Nobody warned me ... that annual night of trash to "reward" "people in need".

Do the sums ... its been running 30 years and every year they "claim" to raise �£30 million
... there are NO children in need - they are all millionaires !

I'm no fan of CIN but that last sentence about them all being millionaires was in seriously bad taste. If I was in your company and you said that I'd swing for you. My daughter was diagnosed with cancer aged 2. So fuck you and your horrible little world.

When I peruse these pages at times I get the feeling that the term "in need" primarily applies to ITK..in need constantly of attention...and i am feeding the psychological weakness by posting I know so shall stop...

My only complaint is that celebs saying 'donate' whilst they are sitting on millions and have millions in off shore accounts.

BBC is funded by extortion from the public by the Capita goons and scaremongering from TVL.

Mr Norton how about give up all your millions you have got and give it to CIN, it be more than everything that's been donated for 30 years by the public.

And that goes for all BBC staff also.

andrew wrote:
My only complaint is that celebs saying 'donate' whilst they are sitting on millions and have millions in off shore accounts.

Yes ... rather sickening isn't it?

"Look at me" ... doing all this good !

Its quite clear that IF that kind of money IS being raised -

1. The "heat" or "eat" brigade are lying as they clearly have lots of spare cash !
2. An awful lot is wasted on "admin" (hotel expenses etc for the producers?) etc
3. That after 30 odd years its all been a waste of time because apparently everything is just as "bad" as it was !

GET A LIFE

Angel wrote:
My daughter was diagnosed with cancer aged 2.

Thats very sad ... but can you kindly explain how filling Greggs' counter with plastic rubbish (which all needs paying for !) helps?

It does help Greggs profits though !!!!

Wyot wrote:
ITK..in need constantly of attention...

And sadly will type any rubbish, untruth or fiction to get it...

('lol')

In The Know wrote:
andrew wrote:
My only complaint is that celebs saying 'donate' whilst they are sitting on millions and have millions in off shore accounts.

Yes ... rather sickening isn't it?

"Look at me" ... doing all this good !

Its quite clear that IF that kind of money IS being raised -

1. The "heat" or "eat" brigade are lying as they clearly have lots of spare cash !
2. An awful lot is wasted on "admin" (hotel expenses etc for the producers?) etc
3. That after 30 odd years its all been a waste of time because apparently everything is just as "bad" as it was !

GET A LIFE

I agree that there is an awful lot of the money wasted, when there is so much good that could be done with it.

In The Know wrote:
andrew wrote:
My only complaint is that celebs saying 'donate' whilst they are sitting on millions and have millions in off shore accounts.

Yes ... rather sickening isn't it?

"Look at me" ... doing all this good !

Its quite clear that IF that kind of money IS being raised -

1. The "heat" or "eat" brigade are lying as they clearly have lots of spare cash !
2. An awful lot is wasted on "admin" (hotel expenses etc for the producers?) etc
3. That after 30 odd years its all been a waste of time because apparently everything is just as "bad" as it was !

GET A LIFE

Not just that the organisers (BBC) have to pay for set designers, riggers, stage managers the caterers no doubt some of it will pay the tax payers.

I don't get the heat or eat brigade there is always a budgeting loan from the DWP, which pays for winters clothes and extra money for the meter.

Remember took a cut for years until he outed along with others.

Do BBC still pay staff taxi fares for 10 minute walks ?

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
I agree that there is an awful lot of the money wasted, when there is so much good that could be done with it.

... and did you know that apart from earning �£800,000 a year (in 2007)
Sir Terry was also paid almost �£10,000 for presenting BIN ?
(That is - until the bad publicity got him to give it up !)

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6417329.stm

Jobs for the boys (and lots of expenses too !)

In The Know (as always !) wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
I agree that there is an awful lot of the money wasted, when there is so much good that could be done with it.

... and did you know that apart from earning Â�£800,000 a year (in 2007)
Sir Terry was also paid almost Â�£10,000 for presenting BIN ?
(That is - until the bad publicity got him to give it up !)

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6417329.stm

Jobs for the boys (and lots of expenses too !)

Yes. I wouldn't have the cheek to ask others for money while I was taking it myself.
The point of most well known charities is to create a business, and helping people (if it even happens) is a sideline.

And its not that I dont care about sick, disadvantaged or abused children. I care too much to see them cheated!

Mr G Norton and others could club to re-home every resident of Grenfell.

I wonder if BBC paid the electrician after doing his job then came up to him with a bucket.

honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Yes. I wouldn't have the cheek to ask others for money while I was taking it myself.
The point of most well known charities is to create a business, and helping people (if it even happens) is a sideline.

In November 2006, Intelligent Giving published an article about Children in Need, which attracted wide attention across the British media. The article, titled "Four things wrong with Pudsey", described donations to Children in Need as a "lazy and inefficient way of giving" and pointed out that, as a grant-giving charity, Children in Need would use donations to pay two sets of administration costs. It also described the quality of some of its public reporting as "shambolic"

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-416666/...-way-to-charity.html

andrew wrote:
Mr G Norton and others could club to re-home every resident of Grenfell.

There has also been concern about the type of groups receiving funding from Children in Need.
Writing in The Spectator, Ross Clark noted how funding goes towards controversial groups such as Women in Prison, which campaigns against jailing female criminals.

Another charity highlighted was the Children's Legal Centre, which provided funding for Shabina Begum to sue her school as she wanted to wear the jilbāb.

Clark pondered whether donors seeing cancer victims on screen would appreciate "that a slice of their donation would be going into the pockets of Cherie Blair to help a teenage girl sue her school over her refusal to wear a school uniform

Red Nose Day/Comic Relief only gave Lenny Henry more spotlight..let's fund more guns and ciggies.

CIN has not been in any local papers in the past, I have only read about said CIN fundraisers in group photos.

There was a 'special school' in Folkestone that needed more cash to stay open they pleaded with CIN and got nothing.

We invented this arrangement some time ago. You hired people to govern for you while you got on with other things. However much money they needed, they discussed it with you, you agreed on a fee and it was administered. That was how it worked.

We still do that, officially, but we also raise cash ourselves for certain things that we hired those people to deal with on our behalf and with our money.

It's almost as if we don't understand how our own system is supposed to work.

... and when the bucket collectors go round the pubs etc - how much of it ends up in Wetherspoons?

Then where does it all go ?