Chairman accepts charitable donation for a good cause Options

[CharlieF]

Can anyone shed any light on this?

Why would a community group want to make a donation to the Chairman's favourite charity? Is there precedent for this sort of thing? Call me an old cynic but is this an apology of some sort? If so for what?

Or is this linked to the front page article in the NWN today about the EDL? If so it is very disturbing if a section of the community feels so besieged that they need to buy approval from the wider community with 'charitable donations'.

[Strafin]

I just think you're being a bit cynical. A lot of community groups who have been helped or supported by the council would make donations to the chosen charity. I can't cite an example but I have seen it happen.

[NWNREADER]

More than 'a bit' (I hope)

[Squelchy]

Call me an old cynic but is this an apology of some sort?

What on earth put that idea into your head? Please do tell.

[CharlieF]

It just seemed so worrying. Why would anyone give a donation to a public servant's preferred charity? It's what people do with court awards or money that people don't feel they should accept for some reason. Or it's what people in public service ask for people to do with money that is being pressed on them.

If you want to give to a charity you give, but giving to someone else's choice publicly, obviously has some other motivation. I was just anxious really. I just hope it wasn't anything to do with the demo as I said.

[CharlieF]

Actually the more I think about this, the more odd it seems.

Surely the Chairman of West Berks Council shouldn't be accepting donations at all - certainly not for one charity over any other. His role is a civic one and in theory an apolitical one - so he shouldn't have a preferred charity or anything 'preferred' at all really other than the people of West Berkshire above all others.

Perhaps I worry too much.

[On the edge]

No I don't think you worry too much! The Chair certainly should not have a 'preferred' anything -.it smacks of favouritism and potential discrimination. Charities are often big business these days and some have quite list their way. A few months back there was a very interesting lecture on Radio 4 on this very subject. In some cases, it's in a charity s vested interest to keep the 'cause' going!

[CharlieF]

No I don't think you worry too much! The Chair certainly should not have a 'preferred' anything -.it smacks of favouritism and potential discrimination. Charities are often big business these days and some have quite list their way. A few months back there was a very interesting lecture on Radio 4 on this very subject. In some cases, it's in a charity s vested interest to keep the 'cause' going!

I'm not even sure what it is I'm worrying about here, but something just seems ....odd. That's why I asked.

[Simon Kirby]

It looks perfectly innocent to me Charlie.

I don't see a problem with the Chair of the Council having a preferred charity. I can imagine that there would be times when organisations and individuals might want to make a charitable donation through the civic function of the Chair of the Council, which is kind of giving a nod of deference to the civic body while the money goes to a good cause. I think it's perfectly fine for the Chair of the Council to decide for himself which charity he wants to support with money that he receives in this way.

I think the last paragraph explains the situation well: "The members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community believe that to do good work requires them to make sacrifices of their own time and money. Members donate willingly, both their time and money, to support the work of a host of charities and have raised a huge amount for British charities over the years."

I think it's pretty well known isn't it that charitable works are an essential element of several faiths and philosophies, and specifically that zakat, or the duty to give arms, is one of the five pillars of Isalm.

Good for them.

[On the edge]

Great charity....but why dies it need the blessing of the Council? At best that's very much doff cap and tug forelock!

[Simon Kirby]

Great charity....but why dies it need the blessing of the Council? At best that's very much doff cap and tug forelock!

The notion of zakat isn't just about alms, it involves contributing to the benefit of the community as a whole, and so giving alms to a civic organisation is quite appropriate. It's not about receiving the council's blessing, it's that the Chair of the Council is the civic leader and is an appropriate person to accept the alms on behalf of the community.

[On the edge]

The notion of zakat isn't just about alms, it involves contributing to the benefit of the community as a whole, and so giving alms to a civic organisation is quite appropriate. It's not about receiving the council's blessing, it's that the Chair of the Council is the civic leader and is an appropriate person to accept the alms on behalf of the community.

Still don't get it. Yes, it's a really good thing and very laudable, but what's wrong with just dropping the hint that they can choose and donate direct. In this particular case, it's quite obvious that all is totally above board.