Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Here comes another Winter

Apropos my last post, I could not help but notice that the Maxim website has an opinion piece by Paul Henderson, about charities. I have previously commented about Mr Henderson, formerly Director of Maxim's Centre for Education, whom Old Maxim referred to as "nationally recognised as an expert in curriculum development and values education." Old Maxim also said that Mr Henderson's special interest is in hermeneutics (tell that to Paul Riceour) although New Maxim is a little more circumspect.

Anyway, Mr Henderson has written about charities. In the preferred fake academic style of Maxim he starts with a literary reference:
John Donne’s love poem 'A Valediction Forbidding Mourning' begins in a strange place. It opens with a deathbed setting and the ambiguity that surrounds a dying person’s last breath. The person is "virtuous."

Quite what this has to do with charities is a little unclear but he goes on to talk about "Anna Politkovskaya, the Russian journalist, who was found dead in the lift of her Moscow apartment...The majority of those who know her work are mourning. Those who have read her obituary, and who dislike injustice, are touched by grief."

Again, what does this have to do with charities? Nothing, nothing whatsoever, except that the leading educationalist and hermeneutician is attempting to tug at our heart-strings. He goes on to talk about Freedom of Speech and Amnesty International. Surprisingly, he does not mention Bono.

Apropos, again, my last post, I mentioned that Maxim is a registered charity. Regardless of John Donne, Anna Politkovskaya, Amnesty International or Bono, Maxim is worried. The Charities Commission is considering an "approach for dealing with requests from charitable entities to restrict public access to certain details about them that normally would be available to the public on the Charities Register." Why should Maxim be worried? I suspect that Maxim and a lot of organisations with which it is associated, do very well out of the current rules about charities. I suspect as well that there is a lot they do not want us to know about.

I said in my last post that I would follow the money. A lot of it is about money. Charities get loads of tax benefits, principally that they do not pay income tax. This is all well and good, if you think about charities as organisations that are actively interested in the common good or particular goods: widows, orphans, small furry animals, that sort of thing. However, the legal definition of charities is very broad and quite archaic. Maxim, after all, is an an educational charity.

But, then again, Bishop Brian Tamaki's odious Destiny Church is also a charity, in fact a series of franchised charities which would give any tax lawyer a headache, albeit a very well paid one. Behind the veil of 'charity' a host of activities are going on, many of which are not in the least bit charitable. The trouble for anyone who investigates these organisations is that you hit a brick wall when the subject of your inquiry is a charity. There is a lot that any normal business would have to declare that a charity can conceal.

After many many years of work, moves are afoot to make charities a little more transparent.

No wonder the hermeneutician and his employers and their friends are worried.


Anonymous said...

I've heard some interesting beltway rumours about a strange-sect wedding between the Maxim Institute and Centre for Independent Studies. Has anyone else?

Incidentally, thought it was remiss that Nicky ignored your sterling effort cf Logangate, dearheart

Craig Y.

Anonymous said...

The only similarities between CIS and Maxim is they both won Templeton awards - one on 2006 and the other in 2005. So Craig, what are the rumours

Anonymous said...

The rumours are that the Maxim Institute may soon announce that it and the CIS will merge. Incidentally, though, as a reader of the CIS journal Policy, I'm unsure of your prognosis here. CIS certainly does argue for a conservative religious role in the establishment of centre-right public policy, and CIS/Institute
policy positions on education are highly similar.
Given the Institute's current woes, I suspect Nicky's revelations may soon shine a light on whether there is substance to the rumour.

Craig Y.

Dave said...

Actually Craig, its not CIS - it's the CIA.

the money funding Maxim came through the Cayman Islands (they actually used Don Brash's own account where he's been channelling funds embezzled from the Reserve Bank). The Exclusive Brethren had met earlier in the year with Colonel Gadaffi whose royal shetland pony is a 2nd cousin to John Keys cocker spaniel. Gadaffi persauded Vladimir Putin to lean on the military junta in Hezekastan who then laundered the proceeds via Russell McVeagh.

Anonymous said...

Why do I suspect the raving right are jealous because their pet hack rags allegations about Cabinet Minister ZZZ were virtually ignored by the mainstream media?

Craig Y.

Paul said...

It is all a huge conspiracy that Wishart will expose in next month's Investigate.

Anonymous said...

I wonder who his sauce is- Wayne Idour, Lew Proctor, Mr Bird Vomit, or someone even more nefarious...

I'm so excited, I'm falling asleep.
Incidentally, why is it not okay to be spanked by other adults, but okay to spank nonconsenting kids according to fundiedom?

Craig Y.

Anonymous said...

I believe his sauce is Watties Tomato. Tried the Sweet Chilli but did not like it.

Pascal's bookie said...

CIS? Is that the Centre for Independent Studies by any chance?

Fargin shizzbit, what a pile of poo that is for the name of a thinktank. Independent studies eh? Independent of who? studies of what?

They put out a 'study' a while back that came to a very surprising and no doubt independent conclusion. I think it was about tax rates and they reckoned taxes should be lower.

"Gods wounds" I thought to myself as I read a synopsis, that was surprisingly not written in crayon. "lower taxes, there's a frightenly independent policy position".

I'm not on principal opposed to the lowering of taxes but there was nothing, no thing, interesting about the paper. It was a good once over of some rudimentary "all other things being equal" economics that would have got a good grade in an old economics bursary exam.

I was not surprised when I saw the author on the TV. He had spots.
I was surprised that the TV people put a spotty boy on the news to tell us about economics.

Anonymous said...

Hello. Good day
Who listens to what music?
I Love songs Justin Timberlake and Paris Hilton

Paul said...

If anyone else love songs Justin Timberlake and Paris Hilton, please keep it to yourself.