Talk:Finance & Fundraising Policy/2012: Difference between revisions
Peter Damian (talk | contribs) |
Peter Damian (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Some comments from Edward== | ==Some comments from Edward the taxpayer== | ||
This is good on the 'accounting for money' side but omits other considerations which are relevant, in my view (and according to charity law. How does this policy ensure | This is good on the 'accounting for money' side but omits other considerations which are relevant, in my view (and according to charity law. How does this policy ensure | ||
Revision as of 15:50, 3 December 2011
Some comments from Edward the taxpayer
This is good on the 'accounting for money' side but omits other considerations which are relevant, in my view (and according to charity law. How does this policy ensure
- that the charities funds and assets are use only to further the objects (or purpose) of the charity
- that it delivers the charitable outcomes for the benefit of the public for which is has been set up .... ?
I have been asking these questions elsewhere but to no avail. The object and purpose of the charity must be clearly set out, perhaps more clearly and in more detail than in the documents that are currently visible. And all fundraising statements must be aligned with those objects. e.g. you can't say or imply (as I think WMUK is currently saying or implying) that the fundraiser will support Wikipedia or servers or whatever, when it is not. And also note that "An effective charity is accountable to the public and others with an interest in the charity (stakeholders) in a way that is transparent and understandable" [1]. I am not seeing any accountability in the current refusal (or apparent refusal) to publish correspondence with the UKCC about how the content of Wikipedia is 'monitored and controlled' through its system of governance. See e.g. the long and futile debate going on here Edward 14:49, 3 December 2011 (UTC)