Tuesday, 17 June 2014
No, I'm not going to donate to Oxfam...
You might have noticed there's been a bit of a hoo-hah about the above poster that was shoved out by those bastions of caring, Oxfam. Apparently, it's considered to be too political and an MP has complained to the Charities Commission.
Quite right too. This is Britain FFS not the bloody third world. I know charity begins at home but not when it comes down to overt leftie propaganda. I can see it now : "Want to bring down the government and bring back the bastards who wrecked the country last time round? Well, just give £3 a month."
Apparently, this part of a wider Oxfam campaign blaming welfare cuts for the increase in food bank usage. Well, that's also bollocks. Give people something for nothing and they'll stick their hands out and grab it. You can't blame them for that.
But then Oxfam have always been totally out of touch with reality. I remember many years back in a former life being asked to test a new computer system which was designed to be rolled out in the African villages to keep track of project costs. I has an idealogical problem with this. It goes along the lines of the old saying 'give a man a fish and he'll eat it but teach him how to fish and you'll feed him for life' or something like that.
This computer system was going to put local clerical workers employed by Oxfam out of work - which seemed to me to be going against the whole ethos of the organisation.
Then it got better. 'I'm not happy with your rate' says the Oxfam manager. 'For every £1 and hour I can knock off it, I can feed a starving family in Africa for a week.' 'Tell you what' says I, 'I'll match every £1 an hour you knock off your salary.' Not only that, but how many people could they have fed for the cost of the computers?
This is the organisation whose former chief executive Dame Barbara Stocking saw her pay rise over three years, while revenues fell but donations increased. In a statement, Oxfam said Lady Stocking was due to paid £119,560 in 2012/13 - which means that her pay increased by 19 per cent from £100,008 in 2009/10 "which is in the lower quartile of what other large charities paid for their chief executives". Isn't that a bit like saying it's OK to give a fat cat banker a whopping great bonus because all the banks do it?
And I wonder how many starving families in Africa she could have fed on that pay rise. After all, she earned more than David Cameron.
I'm not anti-charities as such. If people want to give them money, then fine. Go ahead. But as far as I'm concerned, I've got better things to spend my money on than helping to fund political campaigns I don't agree with and to piss up the wall on top heavy admin costs.