I were in his shoes and there were questions about where the money was going (to feed orphans vs. say, lining some guys pocket in which case, giving or NOT giving the money doesn't mean a thing to the oprhans,) then I would probably hesitate to send money until I knew what the situation was as well.
They blame the charity for blocking the money but couldn't the orphanage ALSO fix things by simply giving them the information they ask for or rectifying whatever mistake they made? There's so many corrupt organizations that claim to be 'charitable' out there that the orphanage really should have seen this coming- where the charity wants to know where the money is going and why. From what I've read it seems like they can't justify where the money is GOING. Who's to say then that the money didn't go to line someone's pockets? They can't justify where the money went as in, they don't know/can't/won't say.
As an orphanage keeping an itemized account of finances should be the first thing on their minds to know what is coming in and going out in terms of money. The whole thing seems fishy to me. They are accepting very large sums of money from Sentebale and are expecting even more and do not expect to have to account for the sums? The charity I'm sure would have made any expectations clear from the start so any requirements shouldn't be coming as a surprise to the orphanage.
The woman who runs the orphanage can claim all she wants that the money is going to 'feed the children.' I had a woman who ran a greyhound rescue I dealt with who swore all the donated funds were going to 'help the greyhounds.' A $50,000 new car, a $30,000 patio and a $20,000 kitchen later on a disability pension that averaged less than $30,000 a year later it became obvious it wasn't all going to 'help the greyhounds.'
It might not be about 'following through.' I know if I were in his shoes and there were questions about where the money was going (to feed orphans vs. say, lining some guys pocket in which case, giving or NOT giving the money doesn't mean a thing to the oprhans,) then I would probably hesitate to send money until I knew what the situation was as well.
They blame the charity for blocking the money but couldn't the orphanage ALSO fix things by simply giving them the information they ask for or rectifying whatever mistake they made? There's so many corrupt organizations that claim to be 'charitable' out there that the orphanage really should have seen this coming- where the charity wants to know where the money is going and why. From what I've read it seems like they can't justify where the money is GOING. Who's to say then that the money didn't go to line someone's pockets? They can't justify where the money went as in, they don't know/can't/won't say.
As an orphanage keeping an itemized account of finances should be the first thing on their minds to know what is coming in and going out in terms of '
A way for the charity of Harry to organise things there is to have one of his own people in Africa to do the administration
That won't help if the African organisation refuses to allow Sentebale access to the books, which is the case here.A way for the charity of Harry to organise things there is to have one of his own people in Africa to do the administration.