Wednesday, October 31, 2007

It's a bouncing baby Bance!

A email correspondant has emailed me with an interesting connection. In terms of documenting it, I can find (so far) that as of July 2007, Antonia Bance was still "policy and communications manager for UK Poverty and Oxfam" which is, I think you will agree, very lovely indeed.

In late September, Antonia wrote the following on her blog. [Emphasis mine.]
Finally, I think I’ve moved a bit politically, and my allegiance to the party has hardened, meaning that I am both less likely to criticise the government’s actions (particularly since Brown took over) and more likely to self-censor when I want to shout about how wrong they are. Hey ho.

Hey ho, indeed. It's good to know that whatever the NuLabour government does, the policy and communications manager for UK Poverty and Oxfam won't be too inclined to criticise them.

Which is, I guess, a good thing since, in 2006, the UK government funded Oxfam, through the DFID, to the tune of £11.2 million (other UK Agencies, whatever they might be, donated £2.4 million).

Trebles all round!

UPDATE: this is slightly off-topic, but looking through Oxfam's 2006 filed accounts [PDF], I am interested to note (p49 of the document, p48 of the PDF) that Oxfam Great Britain appears to be registered in South Africa.

Click for larger
Does anyone know why that should be?


Tomrat247 said...

Could there be some inventive accounting which makes it cheaper to transfer monies acrued to south africa for tax purposes? If they are receiving £11.2 million from the government could this be equivalent to money laundering?
I would hope it is transfered here merely for logistical purposes - lot of poor people in Africa, after all (though I wouldn't think South Africa).

Mark Wadsworth said...

Oxfam is a UK registered company 612712 and charity (see page 2 of pdf). The South African thing is like a subsidiary.

Mark Wallace said...

Could be linked to the fact that Joel Joffe, former Chairman, was a South African I believe. THat could also be irrelevant, though.

Anonymous said...

It is because all charities are run by Marxists crooks using accounts in countries like South Africa and Switzerland to hide the cash away. Gorgon is now going to change the law to allow charities to be more openly political (as if the tossers weren't already) so they will no be openly saying vote Labour if you want Oxfam to have more money.

Nobody ever finds out where the bloody money goes. No-one ever dares look or question. I can tell you that when the Tsunami hit Sri Lanka no-one could see hide nor hair of Oxfam or the IRC. They are utterly corrupt. The Sri Lankan government turned back ship-loads of fancy 4 x 4s from Oxfam because they were already knee deep in trucks and didn't need them - they reckoned it was an import scam. Do some sniffing around on Google and you will find out lots of interesting stuff about the big charities. The Americans hate the IRC.

Anonymous said...

I hear that Oxfam has borrowed lock stock and barrel the BBC's Conflict of Interest Guidelines to come up with its own guidelines, apparently without the knowledge of the BBC and to the bemusement of Oxfam's staff who weren't even told that they in essence had been given the BBC's guidelines to look at! If this is true, it just proves how low Oxfam has sunk.

Anonymous said...

Quite simple.

South African law requires that any charity operating there is incorporated locally.

So Oxfam has to set up a subsidiary in South Africa in order to operate there.

Anonymous said...

I think £2.4m other UK agencies refers to donations received from other UK charities.

Say if Save the Children pay towards a project that Oxfam leads but they both want to support then the money will appear in Oxfam's accounts as income.

Quite simple, really.