[WillowTheWhisp]

Originally Posted by andrewb

Yes it's me, I'm avidly running around family homes voting to save face.

£90,000 was raised in total. £10,000 was raised by conventional methods. The other £80,000 was raised by charities, and then given back to them with an additional 10% (from the £10,000 conventional methods).

The 'controversial' part being that the charities have been given an incentive to raise their own money, where as in the past only the conventional method was used, with the money going to a nominated charity.

Is this any clearer? If not which bit is it that I am still covering with mud.

So, if I'm following this correctly, the actual mayoral raising of money only totalled £10,000 - not £90,000? So why is it being said that he raised it all when the charities raised most of it themselves? Maybe that's what the complaining is all about, taking credit for something which was not entirely his to take credit for.