I am surprised that former employees of aid agencies are willing to use the good names of their former employers for political purposes during an election campaign ('Cameron aid policy about populism, not poverty, say former charity bosses', News). Every major aid agency prizes its impartiality. We don't shy away from criticising any party policy when we think it is wrong and welcoming it when we think it is right.
Organisations such as mine are funded by the public. This money is not given to us for political purposes. When former employees of respected aid agencies use the reputations of their previous employers for political campaigning it has negative implications for all non-governmental organisations working to address poverty in a way that is impartial.
Mark Waddington
CEO War Child
Indeed. Whilst there may be an argument for public funding for charities and NGOs, not one that I'd agree with, there is no argument for funding partisan political campaigns.
6 comments:
Good stuff. Where's the link to the actual letter?
Oh right, I've added it now.
It is the second letter down.
Ah, yes.
I think you've misread it. When he says 'funded by the public' doesn't he mean just that, rather than public as taxpayer.
I also disagree with the post as surely former staff can say what they want?
I could have misread it, maybe fake charities are too much on my mind.
The point about the former charity bosses is that by invoking the names of the organisations they used to run they aren't just speaking as members of the public.
Isn't that commonplace though? 'Former England manager', 'Former PM', 'Former CEO of M&S' etc.
Post a Comment