Ex-Mayor in charity storm. - Page 7

Neil · 12-06-2008, 20:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by katex

This morning was standing at:-

88% Yes to agreeing he was doing a good deed.
12% No he was conning us all.

Still feel just political support on this poll though, nobody still quite sure how it was manipulated.

That is a good majority for yes then.

accyman · 12-06-2008, 20:40

i suppose he could have raised the odd £50 here and there if he went back to dj'ing but instead he dared to raise a hell of a lot more using his brain

utterly disgusting behaviour i bet the charities that benefited are realy upset they got more than £50

was the news paper short on news when this was reported ?

BERNADETTE · 12-06-2008, 20:43

He raised about the same as the other mayors and made out it was a hell of a lot more.

lindsay ormerod · 12-06-2008, 20:47

May not be illegal or even immoral but it's certainly devious.

Neil · 12-06-2008, 20:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindsay ormerod

May not be illegal or even immoral but it's certainly devious.

I would not say devious, more a case of brains not brawn.

lindsay ormerod · 12-06-2008, 20:59

Okay,substitute devious for underhand, put another way, I wouldn't buy a used car off him !

g jones · 12-06-2008, 23:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by lindsay ormerod

Okay,substitute devious for underhand, put another way, I wouldn't buy a used car off him !

There is a lot more to this story than is out there. Doug Heyes personalised the issue. Why not just give the charities 10% and not bother with all this money moving from one pot and back to the first pot for no reason. The first donation landed before Xmas and the remainder in the new year. Taking the money so late means there was never an incentive to raise money to be topped up. Giving money to make money is against Charity Commision rules. As is giving money without any paperwork, which all of them have done and which means temporarily they can't have their money back. Unfortunately it has all been done on a nod and wink. There's £104,000 in total to be audited. £11,000 in expenses. One of them is kicking up because they are behind on rent and need it. The College, Mount Carmel, Hollins may not get their 10% as it is forbidden also under Charity rules to give to educational establishments I am led to believe. The mayoral fund is forbidden from giving to non Hyndburn residents so the Bethany Fund won't get 10%. Councils Audit and Investigations have been called in to sort out the mess.

What is clear is that most Charities turned down this arrangement. The ones that didn't all had connections or friendships of one kind or another. Political friends in Sea Cadets, Bethaney. Cllr Britcliffe runs Stray Dogs with Steve Wood. Tony went on the Board at Mount Carmel and not long after they handed over £30,000. Tony sometimes puts himself in some awkward positions!

Royboy39 · 12-06-2008, 23:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by g jones

There is a lot more to this story than is out there. Doug Heyes personalised the issue. Why not just give the charities 10%. The first donation landed before Xmas and the remainder in the new year. Taking the money so late means there was never an incentive to raise money to be topped up. Giving money to make money is against Charity Commision rules. As is giving money without any paperwork, which all of them have done and which means temporarily they can't have their money back. Unfortunately it has all been done on a nod and wink. There's £104,000 in total to be audited. £11,000 in expenses. One of them is kicking up because they are behind on rent and need it. The College, Mount Carmel, Hollins may not get their 10% as it is forbidden also under Charity rules to give to educational establishments I am led to believe. The mayoral fund is forbidden from giving to non Hyndburn residents so the Bethany Fund won't get 10%. Councils Audit and Investigations have been called in to sort out the mess.

May the outcome be truthful and as this is a local issue, if no fraud or intended fraud is uncovered as being commited or intended then let the matter rest...........i'ts not the end of the world.
The replacement of Wheelie bins is more important to some.

garinda · 12-06-2008, 23:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by g jones

There is a lot more to this story than is out there. Doug Heyes personalised the issue. Why not just give the charities 10% and not bother with all this money moving from one pot and back to the first pot for no reason. The first donation landed before Xmas and the remainder in the new year. Taking the money so late means there was never an incentive to raise money to be topped up. Giving money to make money is against Charity Commision rules. As is giving money without any paperwork, which all of them have done and which means temporarily they can't have their money back. Unfortunately it has all been done on a nod and wink. There's £104,000 in total to be audited. £11,000 in expenses. One of them is kicking up because they are behind on rent and need it. The College, Mount Carmel, Hollins may not get their 10% as it is forbidden also under Charity rules to give to educational establishments I am led to believe. The mayoral fund is forbidden from giving to non Hyndburn residents so the Bethany Fund won't get 10%. Councils Audit and Investigations have been called in to sort out the mess.

What is clear is that most Charities turned down this arrangement. The ones that didn't all had connections or friendships of one kind or another. Political friends in Sea Cadets, Bethaney. Cllr Britcliffe runs Stray Dogs with Steve Wood. Tony went on the Board at Mount Carmel and not long after they handed over £30,000. Tony sometimes puts himself in some awkward positions!

Well I thought I'd understood it all, and my initial reaction was this really was a non-story, mixed in with a few sour grapes.

What you've posted as muddied the water.

It's shocking that the charities don't even have the money raised yet, and that one of them is now struggling to pay their rent.

BERNADETTE · 12-06-2008, 23:44

What I don't get in all this is the need to raise or appear to raise more than any previous or future Mayors. Think we all have charities that we favour it is part of life. Seems to me that in future the nominated charities should be named before the Mayor takes office.

MargaretR · 12-06-2008, 23:56

The ex Mayor is not the only local tory who makes promises then doesn't honour them
See thread
http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f...ide-38079.html
PB is just as bad

Neil · 13-06-2008, 00:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

What I don't get in all this is the need to raise or appear to raise more than any previous or future Mayors.

Who said that was the intention.

Royboy39 · 13-06-2008, 00:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by [email protected]

The ex Mayor is not the only local tory who makes promises then doesn't honour them
See thread
http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/f...ide-38079.html
PB is just as bad

Oh dear......here we go again.

BERNADETTE · 13-06-2008, 00:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

Who said that was the intention.

When it jumps from ten to fifteen thousand up to ninety odd thousand (or so we are led to believe) until the true facts start emerging what else are we supposed to think?? It appears to me that was the intention.

Neil · 13-06-2008, 00:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

It appears to me that was the intention.

Do you not think he was just trying to do his best and raise as much money as he could using a different method to the usual jumble sales and raffles?

Jumble sales and raffles are fine but there would not be a free event in Rhyddings Park on Sunday if we had used the jumble sale and raffle method of raising the money.

It looks to me like he was just trying to move with the times. Time will soon tell if it worked or not.